May I remind everyone the reason why republicans won the House in 2012? Gerrymandering of course!

[sameech]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success



The report -- drafted as a summary of the importance of the RSLC's Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP) -- serves as a breakdown of the broader GOP plan to take control of state legislatures, giving Republicans free rein to mount an aggressive gerrymandering campaign that allowed the party to keep a House majority, despite getting fewer votes in those races overall.

"The rationale was straightforward," reads the memo. "Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn. Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade."

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success

How about answering a question yourself, instead of being an inane quote-bot.

Fucking hack.

What's wrong? YOU don't like factual info? You prefer right wing memes,. distortions and LIES?

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

ALL nonsense. GOPers ADMIT how and why they won 2010 and 2012 Congress in their memo

Cali just started their top 2

You mean in an off year the Prez's party will lose? Shocking. You don't know much history huh?

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

Obama got 52% of the vote, twice, First in like 40+ years! Not even Saint Ronnie did that!

 

[martybegan]

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success



The report -- drafted as a summary of the importance of the RSLC's Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP) -- serves as a breakdown of the broader GOP plan to take control of state legislatures, giving Republicans free rein to mount an aggressive gerrymandering campaign that allowed the party to keep a House majority, despite getting fewer votes in those races overall.

"The rationale was straightforward," reads the memo. "Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn. Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade."

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success

How about answering a question yourself, instead of being an inane quote-bot.

Fucking hack.

What's the matter marty. You prefer opinion over facts? Or course you do. Opinions are easy to argue against. Or even dismiss out of hand. Facts are a bit more difficult to ignore. Unless you be a Republican. Which you are.

But I'll give you my opinion Marty. Dad23 has kicked so many Republican fantasies/lies to the curb that of course you all hate to see his posts.

Nice job Dad23.

Lol, he quotes partisan opinions and you roll them out as facts simply because they were quoted. He ignores the reality of over-vote, which as existed since the beginning of the Republic.

Dad23 is a miserable hack, just like you are. You belong together.

No kidding, he bring in something from STINKprogress. That site is filled with some of dumbest people in the country yet he falls for the crap

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

 

[sameech]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

Obama got 52% of the vote, twice, First in like 40+ years! Not even Saint Ronnie did that!

Yes, and in a lot of congressional districts where Obama carried the majority, the house seat went to a conservative republican as happened in mine. The DCCC won't put a lot of money in house races in the south unless they are open seats despite having real shots in an increasingly violet region because the DNC doesn't want to spend money on people who are not the right flavor of liberal or have conservative/moderates having a voice in their party's agenda. Gerrymandering is an excuse the DNC uses to cover that they largely abandon a great many districts they could win because the elites don't want them.

 

[martybegan]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success



The report -- drafted as a summary of the importance of the RSLC's Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP) -- serves as a breakdown of the broader GOP plan to take control of state legislatures, giving Republicans free rein to mount an aggressive gerrymandering campaign that allowed the party to keep a House majority, despite getting fewer votes in those races overall.

"The rationale was straightforward," reads the memo. "Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn. Drawing new district lines in states with the most redistricting activity presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade."

GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success

How about answering a question yourself, instead of being an inane quote-bot.

Fucking hack.

What's wrong? YOU don't like factual info? You prefer right wing memes,. distortions and LIES?

 

[TooTall]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Now you need to find a source that says Democrats that control the Governorship and state legislature do not gerrymander. I'm waiting!

 

[Dad2three]

How about answering a question yourself, instead of being an inane quote-bot.

Fucking hack.

What's the matter marty. You prefer opinion over facts? Or course you do. Opinions are easy to argue against. Or even dismiss out of hand. Facts are a bit more difficult to ignore. Unless you be a Republican. Which you are.

But I'll give you my opinion Marty. Dad23 has kicked so many Republican fantasies/lies to the curb that of course you all hate to see his posts.

Nice job Dad23.

Lol, he quotes partisan opinions and you roll them out as facts simply because they were quoted. He ignores the reality of over-vote, which as existed since the beginning of the Republic.

Dad23 is a miserable hack, just like you are. You belong together.

No kidding, he bring in something from STINKprogress. That site is filled with some of dumbest people in the country yet he falls for the crap

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

Did I say they didn't? The difference is the GOP ADMITTED they won the House BECAUSE of gerrymandering AND conservatives are claiming the reason was they didn't want the Dems/Obama, Obama who got 52% of votes, twice and the Dems who won 51% of the vote!

