CDZ What are your thoughts on Gerrymandering? Good? Bad?

[Crepitus]

Gerrymanders should be Hunter to extinction no matter which party they support.

Congressional (and other) districts should be regular rectangles as much as possible.

Who decides what rectangle? Vertical or Horizontal? Fat or thin?

Who determines how much is possible?

You people are like dogs chasing your tails...

There is no other viable system.

Racists would love your plans because it would wipe out the majority of black Representatives, but who else would want such a thing?

Do you not understand what a "regular rectangle" is?

It would not wipe out black representatives, it would most likely increase them.

You conservitards are against ending gerrymandering because you benefit more often than Democrats do.

Rectangles? That is absolutely silly. Districts are not comprised by equal land area. They are comprised by equal populations. They would all be rectangles if they were made by third graders.

Both parties engage in rampant gerrymandering, and whichever party is in control at the time, is the one against ending gerrymandering.

Nobody said the rectangles had to be the same size, kid.

Use your head.

 

[MAGAman]

Nobody said the rectangles had to be the same size, kid.

Use your head.

Tight.

The party in power decided the shape and size.

 

[rightwinger]

Nobody said the rectangles had to be the same size, kid.

Use your head.

Tight.

The party in power decided the shape and size.

The voting district should determine who is in power, not the other way around

 

[MAGAman]

The voting district should determine who is in power, not the other way around

What voting districts? Without gerrymandering there are no districts.

Currently the districts are electing the people they choose.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Gerrymanders should be Hunter to extinction no matter which party they support.

Congressional (and other) districts should be regular rectangles as much as possible.

Who decides what rectangle? Vertical or Horizontal? Fat or thin?

Who determines how much is possible?

You people are like dogs chasing your tails...

There is no other viable system.

Racists would love your plans because it would wipe out the majority of black Representatives, but who else would want such a thing?

Do you not understand what a "regular rectangle" is?

It would not wipe out black representatives, it would most likely increase them.

You conservitards are against ending gerrymandering because you benefit more often than Democrats do.

Rectangles? That is absolutely silly. Districts are not comprised by equal land area. They are comprised by equal populations. They would all be rectangles if they were made by third graders.

Both parties engage in rampant gerrymandering, and whichever party is in control at the time, is the one against ending gerrymandering.

Nobody said the rectangles had to be the same size, kid.

Use your head.

Great, different size rectangles. Now you’re thinking like a fourth grader. I think we both agree that the politically motivated gerrymandering should be mitigated, but the the district lines need to be drawn encapsulating equal sized population without regard to political profile or specific shapes. Some natural barriers like bodies of water or rivers and mountains may dictate natural districts.

 

[rightwinger]

The voting district should determine who is in power, not the other way around

What voting districts? Without gerrymandering there are no districts.

Currently the districts are electing the people they choose.

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

 

[rightwinger]

Gerrymanders should be Hunter to extinction no matter which party they support.

Congressional (and other) districts should be regular rectangles as much as possible.

Who decides what rectangle? Vertical or Horizontal? Fat or thin?

Who determines how much is possible?

You people are like dogs chasing your tails...

There is no other viable system.

Racists would love your plans because it would wipe out the majority of black Representatives, but who else would want such a thing?

Do you not understand what a "regular rectangle" is?

It would not wipe out black representatives, it would most likely increase them.

You conservitards are against ending gerrymandering because you benefit more often than Democrats do.

Rectangles? That is absolutely silly. Districts are not comprised by equal land area. They are comprised by equal populations. They would all be rectangles if they were made by third graders.

Both parties engage in rampant gerrymandering, and whichever party is in control at the time, is the one against ending gerrymandering.

Nobody said the rectangles had to be the same size, kid.

Use your head.

Great, different size rectangles. Now you’re thinking like a fourth grader. I think we both agree that the politically motivated gerrymandering should be mitigated, but the the district lines need to be drawn encapsulating equal sized population without regard to political profile or specific shapes. Some natural barriers like bodies of water or rivers and mountains may dictate natural districts.

A rectangle is a defendable shape
A gerrymander which zigs in and out and takes a bizarre shape is not defendable

 

[MAGAman]

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

Or, what angers people most, is that the opposition party determines who votes for them.

