Philobeado
Gold Member
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain - Rasmussen Reports
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain - Rasmussen Reports
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain - Rasmussen Reports
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain - Rasmussen Reports
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain
Redistricting Could Prolong the Democrats' Pain - Rasmussen Reports
I get the feeling you didn't read your own post. This is not a win for the Reps, yet. We'll have to see how it all works out first.
Gerrymandering is a loss for the American people. It should be illegal.
how about as close to geographic lines as possible taking into account city/county linesGerrymandering is a loss for the American people. It should be illegal.
How do you propose to set district lines then?
how about as close to geographic lines as possible taking into account city/county linesGerrymandering is a loss for the American people. It should be illegal.
How do you propose to set district lines then?
if you re-read my post, and think more clearly, you will get the meaning of what i saidhow about as close to geographic lines as possible taking into account city/county linesHow do you propose to set district lines then?
Who gets to place the lines? It has to be based on population - each district to represent a certain amount of people. County lines don't do that - one county could have 5 times as many people as the next one.
Whoever gets to place the lines has an advantage. That's what Gerrymandering is.
if you re-read my post, and think more clearly, you will get the meaning of what i saidhow about as close to geographic lines as possible taking into account city/county lines
Who gets to place the lines? It has to be based on population - each district to represent a certain amount of people. County lines don't do that - one county could have 5 times as many people as the next one.
Whoever gets to place the lines has an advantage. That's what Gerrymandering is.
of course districts have to be population based
but how about drawing those lines using city/county lines as guidelines and geographic lines as well
granted you will not ALWAYS be able to draw the lines and stay withn the others, but at least TRY and lets not make a district that has parts that dont even touch each other
yes, but i remember in TX they had that law, so they made a district that followed the I-35 and ballooned out on certain areas to get the people they wanted in that district and the only thing those areas had in common was democratsif you re-read my post, and think more clearly, you will get the meaning of what i saidWho gets to place the lines? It has to be based on population - each district to represent a certain amount of people. County lines don't do that - one county could have 5 times as many people as the next one.
Whoever gets to place the lines has an advantage. That's what Gerrymandering is.
of course districts have to be population based
but how about drawing those lines using city/county lines as guidelines and geographic lines as well
granted you will not ALWAYS be able to draw the lines and stay withn the others, but at least TRY and lets not make a district that has parts that dont even touch each other
Actually, there is a law, at least in NY, that every district must be continuous - no parts that don't touch.
I do understand what you're saying - but the point that I'm trying to make is that no matter what, SOMEONE has to draw the lines. Even if they stick on county lines, or city lines - some counties have less than a district's worth of people, and some have more - SOMEONE has to decide how to split a county, or add 2 counties together.
And as long as SOMEONE is deciding, they'll make those decisions based on politics.
yes, but i remember in TX they had that law, so they made a district that followed the I-35 and ballooned out on certain areas to get the people they wanted in that district and the only thing those areas had in common was democratsif you re-read my post, and think more clearly, you will get the meaning of what i said
of course districts have to be population based
but how about drawing those lines using city/county lines as guidelines and geographic lines as well
granted you will not ALWAYS be able to draw the lines and stay withn the others, but at least TRY and lets not make a district that has parts that dont even touch each other
Actually, there is a law, at least in NY, that every district must be continuous - no parts that don't touch.
I do understand what you're saying - but the point that I'm trying to make is that no matter what, SOMEONE has to draw the lines. Even if they stick on county lines, or city lines - some counties have less than a district's worth of people, and some have more - SOMEONE has to decide how to split a county, or add 2 counties together.
And as long as SOMEONE is deciding, they'll make those decisions based on politics.
LOL
that shouldnt be allowed either
i dont want lines drawn to help ANYONEyes, but i remember in TX they had that law, so they made a district that followed the I-35 and ballooned out on certain areas to get the people they wanted in that district and the only thing those areas had in common was democratsActually, there is a law, at least in NY, that every district must be continuous - no parts that don't touch.
I do understand what you're saying - but the point that I'm trying to make is that no matter what, SOMEONE has to draw the lines. Even if they stick on county lines, or city lines - some counties have less than a district's worth of people, and some have more - SOMEONE has to decide how to split a county, or add 2 counties together.
And as long as SOMEONE is deciding, they'll make those decisions based on politics.
LOL
that shouldnt be allowed either
No, they do that in NY too. There are some districts that have portions that only include lakes, or public parks - in order to make them continuous. Except the district lines are drawn by the State Senate, which has been Republican controlled from the 1940s - 2008, so they're mostly gerrymandered to help Republicans.
i dont want lines drawn to help ANYONEyes, but i remember in TX they had that law, so they made a district that followed the I-35 and ballooned out on certain areas to get the people they wanted in that district and the only thing those areas had in common was democrats
LOL
that shouldnt be allowed either
No, they do that in NY too. There are some districts that have portions that only include lakes, or public parks - in order to make them continuous. Except the district lines are drawn by the State Senate, which has been Republican controlled from the 1940s - 2008, so they're mostly gerrymandered to help Republicans.
they should be as neutral as possible
how about find another option?i dont want lines drawn to help ANYONENo, they do that in NY too. There are some districts that have portions that only include lakes, or public parks - in order to make them continuous. Except the district lines are drawn by the State Senate, which has been Republican controlled from the 1940s - 2008, so they're mostly gerrymandered to help Republicans.
they should be as neutral as possible
The point is, there's no such thing as an impartial person to draw the lines - what do you do when there are 2 equally valid options, one favoring Dems, the other favoring Reps?
how about find another option?i dont want lines drawn to help ANYONE
they should be as neutral as possible
The point is, there's no such thing as an impartial person to draw the lines - what do you do when there are 2 equally valid options, one favoring Dems, the other favoring Reps?
no one said there was an EASY answerhow about find another option?The point is, there's no such thing as an impartial person to draw the lines - what do you do when there are 2 equally valid options, one favoring Dems, the other favoring Reps?
That's the point.
Someone has to make the decision. And NO ONE is completely impartial. No matter what lines are drawn, one or both parties will complain that it helps the other side more.
There's no easy answer to this.
no one said there was an EASY answerhow about find another option?
That's the point.
Someone has to make the decision. And NO ONE is completely impartial. No matter what lines are drawn, one or both parties will complain that it helps the other side more.
There's no easy answer to this.
but it takes people of integrity to compromise on issues like this
How do you propose to set district lines then?
seems like they do exactly what i am saying should be doneHow do you propose to set district lines then?
Iowa seems to have some success with the way they do it. It doesn't really have to be a partisan affair.