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

Obama got 52% of the vote, twice, First in like 40+ years! Not even Saint Ronnie did that!

Yes, and in a lot of congressional districts where Obama carried the majority, the house seat went to a conservative republican as happened in mine. The DCCC won't put a lot of money in house races in the south unless they are open seats despite having real shots in an increasingly violet region because the DNC doesn't want to spend money on people who are not the right flavor of liberal or have conservative/moderates having a voice in their party's agenda. Gerrymandering is an excuse the DNC uses to cover that they largely abandon a great many districts they could win because the elites don't want them.

The race baiting continues. PLEASE keep at it, it does wonders for the GOP

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Now you need to find a source that says Democrats that control the Governorship and state legislature do not gerrymander. I'm waiting!

Weird, was that his posit? lol

 

[martybegan]

What's the matter marty. You prefer opinion over facts? Or course you do. Opinions are easy to argue against. Or even dismiss out of hand. Facts are a bit more difficult to ignore. Unless you be a Republican. Which you are.

But I'll give you my opinion Marty. Dad23 has kicked so many Republican fantasies/lies to the curb that of course you all hate to see his posts.

Nice job Dad23.

Lol, he quotes partisan opinions and you roll them out as facts simply because they were quoted. He ignores the reality of over-vote, which as existed since the beginning of the Republic.

Dad23 is a miserable hack, just like you are. You belong together.

No kidding, he bring in something from STINKprogress. That site is filled with some of dumbest people in the country yet he falls for the crap

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

Did I say they didn't? The difference is the GOP ADMITTED they won the House BECAUSE of gerrymandering AND conservatives are claiming the reason was they didn't want the Dems/Obama, Obama who got 52% of votes, twice and the Dems who won 51% of the vote!

someone already showed that this may have gained up to 10 seats, which is smaller than the Republican Control of the house.

And again, what is the difference between admitting it and not? It happens and both sides do it. You are just butthurt because the Republicans are doing it, you two bit, dime-store hack.

 

[TooTall]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

Obama got 52% of the vote, twice, First in like 40+ years! Not even Saint Ronnie did that!

Here are a few stats on Reagan

Percentage of the popular vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 50.7%
Number of states won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 44
Percentage of the electoral vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 90.9%7

Percentage of the popular vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 58.8%
Number of states won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 49
Percentage of the electoral vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 97.6%

Average for both elections, 54.75%. Eat your heart out.

 

[Dad2three]

There are more blacks in Congress representing black districts than ever in history.

That is because democratic gerrymandering is good. GOP gerrymandering is the only kind that is bad.

BTW, the OP is 100% wrong. It has nothing to do with gerrymandering. It has to do with democratic overperformance in urban areas. It doesn't matter if you win by 100 votes or 100,000 votes and the extra tens of thousand of democratic votes in San Fransisco doesn't mean squat to a House race in Alabama even if it were a billion votes. What this does reveal however is the democratic party's desperation to nationalize all races because they cannot stand that the people in NYC don't get to control who represents southerners in Congress.

Lol I gave you facts with a source and you didn't. Hmmm...

Perhaps then you should look at the source I provided that you say I didn't. While you are at it google around. Try to look at statistical studies of the effect of incumbency in Congressional elections and see that democrats get about twice the upvote because of as republicans. Perhaps explain the effect on the national vote of California's top two system in which some races were democrats v. democrats with no GOP candidate. Explain the effect of third party candidates who got 3% of the vote but no seats (the democrats did not break 50% nationally--it is only when you take out the third parties that they cross that line).

I'll make it easy for you--The Senate is forecast to flip to the GOP and those races cannot be gerrymandered, so explain to me how America's will has been thwarted by gerrymandering in the face of all the evidence that the political tide has turned against your righteousness?

Obama got 52% of the vote, twice, First in like 40+ years! Not even Saint Ronnie did that!

Here are a few stats on Reagan

Percentage of the popular vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 50.7%
Number of states won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 44
Percentage of the electoral vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1980: 90.9%7

Percentage of the popular vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 58.8%
Number of states won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 49
Percentage of the electoral vote won by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election of 1984: 97.6%

Average for both elections, 54.75%. Eat your heart out.

CAN YOU SAY 52% TWICE? And Mondale? lol


And the number 138?

The presidency of Ronald Reagan in the United States was marked by multiple scandals, resulting in the investigation, indictment, or conviction of over 138 administration officials, the largest number for any US president.

