Who gets the blame for breaking our 250 year old experiment with democracy?

I suppose one could make the argument the conservatives on the SC get the nod for gutting the VRA. The recent ruling effectively nullifying Sec. 2 of the law, having unleashed a rush by southern states to gerrymander districts with minority representation out of existence. But R gerrymandering was already well on its way before the Court decided to once again legislate from the bench.

Supreme Court guts Voting Rights Act, greenlights GOP gerrymanders​

In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court kneecapped the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark civil rights law that restricted racial gerrymandering and racial discrimination in voting for sixty years.

Writing for the majority in Callais v. Louisiana, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the court was not striking down Section 2 of the VRA, but rather “properly” interpreting it as “impos[ing] liability only when circumstances give rise to a strong inference that intentional discrimination occurred.”

Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, accused the majority of making changes that “eviscerate the law.”

The ruling effectively invalidates Section 2 of the VRA as it has been understood for four decades without explicitly striking down the statute. It now will require proof of intentional discrimination — something Congress did not write into the law and that’s extremely difficult for plaintiffs to show.


To be sure, both D's and R's have engaged in the ugly practice of gerrymandering throughout our history. Boiled down to its essence, it is and always has been a perversion of a representative democracy. Which is why Dem's tried to pass legislation mandating that independent commissions draw district maps in the future. R's rejected the idea. We're coming to understand why.

AI Overview

H.R. 1 (the For the People Act) and subsequent legislation like the Redistricting Reform Act of 2025
aim to eliminate partisan gerrymandering by requiring all states to use 15-member independent redistricting commissions (IRCs) to draw congressional maps.

So, it appears the hands down winner in causing an unprecedented number of R controlled states to enact legislation allowing for mid-cycle redistricting (which normally happens every 10 years following the census), and the consequent reaction by Dem controlled states to the aforementioned perversion, is.........well........it goes without saying. Of note, R's have typically used their control of state legislatures in order to permit the gerrymandering while D's have sought the input of the people by passing referendums. The VA Supreme Court having taken away the right of majority rule after the people voted to allow for new maps to be drawn.

trump has expressed concern he will be impeached again if the D's take the House in the fall. Then there's the matter of the House holding hearings and using its constitutional authority of oversight (something the R's have abdicated) that also has to be concerning for Don. Though two years isn't nearly long enough to hold the regime to account for all its abuses. Which explains his motivation for trying to rig the midterms in the R's favor. To be clear, rigging the election on a national scale is exactly what he's trying to do. It's an abomination like no other in our history.

But while he is responsible for trying to put another nail in democracy's coffin, is he to blame for the success to date? Or are the R's in control of state legislatures and governor's mansions really to blame? They could have stood up for the principles on which the country was founded like the seven state reps in Indiana did. The ones targeted by trump for being primaried out of office. Nothing prevented Greg Abbott from telling trump he could not in good conscience do what he was being asked. R legislative leaders could have refused to participate in an anti-democratic scheme they knew to be wrong. Voters in IN could have shown their support for the reps who so obviously did the right thing.

The point being trump is powerless without his enablers. He only gets to lead the country down this path if enough people follow. The existential question for the times is how to get them to stop following.
That experiment was broken when the democrats, and their RINO minions stole the 2020 election and installed a turnip as president.

That was the end of the first American Republic.

Now the battle is to see what replaces it, a Marxist dictatorship which is what the political class wants, or a reborn Republic which is what MAGA is fighting for.
 
More sour grapes from a party that dumped their candidate for a moron that couldn't primary, and after another 100 million spent, still couldn't buy the election.

GTFOH.:eusa_hand:
 
You are ignoring that discrimination against blacks continues to this day regardless of attempts to remedy centuries of discrimination.

That is a well crafted assertion.

The way you stated it, all you need to support your claim, is ONE ACT of anti-black discrimination, in a nation of over 300 million people.


