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.
It doesn't. Again, it protects against white racist gerrymandering.Right. But, as you highlighted, the problem is the gerrymandering, regardless of why it's done. And, instead of addressing the problem, instead of getting rid of gerrymandering, the law in question actually requires gerrymandering - sets it in place permanently via law.
Pretending racists don't exist isn't a viable political option. The world was a better place after the Voting Rights Act than before. If you don't think so you might be a redneck.This is like so many efforts to combat racism. To address a history of racial privilege and preference, we pass laws that require policies of racial privilege and preference. It might be "fair", in the sense of doling out privilege equally, but it doesn't make for better government. Arguably, it makes it worse because it enshrines preferential policies in law.
By requiring racial (and, arguably, partisan) gerrymandering. That's not a good solution.It doesn't. Again, it protects against white racist gerrymandering.
OkPretending racists don't exist isn't a viable political option.
I might be. But I know futility when I see it.The world was a better place after the Voting Rights Act than before. If you don't think so you might be a redneck.
How is this not racial gerrymandering? Legally required gerrymandering.There is no black racist gerrymandering except in your little white victim fantasy world.
So you admit that you are racist?Racists obviously. I said as much.
And that was abused to take voting power away from everyone else.The Voting Rights Act did just that since racist whites couldn't be trusted not to gerrymander away the voting power of black citizens.
Race-based assumption. You racist motherfucker.Because Asians and Black voters tend to be closely aligned politically speaking.
That's all you do. Black people need rights protect. White people need rights protected. Black people need to eat. White people need to eat.I don't assume it
I think we all proved YOU are the racist POS.No, you're just an obvious racist piece of shit.
They should be grateful for the neighborhoods we put them in?Racist in that we give special carve-outs based on race.
That's funny.There is no black racist gerrymandering except in your little white victim fantasy world.
No.They should be grateful for the neighborhoods we put them in?
Then, why are you bitching about 1/4 of the population being black?There is no black racist gerrymandering except in your little white victim fantasy world.
The best approach to getting rid of gerrymandering, that I've seen, is multi-rep districts.No.
Gerrymandering is wrong and should stop, no matter who it is designed to unfairly benefit.
How does that work. I am not familiar.The best approach to getting rid of gerrymandering, that I've seen, is multi-rep districts.
Instead of carving a state or region into a bunch of small districts, you have a multi-winner election for all the seats. So, for example, a smaller state, with say 4 reps, might lump them all together and have a state-wide vote on all candidates, taking the top 4.How does that work. I am not familiar.
So, that would work along side a RCV system?Instead of carving a state or region into a bunch of small districts, you have a multi-winner election for all the seats. So, for example, a smaller state, with say 4 reps, might lump them all together and have a state-wide vote on all candidates, taking the top 4.
Yeah, I edited previous post to add a link.So, that would work along side a RCV system?
Back to sleep kook.And the right’s war in democracy continues.
IMO...it should be divided evenly with no partisan, racial, religious or ethnic gerrymandering.How about ignoring racial blocks and dividing it up evenly?
But how do you decide what is "even"? Or perhaps the more important question is, "who decides" what is even?IMO...it should be divided evenly with no partisan, racial, religious or ethnic gerrymandering.
Bipartisan or nonpartisan commission.But how do you decide what is "even"? Or perhaps the more important question is, "who decides" what is even?
I don't hate the idea, because it is better than what we currently have, but dblack subtly points out the problem with "who." It will always be at risk for corruption and influence.Bipartisan or nonpartisan commission.
I can see that...just read his article though and I think that might be the way to go.I don't hate the idea, because it is better than what we currently have, but dblack subtly points out the problem with "who." It will always be at risk for corruption and influence.
