lennypartiv
Diamond Member
- Jul 16, 2019
- 25,808
- 19,767
- 2,320
We'll agree to stop the gerrymandering when Democrats agree to stop importing voters from south of the border.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
one has nothing to do with the other to me. the overall crux of the issue is both sides do it and the DoJ is going after 1 side and ignoring history.We'll agree to stop the gerrymandering when Democrats agree to stop importing voters from south of the border.
Several states now have independent commissions to draw districts and they have done a much better job at it than when the politicians control it. Others, like Iowa, have rules in place that govern the drawing of districts to prevent political gerrymandering.Everyone's a politician when it comes to drawing districts buddy, lol
Inherently political act
There are many ideas out there. Decreasing the number of districts but having more representatives in each district is one such way. I do not think a 'non-partisan' group established to draw the districts is a good solution but it is another that is floated around on many different forms. At the very least, removing the ability to draw districts that span multiple localities connected through tiny corridors needs to be done away with. The districts should start out as simple geometric shapes that are then detailed to reach population requirements. Those should be more flexible as well. It is less of a problem that one representative may represent 10% more or fewer people than a district drawn specifically to pool alike voters from desperate communities together to reduce their overall voting power. Some ways would require a constitutional amendment, something that I think needs to be done anyway to properly address it, and others do not.then another method needs to be found to accomplish the reasons having to redistrict is necessary. come up with a way that would be unbiased and enforce it to both sides.
good luck.
Yes you can.I just gave you solutions. You can't solve it in the system we have. No
Would require a constitutional convention to change the way we run federal elections. States same thing need to move to a very complex voting system relative to what we have. That would solve gerrymandering.
There is no such thing as an "independent" process to draw districts every 10 years with a new census. More independent yes, independent, no
Several states now have independent commissions to draw districts and they have done a much better job at it than when the politicians control it. Others, like Iowa, have rules in place that govern the drawing of districts to prevent political gerrymandering.
Yes you can.
You have to have a tiny imagination if you think this problem is unsolvable. The only way to ensure failure is to never try in the first place.
You people?No you have an inability to follow through your line of thought
Take whatever solution you want with a current 1 man 1 vote no complications system. You will not get independent districting.
Algos, committees, etc. All tainted by the human element somewhere along the line. I'm going to know what the algo is going to do before i approve it.
And that's before you get to the design of our system which favors rural voters....And many of these republican advantages are just inherent to the system with the demographic breakdown. So how far do you take this balancing act? Political decision
You people are just weak minds who can't solve problems. That's your issue.
Like Democrats never gerrymander?
You people?
Is that really the best you can do? You start with a straw man and end with a personal attack. You might want to look in the mirror.
You've already brought up the flaw in that "solution." Who chooses this "bi-partisan" group? The answer is a bunch of partisans.Get an algorithm to do it, have the algorithm coded by a bi-partisan group of geeks.
...I'm brown you dipshit
I'm talking about you feminine ***** with no sense.
I don't see blacks whining about gerrymandering they seem to have the sense to like their own districts lol
It is almost irrelevant anyway, the SCOTUS is heavily weighted on giving states the free reign (as the constitution actually does specifically spell out) to run their elections and representatives as they see fit.The Justice Department on Monday sued Texas over the state's redistricting plan for House maps over the next decade, accusing Republican line-drawers of illegally undermining minority groups' right to vote.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said the DOJ reviewed the Lone Star State's redistricting plan and found "they include districts that violate the Voting Rights Act." The lawsuit serves as a response to the map Republican Gov. Greg Abbott enacted in October, which independent analysts suggest gives the GOP an unfair partisan advantage.
Justice Department sues Texas over redistricting plan - Washington Examiner
The Justice Department on Monday sued Texas over the state's redistricting plan for House maps over the next decade, accusing Republican line-drawers of illegally undermining minority groups' right to vote.Attorney General Merrick Garland said the DOJ reviewed the Lone Star State's redistricting...www.washingtonexaminer.com
Opinion:
The Texas Democrat Party is highly racist.
They want racially segregated congressional districts.
In the 2010 redistricting they went all the way to the USSC several times to get approval for racially segregated congressional districts, but the USSC ruled against them every time.
The thing about these racist Texas Democrats is that no matter how much they are accommodated to, they will never be happy.
Texas redistricting case: U.S. Supreme Court upholds …
Jun 25, 2018 · In a 5-4 vote, the high court upheld 10 of 11 congressional and state House districts that the maps’ challengers said intentionally …
...
Wow, you really are an idiot. I assumed you people was an moronic reference to paint me as a partisan. YOU pulled race into it as though that was insinuated anywhere at all...
I wonder what ***** was supposed to be.....
hey - the plan he outlined above is a start and throwing some ideas out there. no one is going to make a perfect post in here and turn the world around, so we discuss what could be done if we put forth the effort.No you have an inability to follow through your line of thought
Take whatever solution you want with a current 1 man 1 vote no complications system. You will not get independent districting.
Algos, committees, etc. All tainted by the human element somewhere along the line. I'm going to know what the algo is going to do before i approve it.
And that's before you get to the design of our system which favors rural voters....And many of these republican advantages are just inherent to the system with the demographic breakdown. So how far do you take this balancing act? Political decision. There is no objectively correct, fair, or independent answer to that question.
You people are just weak minds who can't solve problems. That's your issue.
Instead of just hoping elites, who i assure you are not that competent, will solve your problems. Why don't you try to think about how they might do so before you give them any credibility. It's absurd.
god what a fucktard.Oh yea that's what you meant
Shut the fuck up you pale little bitch
hahahaha, accidently talking shit to some one higher than you in the intersectional hierarchy
If you want to fix this, advocate for something that will fix it. But it seems 95%+ of democrats have no idea how to do that.
god what a fucktard.
ignore+1
hey - the plan he outlined above is a start and throwing some ideas out there. no one is going to make a perfect post in here and turn the world around, so we discuss what could be done if we put forth the effort.
the whole "weak minded" shit was just bullshit.