CURRENT EVENTS

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 680
  • Views: 10K
  • Politics 
UNCatTech said:
How does simply accounting for people rig anything in anyone's favor?
Click to expand...
Seats are added or lost based on population. Flooding sanctuary states with millions of illegals and then counting them in the census adds more congressional seats. How is that not rigging the system? What is the logic in counting them when they can't vote? For purposes of voter representation they might as well be gold fish because like gold fish they can't vote. So no logical reason to count them in the census to determine the number of congressional seats.
 
UNCatTech said:
Again, why do you believe that all of the immigrants would vote Democrat when the last election demographics would indicate that to be wrong? This is the same talking point the pubs were using when I voted for bush. It's not defendable, but it makes the cult feel good about the right wanting to keep citizens from voting based on a made up myth. But we know that much of the cult is beholden to myth, so it's understandable that the same myth is working 20 years later.

No matter how it is spun, the bottom line is that there is very little fraud and the real goal is to minimize who can vote by keeping voting eligible citizens from being able to easily vote.
Click to expand...
There's no damn consistency to any of their arguments, their arguments are all done to suit the needs of the moment. How many Trumpers have we seen over the past six months bragging about how Trump got a larger share of minority votes (and especially Latinos) than any Republican presidential candidate in a good while? Plenty. And yet how many of these same Trumpers are now arguing just the opposite - that naturalized Latino citizens always vote Democratic? And if they're really trying to argue that non-naturalized immigrants are voting illegally that is totally false, and has been proven so time and time again. It's a GOP myth, just like the myth that trickle-down economics actually works or that poor people are living like kings and queens on welfare checks and Medicaid.
 
ChileG said:
Democrats are hypocrites for conducting the census the same way it has been done since they started taking the census!!!111111
Click to expand...
No, for being a weak minded, vote buying, policy-less, party that can't win without flooding the country with illegal immigrants. That's why you are hypocrites.
 
Callatoroy said:
So not counting ILLEGALS (who can’t vote) is rigging the system, but flooding the country with ILLEGALS to increase blue numbers isn’t rigging the system. That’s some fucked up liberal hypocrisy and stupidity. One more time for you, ILLEGAL. Meaning no right to be in the country so not counted.
Click to expand...
The goal of the census is to determine how many people are living in an area. It has nothing to do with whether or not they are citizens. Only citizens can vote, but EVERYBODY gets representation. Only citizens get to decide who represents EVERYBODY in a state or district. Everybody there uses roads, water, and other infrastructure that is apportioned according to census data. Census data is much more important than simply voting.
 
CFordUNC said:
Oh, absolutely, I totally expect maximal GOP ratfuckery. That's a given at this point.

I think that an all-out gerrymandering pissing match would look something like this:

Texas eliminates 5 Dem seats. California responds by eliminating 5 Pub seats. Missouri eliminates a Dem. Maryland eliminates a Pub. Florida eliminates 5 Dems. Illinois, Oregon, and New York eliminate 5 Pubs. Ohio eliminates 2 Dems. Indiana and Nebraska eliminate 2 Dems. That would leave a net GOP gain of 4 seats. Maybe California could get really petty and draw out 9 Pub seats, or maybe Washington and New Jersey get involved, too.
Click to expand...
I've also read that there is a real danger for Republicans in some of these states in going to extremes with gerrymandering, as by doing so they will have to create a greater number of marginal GOP districts than before, especially in states with a significant Democratic vote like Texas or Ohio. They will have a larger number of seats that may be "safe" in a typical election, but if there's a blue wave then some of these new districts may not actually be all that safe. The Politico article below explains some of the possible dangers of what Texas Republicans are doing.

Link: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/11/texas-redistricting-00448145
 
Mulberry Heel said:
I've also read that there is a real danger for Republicans in some of these states in going to extremes with gerrymandering, as by doing so they will have to create a greater number of marginal GOP districts than before, especially in states with a significant Democratic vote like Texas or Ohio. They will have a larger number of seats that may be "safe" in a typical election, but if there's a blue wave than some of these new districts may not actually be all that safe. The Politico article below explains some of the possible dangers of what Texas Republicans are doing.