That is a great "bar" to set for yourself.


Meanwhile, everyone over here, in the real world, who are not racist shit talkers?


WE know that the various systems set into place, to discrimination in faovr of blacks to supposedly "remedy centuries of discrimination",

have for 70 years now, been massive and universially discriminating against whites in favor of blacks (and browns).

So, we can now see that that was a big ******* mistake.


WE, white people, took a huge hit, and suffered for generations,


and for what?

For ungrateful assholes, who are demanding more and more and are never satisfied.

**** THAT.


Time to end it. Time to punish those that support it.
 
Democrats have long failed to understand that "You MAY NOT discriminate on the basis of race," does NOT mean, "You MUST discriminate on the basis of race." It's just that simple. Race should play no part in the process. If it does, that is a violation of the 14th Amendment.

In my view, demographics should not even be a part of the data provided to whomever is creating the maps, and neither should party registration. Just draw the districts to make logical groupings of cities, towns, and communities.
Really, and whites have finally learned they are not the masters of society and block minorities from participating?
 
Do you or do you not agree that it serves the purposes of the Founder's intent to have congressional districts drawn free from partisan interests?

The way that you dodged my question?

It makes me want to have a civil war with you.
 
Really, and whites have finally learned they are not the masters of society and block minorities from participating?

How can you even ask that, at this late date?

Have you seriously ran into that, in your life?

Or have you ran into the opposite, when the big wigs are happy to throw working class whites under hte bus, to pander to the activists and the loud assholes?
 
That is a well crafted assertion.

The way you stated it, all you need to support your claim, is ONE ACT of anti-black discrimination, in a nation of over 300 million people.


That is a great "bar" to set for yourself.


Meanwhile, everyone over here, in the real world, who are not racist shit talkers?


WE know that the various systems set into place, to discrimination in faovr of blacks to supposedly "remedy centuries of discrimination",

have for 70 years now, been massive and universially discriminating against whites in favor of blacks (and browns).

So, we can now see that that was a big ******* mistake.


WE, white people, took a huge hit, and suffered for generations,


and for what?

For ungrateful assholes, who are demanding more and more and are never satisfied.

**** THAT.


Time to end it. Time to punish those that support it.
Racism lives; you should be so proud.
 
How can you even ask that, at this late date?

Have you seriously ran into that, in your life?

Or have you ran into the opposite, when the big wigs are happy to throw working class whites under hte bus, to pander to the activists and the loud assholes?
Trump loves to throw people under the bus, or have you not noticed, this country is still run by the rich, not the poor, and damn sure not by the people for the people.
 
Racism lives; you should be so proud.


I asked you if you have actually seen it in your life. Cause that is not what I have seen.

My employers have always had their HR departments and such, and teh big wigs have been happy to throw anyone and everyone under the bus, at a moments notice, to keep that shit off their backs.


I ask again, have you really seen that "racism" in your life?
 
The new voting districts approved Thursday could give Republicans a chance to win all nine of the state's congressional seats in the November midterm elections.

Black people make up 17% of TN's population. The R controlled legislature wants to strip them of their political influence.
did you miss the chart of the Northeast states and the disenfranchised republicans, or is that different?
 
Those are just words on a message board. In the real world blacks are being discriminated against with the blessing of the conservatives on the SCOTUS.
and republicans have been discriminated in blue states for YEARS, did you miss the NE states gerrymandering to ensure dem seats?
 
Trump loves to throw people under the bus, or have you not noticed, this country is still run by the rich, not the poor, and damn sure not by the people for the people.

And the rich are happy to throw us under the bus, if that is what it takes to make a lawsuit or complaint go away.

That has been what I have seen from the rich.

What have you seen?

Have you had rich white men, take the hit, fight the fight, so that they could give you, a white man, an even break? You know, out of racial loyalty?
 