I'm not saying gerrymandering is perfect. It just sucks less than anything else.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I favor what is essentially Gerrymandering Reparations to make up for the decades, 60 years!! that the democrats have been drawing them

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

Or, what angers people most, is that the opposition party determines who votes for them.

I'm not saying gerrymandering is perfect. It just sucks less than anything else.

The ones looking to get elected should have nothing to do with the process of who gets to vote where

 

[Syriusly]

I have been very open here at USMB over the years that I am opposed to gerrymandering regardless of which party it benefits. In my opinion, gerrymandering is a corruption of the American ideal that our votes matter.
Beyond that- it frankly encourages corruption by elected officials- people from both parties have cut deals with each other to allow gerrymandering if it protects their specific district- and their specific job.

Frankly I don't understand why there is not universal condemnation of this corrupt practice.
This thread is an opportunity to express your opinion on gerrymandering. If all you want to do is condemn the opposite party for doing it- well I can't stop you but I am hoping we can get something more substentive than 'well they did it first so we should do it too'.

Because it's not that big of a deal. It's not like left-wing states, start sending ultra-conservatives to congress. Nor do you see right-wing states sending Communists to congress.

So if the people are generally speaking getting what they want.... then who cares?

It's all a bunch of wailing and screaming over nothing. Look, if your state wants to change the rules on redistricting, then you have your state do it. This isn't a significant national issue. Most of the people, are getting the leaders they want.

The differences may not be in whether the elected officials are more to the extreme left or right- but that voters are not getting the leaders that they want.

This is an example of how the results are unfair to Democrats, but in reality both parties have done this for their own parties advantage- AND for the advantage of elected officials who want to keep getting elected.

How do you end up with 54% of the votes- and 36% of the seats? Gerrymandering.

Look at the illustration below- in a perfect world the 5 districts would be 2 gold and 6 purple- representing the actual allocation of voters. Statistically in a world without gerrymandering this average out to work. But politicians don't want voters to have that choice, so they devise districts to protect their jobs- and their party.

Is that an actual state, or made up numbers?

Doesn't matter the worse offenders of Gerrymandering ae the democrats, No one complained for 50 years about their gerrymandering until Republicans suddenly started winning state legislatures then suddenly people like serious were "concerned". Every State was forced to Gerrymander by democrats in the US Congress for 30 years. Not a peep and even now when seriously complains he ALWAYS uses a republican example.

California got fed up with gerrymandering- by Democrats- and cut the politicians out of the process. The Democrats were wrong- the voters were right.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

Or, what angers people most, is that the opposition party determines who votes for them.

I'm not saying gerrymandering is perfect. It just sucks less than anything else.

The ones looking to get elected should have nothing to do with the process of who gets to vote where

Oh, really? In NY Illegals get drivers licenses and 16 years olds are registered to vote

 

[rightwinger]

Gerrymandering supports minority rule

Unamerican

 

[Syriusly]

How districts should be set

View attachment 299186

Who picked those districts?

Which politicians should do your version of gerrymandering?

I'm still waiting for the whiners come up with an alternative.

California Citizens Redistricting Commission - Wikipedia

While the long-term results will bear out over time, independent studies by the Public Policy Institute of California, the National Journal, and Ballotpedia have shown that California now has some of the most competitive districts in the nation, creating opportunities for new elected officials.[12][13][14] For example, the uncertainty caused by the new districts combined with California's "top two" primary system has resulted in half a dozen resignations of incumbent Congressional representatives on both sides of the aisle, a major shake-up of California's Capitol Hill delegation.[15][16] In addition, it has forced a number of intra-party races, most notably a showdown between two of the state's most powerful House Democrats, Representatives Howard Berman and Brad Sherman.[15][17][18] In the previous 10 years, incumbents were so safe that only one Congressional seat changed party control in 255 elections,[15] due to bipartisan gerrymandering after the redistricting following the 2000 Census.[19][20][21] It is predicted that some of the newly elected politicians will be particularly well-suited for national politics since they will be forced to find positions that please moderate and independent voters to remain in office.

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

Or, what angers people most, is that the opposition party determines who votes for them.

I'm not saying gerrymandering is perfect. It just sucks less than anything else.