Link: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/11/texas-redistricting-00448145
Click to expand...
Oh this is fascinating, thank you for sharing
 
Mulberry Heel said:
There's no damn consistency to any of their arguments, their arguments are all done to suit the needs of the moment. How many Trumpers have we seen over the past six months bragging about how Trump got a larger share of minority votes (and especially Latinos) than any Republican presidential candidate in a good while? Plenty. And yet how many of these same Trumpers are now arguing just the opposite - that naturalized Latino citizens always vote Democratic? And if they're really trying to argue that non-naturalized immigrants are voting illegally that is totally false, and has been proven so time and time again. It's a GOP myth, just like the myth that trickle-down economics actually works or that poor people are living like kings and queens on welfare checks and Medicaid.
Click to expand...
Not bragging, laughing because your decades old policy to bring in poor illegal immigrants, get them on the g'ment teat and find a path to citizenship so you can continue to buy their votes through entitlements didn't pan out for you. You guys just assumed it worked for the black community so you would apply the same strategy to the latino voters. Bad news for you is that the black community is starting to wake up and see your shit show for what it is. I sincerely pray your party continues to embrace the continued liberal shift left into full on dim socialism. Really pulling hard for aoc and mamdani and warren to become your party leaders. You guys are to dumb to understand why you lost the last election. Can't wait for nyc to elect mamdani.
 
farce© said:
The goal of the census is to determine how many people are living in an area. It has nothing to do with whether or not they are citizens. Only citizens can vote, but EVERYBODY gets representation. Only citizens get to decide who represents EVERYBODY in a state or district. Everybody there uses roads, water, and other infrastructure that is apportioned according to census data. Census data is much more important than simply voting.
Click to expand...
total population determines congressional seats, not legal citizen population. Don't think there is a question on the census about citizenship. SC struck that down in 2019.
 
Callatoroy said:
No, for being a weak minded, vote buying, policy-less, party that can't win without flooding the country with illegal immigrants. That's why you are hypocrites.
Click to expand...

How does that make me a hypocrite? If I'm weak, devoid of policy and willing to buy votes, why wouldn't i try to flood the country with non-voters? You can't even keep your gratuitous insults straight - it's like you have NewsMax Tourette's.

I similarly accuse the GOP of actively suppressing votes because they'd lose every election if every citizen voted. But I'm not accusing them of hypocrisy, you stupid twit.
 
Callatoroy said:
Seats are added or lost based on population. Flooding sanctuary states with millions of illegals and then counting them in the census adds more congressional seats. How is that not rigging the system? What is the logic in counting them when they can't vote? For purposes of voter representation they might as well be gold fish because like gold fish they can't vote. So no logical reason to count them in the census to determine the number of congressional seats.
Click to expand...

maybe you missed this

per @CFordUNC

Actually, it doesn't, because according to 2022 data from the Pew Research Center, some of the states with the highest percentages of illegal immigrants in their populations are ones that regularly send Republicans to Congress and award their electoral votes to Republican candidates. Nevada, a swing state, tops the list with 5.8 percent of its population being undocumented. But Trump’s home state of Florida comes third, with 5.2 percent. Arizona and Georgia—two other swing states—are all in the top fifteen on the list, with undocumented immigrants making up between 3.2 and 3.5 percent of their populations.
 
1754668292645.png
Some facts. Do with them what you will. Red states (based on 2024 Presidential result) gained 5 House seats, while blue states gained 2. Red states lost 4 House seats, while blue states lost 3. That's a net 1 pickup for red states and net 1 loss for blue states as a result of the 2020 census.

The most commonly referred to "sanctuary cities" are NYC, LA, Chicago, SF, and Philadelphia. All of their states lost a seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top