• 1 Iran-Contra Affair
• 2 Department of Housing and Urban Development grant rigging
• 3 Lobbying scandal
• 4 EPA scandals
• 5 Inslaw Affair
• 6 Savings & loan crisis
• 7 Debategate
  
  Reagan administration scandals - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
  
  Reagan's Administration Was Among the Most Corrupt
  
  

 

[Dad2three]

Lol, he quotes partisan opinions and you roll them out as facts simply because they were quoted. He ignores the reality of over-vote, which as existed since the beginning of the Republic.

Dad23 is a miserable hack, just like you are. You belong together.

No kidding, he bring in something from STINKprogress. That site is filled with some of dumbest people in the country yet he falls for the crap

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

Did I say they didn't? The difference is the GOP ADMITTED they won the House BECAUSE of gerrymandering AND conservatives are claiming the reason was they didn't want the Dems/Obama, Obama who got 52% of votes, twice and the Dems who won 51% of the vote!

someone already showed that this may have gained up to 10 seats, which is smaller than the Republican Control of the house.

And again, what is the difference between admitting it and not? It happens and both sides do it. You are just butthurt because the Republicans are doing it, you two bit, dime-store hack.

Got it, you have nothing but to attack. Being a right winger, it doesn't surprise me

 

[martybegan]

No kidding, he bring in something from STINKprogress. That site is filled with some of dumbest people in the country yet he falls for the crap

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

Did I say they didn't? The difference is the GOP ADMITTED they won the House BECAUSE of gerrymandering AND conservatives are claiming the reason was they didn't want the Dems/Obama, Obama who got 52% of votes, twice and the Dems who won 51% of the vote!

someone already showed that this may have gained up to 10 seats, which is smaller than the Republican Control of the house.

And again, what is the difference between admitting it and not? It happens and both sides do it. You are just butthurt because the Republicans are doing it, you two bit, dime-store hack.

Got it, you have nothing but to attack. Being a right winger, it doesn't surprise me

No, its a combination of refuting your shit posting, AND attacking.

Posts such as yours deserve no better.

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm curious, Dad...what will your excuse be if Democrats lose badly two weeks from now?

 

[martybegan]

I'm curious, Dad...what will your excuse be if Democrats lose badly two weeks from now?

1. Gerrmandering
2. Sheeple
3. Bush ChimpyMcHiter
4. Racism, sexism homophobia and bad breath.

 

[g5000]

"In 2012 U.S. House of Representative election, 1.4 million more voters voted for Democrats than for Republicans - but the Republicans control the house 234 to 210. In North Carolina, the overall vote for the House was 51% Democratic to 49% Republicans, but Republicans won 9 to 4."

What is gerrymandering - Quora

Gerrymandering is bipartisan. It is one of several reasons I call Congress the American Politboro.

For the past half century, the House has had a 98 percent re-election rate for members who run for re-election. The Senate is around 80 percent.

 

[Dad2three]

Weird, it has a link to the GOP's own words right? lol

So republicans suddenly invented re-drawing districts in their own interest after a census?? Democrats NEVER do the same thing, right?

The Democrats are hardly any better when they are in control. In California, the Democratic controlled legislature has a history of creating district lines that meander around California, throwing Republicans incumbents together, and carving out new districts that favor Democratic candidates. In one famous instance of excessive creativity, they designed a district for a Democratic incumbent that had 385 sides. In the past, the electoral power grab has been so effective that Democrats have been able to win a majority of the U.S. House seats from that state, even though they sometimes have earned less than a majority of the votes.

How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve Our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems

note, I don't agree with PR as a system, but even they note Dems play the same damn game.

Did I say they didn't? The difference is the GOP ADMITTED they won the House BECAUSE of gerrymandering AND conservatives are claiming the reason was they didn't want the Dems/Obama, Obama who got 52% of votes, twice and the Dems who won 51% of the vote!

someone already showed that this may have gained up to 10 seats, which is smaller than the Republican Control of the house.

And again, what is the difference between admitting it and not? It happens and both sides do it. You are just butthurt because the Republicans are doing it, you two bit, dime-store hack.

Got it, you have nothing but to attack. Being a right winger, it doesn't surprise me

No, its a combination of refuting your shit posting, AND attacking.

Posts such as yours deserve no better.

What did you refute? The GOP admits it won 2012 BECAUSE OF gerrymandering

GOP Memo: Gerrymandering Won Us The House Majority
GOP Memo Gerrymandering Won Us The House Majority