The ones looking to get elected should have nothing to do with the process of who gets to vote where

Oh, really? In NY Illegals get drivers licenses and 16 years olds are registered to vote

Nothing wrong with illegals proving they can drive and getting insurance. Makes it better for me

16 year olds do not vote

 

[Syriusly]

No problem then- you are just fine with gerrymandering and the corruption is encourages.

You don't seem to understand that there is no viable alternative.

The only alternative is "at large" voting for all representatives which means no districts and virtually no diversity of thought.

Alternatives do exist- some have been enacted- some have been proposed.

So what is your position? Do you think that gerrymandering is a good thing?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Actually, the candidates party is selecting who gets to vote for them.

Or, what angers people most, is that the opposition party determines who votes for them.

I'm not saying gerrymandering is perfect. It just sucks less than anything else.

The ones looking to get elected should have nothing to do with the process of who gets to vote where

Oh, really? In NY Illegals get drivers licenses and 16 years olds are registered to vote

Nothing wrong with illegals proving they can drive and getting insurance. Makes it better for me

16 year olds do not vote

Same way they pay their fair share of healthcare costs, right?

 

[Syriusly]

I have been very open here at USMB over the years that I am opposed to gerrymandering regardless of which party it benefits. In my opinion, gerrymandering is a corruption of the American ideal that our votes matter.
Beyond that- it frankly encourages corruption by elected officials- people from both parties have cut deals with each other to allow gerrymandering if it protects their specific district- and their specific job.

Frankly I don't understand why there is not universal condemnation of this corrupt practice.
This thread is an opportunity to express your opinion on gerrymandering. If all you want to do is condemn the opposite party for doing it- well I can't stop you but I am hoping we can get something more substentive than 'well they did it first so we should do it too'.

Because it's not that big of a deal. It's not like left-wing states, start sending ultra-conservatives to congress. Nor do you see right-wing states sending Communists to congress.

So if the people are generally speaking getting what they want.... then who cares?

It's all a bunch of wailing and screaming over nothing. Look, if your state wants to change the rules on redistricting, then you have your state do it. This isn't a significant national issue. Most of the people, are getting the leaders they want.

???....Most of the people are getting the leaders they want.

Gerrymandering is not so much about who gets elected from individual districts, it’s about the control of the state. So when you say most people get who they want, what you are really saying is most people who didn’t get who they want were in the wrong district.

Politicians- when allowed to gerrymander- do so to protect a) their own jobs and b) their party. They purposely design districts so that regardless of how the majority of voters vote, that their party will still have the majority of seats.
Again- look at the chart below- 54% of the voters voted Democratic, 64% of the seats were won by Republicans(with 46% of the vote).

Look- it is a perfectly legitimate position just to say you are okay with corrupt politicians gerrymandering to ensure that they are always elected and that their party maintains a majority regardless of the vote.

But frankly saying that those 54% got what they wanted when 64% of the seats went to the other party is just false.

 

[Syriusly]

Gerrymanders should be Hunter to extinction no matter which party they support.

Congressional (and other) districts should be regular rectangles as much as possible.

Who decides what rectangle? Vertical or Horizontal? Fat or thin?

Who determines how much is possible?

You people are like dogs chasing your tails...

There is no other viable system.

Racists would love your plans because it would wipe out the majority of black Representatives, but who else would want such a thing?

Do you not understand what a "regular rectangle" is?

It would not wipe out black representatives, it would most likely increase them.

You conservitards are against ending gerrymandering because you benefit more often than Democrats do.

Rectangles? That is absolutely silly. Districts are not comprised by equal land area. They are comprised by equal populations. They would all be rectangles if they were made by third graders.

Both parties engage in rampant gerrymandering, and whichever party is in control at the time, is the one against ending gerrymandering.

So are you for gerrymandering or against it?

Both parties do gerrymander- and will do so as long as voters don't give a damn.
Are you okay with it only so long as it benefits the party you belong to?

 

[Syriusly]

Republicans need to continue Gerrymandering for a few more decades in order to make right the wrong the democrats did when they were in power.

Wow- I think that the last time Democrats 'were in power' for decades at a time was in the '30's. How long do we have to put up with Republican corruption just to make you feel better about 'corruption' from 1938?