The GOP in Arizona wants their Gerrymandering back!

[OKTexas]

Big surprise, The GOP needs to choose their voters instead of letting the voters choose them....

So you and the OP are going to tell us Democrats never do that gerrymandering thingy?

Not anywhere near as frequently.

Dem's are the masters at it.
That's why they kept winning for so many years.

that and RW's are loser dumbasses ....

See post #20, it applies to you also.

 

[Nyvin]

News from The Associated Press

And it sounds like, thanks to the conservative judges on the bench, they will get it.

Add this to the list of:

-fear mongering
-voter suppression
-obstruction

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

 

[OKTexas]

News from The Associated Press

And it sounds like, thanks to the conservative judges on the bench, they will get it.

Add this to the list of:

-fear mongering
-voter suppression
-obstruction

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

 

[Nyvin]

News from The Associated Press

And it sounds like, thanks to the conservative judges on the bench, they will get it.

Add this to the list of:

-fear mongering
-voter suppression
-obstruction

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

 

[HenryBHough]

T'was a Democrat (Governor Gerry) who INVENTED the Gerrymander in Massachusetts.

I'm sad to see Democrats denigrate his memory in this cavalier way.

 

[Nyvin]

T'was a Democrat (Governor Gerry) who INVENTED the Gerrymander in Massachusetts.

I'm sad to see Democrats denigrate his memory in this cavalier way.

He was a "Democratic-Republican"

 

[OKTexas]

News from The Associated Press

And it sounds like, thanks to the conservative judges on the bench, they will get it.

Add this to the list of:

-fear mongering
-voter suppression
-obstruction

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

 

[HenryBHough]

He was a "Democratic-Republican"

See!

Republicans honor him; Democrats eat their own.

 

[Nyvin]

News from The Associated Press

And it sounds like, thanks to the conservative judges on the bench, they will get it.

Add this to the list of:

-fear mongering
-voter suppression
-obstruction

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

 

[OKTexas]

ROFLMFAO!!!!! You're nothing but a hypocritical asshole, in your opinion voters are capable of deciding this but are totally incompetent when it comes to defining marriage? I got an idea, why don't you crawl into your little corner and fornicate yourself.

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

 

[Nyvin]

Voters don't decide anything involved with independent commissions....

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

 

[Seawytch]

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

Exactly. Any state with a citizens redistricting committee, whether through people's initiative or legislative vote, could be rendered invalid by a SCOTUS ruling.

 

[bripat9643]

Big surprise, The GOP needs to choose their voters instead of letting the voters choose them....

So you and the OP are going to tell us Democrats never do that gerrymandering thingy?

Not anywhere near as frequently.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Iibturds kill me!

 

[bripat9643]

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

How do you propose to do it if not by vote of the state legislature?

 

[OKTexas]

Didn't read the article did ya dumb ass?

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

OK, one more time for dummies.

From the article:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Could it have other ramifications, yep, but as stated in the article, see above, that is the issue before the court.

 

[Nyvin]

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

How do you propose to do it if not by vote of the state legislature?

What?

 

[OKTexas]

Yes I did....it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything, it's a matter of whether or not the legislatures are constitutionally given the authority to draw the maps. The article puts "voters took away that power" for effect.

Your post still has no relevancy....voters being "capable of deciding" anything here isn't at all important.

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

Exactly. Any state with a citizens redistricting committee, whether through people's initiative or legislative vote, could be rendered invalid by a SCOTUS ruling.

Not necessarily, if the legislature sets up the commission, wouldn't that be in accordance with their powers per the Constitution? That's not the case in AZ.

 

[bripat9643]

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

How do you propose to do it if not by vote of the state legislature?

What?

How do you propose to dray the boundaries of Congressional districts if not by vote of the state legislature?

 

[Nyvin]

How do you propose to dray the boundaries of Congressional districts if not by vote of the state legislature?

It really should be as non-partisan as possible. The districts should aim to be as compact as possible too.

I think a combination of Iowa's and California's systems would work best, having strict guidelines as to how districts could be drawn and also having a non-partisan independent commission draw the maps without political data taken into account.

 

[Nyvin]

Here ya go dummy, from the link:

The big issue before the court is whether voters can take away the power given by the U.S. Constitution to elected state legislatures to decide how members of the U.S. House are elected.

Also from the link:

That's what Arizona voters did in 2000 when they adopted an independent commission. The legislature's Republican leaders filed their lawsuit after the commission's U.S. House map in 2012 produced four safe districts for Republicans, two for Democrats and made the other three seats competitive.

Now tell me again, "it has nothing to do with whether or not voters "decide" anything,"

Maybe your problem is comprehension. Dummy

How does anything you posted have anything to do with voters being "capable of deciding" anything? It doesn't. The issue being debated is whether or not legislators are given a constitutional right to draw district lines.

You really can't read can you? **** off dummy.

Okay fine, let's put it this way....if the law wasn't made by ballot measure and was instead voted in through the legislature....the lawsuit would still apply and could still be taken to the Supreme Court.

The issue isn't with voters deciding anything, the article just put it in for effect. The issue....said yet again....is whether or not the legislatures have constitutional rights to draw district maps.

Exactly. Any state with a citizens redistricting committee, whether through people's initiative or legislative vote, could be rendered invalid by a SCOTUS ruling.

Not necessarily, if the legislature sets up the commission, wouldn't that be in accordance with their powers per the Constitution? That's not the case in AZ.

That would be an entirely different law similar to Washington State's.