15th post
I suppose one could make the argument the conservatives on the SC get the nod for gutting the VRA. The recent ruling effectively nullifying Sec. 2 of the law, having unleashed a rush by southern states to gerrymander districts with minority representation out of existence. But R gerrymandering was already well on its way before the Court decided to once again legislate from the bench.

Supreme Court guts Voting Rights Act, greenlights GOP gerrymanders​

In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court kneecapped the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark civil rights law that restricted racial gerrymandering and racial discrimination in voting for sixty years.

Writing for the majority in Callais v. Louisiana, Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the court was not striking down Section 2 of the VRA, but rather “properly” interpreting it as “impos[ing] liability only when circumstances give rise to a strong inference that intentional discrimination occurred.”

Justice Elena Kagan, in dissent, accused the majority of making changes that “eviscerate the law.”

The ruling effectively invalidates Section 2 of the VRA as it has been understood for four decades without explicitly striking down the statute. It now will require proof of intentional discrimination — something Congress did not write into the law and that’s extremely difficult for plaintiffs to show.


To be sure, both D's and R's have engaged in the ugly practice of gerrymandering throughout our history. Boiled down to its essence, it is and always has been a perversion of a representative democracy. Which is why Dem's tried to pass legislation mandating that independent commissions draw district maps in the future. R's rejected the idea. We're coming to understand why.

AI Overview

H.R. 1 (the For the People Act) and subsequent legislation like the Redistricting Reform Act of 2025
aim to eliminate partisan gerrymandering by requiring all states to use 15-member independent redistricting commissions (IRCs) to draw congressional maps.

So, it appears the hands down winner in causing an unprecedented number of R controlled states to enact legislation allowing for mid-cycle redistricting (which normally happens every 10 years following the census), and the consequent reaction by Dem controlled states to the aforementioned perversion, is.........well........it goes without saying. Of note, R's have typically used their control of state legislatures in order to permit the gerrymandering while D's have sought the input of the people by passing referendums. The VA Supreme Court having taken away the right of majority rule after the people voted to allow for new maps to be drawn.

trump has expressed concern he will be impeached again if the D's take the House in the fall. Then there's the matter of the House holding hearings and using its constitutional authority of oversight (something the R's have abdicated) that also has to be concerning for Don. Though two years isn't nearly long enough to hold the regime to account for all its abuses. Which explains his motivation for trying to rig the midterms in the R's favor. To be clear, rigging the election on a national scale is exactly what he's trying to do. It's an abomination like no other in our history.

But while he is responsible for trying to put another nail in democracy's coffin, is he to blame for the success to date? Or are the R's in control of state legislatures and governor's mansions really to blame? They could have stood up for the principles on which the country was founded like the seven state reps in Indiana did. The ones targeted by trump for being primaried out of office. Nothing prevented Greg Abbott from telling trump he could not in good conscience do what he was being asked. R legislative leaders could have refused to participate in an anti-democratic scheme they knew to be wrong. Voters in IN could have shown their support for the reps who so obviously did the right thing.

The point being trump is powerless without his enablers. He only gets to lead the country down this path if enough people follow. The existential question for the times is how to get them to stop following.


Who lost their right to vote?
 
And the rich are happy to throw us under the bus, if that is what it takes to make a lawsuit or complaint go away.

That has been what I have seen from the rich.

What have you seen?

Have you had rich white men, take the hit, fight the fight, so that they could give you, a white man, an even break? You know, out of racial loyalty?
Not since FDR.
 
Who lost their right to vote?

Leftards just say shit.

He won't understand why you try to disccuss what he said.

He has already moved on to next attack.

That old attack? It served it's purpose, for the moment it was supposed to serve it's purpose.

Now, teh next attack is here, putting out there some negs, smearing the left's enemies.

YOur concern about whether it is true, or makes sense,


he doens't understand what or why that is... anything.


YOu might as well try to explain True Love to a scallop.

A dead scallop.
 
Back
Top Bottom