Redistricting | Indiana Senate refuses to redistrict

  • Thread starter Thread starter Callatoroy
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 316
  • Views: 14K
  • Politics 


🎁 —> https://www.wsj.com/politics/electi...6?st=uFytET&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

“…
Nonpartisan analysts say the California ruling will likely limit GOP gains from the redistricting push to three or four seats, or possibly none at all. Republicans currently hold a majority in the House of 218-214.

Last weekend in Texas, a Democrat won a state Senate seat by 14 points in a district that Trump had carried by 17 points in 2024, suggesting that Democrats angry at Trump are eager to vote.

Texas lawmakers made five House districts more friendly to Republicans, but people in both parties consider two of them to be competitive due in part to Democratic enthusiasm, even though Trump in 2024 won both districts by about 10 points.

“I think the benefits Republicans ultimately derive from this redistricting arms race are negligible,” said Jacob Rubashkin, an analyst with the nonpartisan newsletter Inside Elections. “You can’t gerrymander your way out of a wave election, and Democrats don’t even need a wave” to take the House majority, he added.…”

——
A similar analysis may have prompted Trump’s recently much more aggressive rhetoric about the GOP taking over elections in blue cities.
 
Why won’t either side put forward a clean (not one loaded with partisan provisions) bill which outlaws gerrymandering that establishes independent state commissions to draw the Congressional lines. It should provide that the number of Congressional representatives must correspond approximately to the average % of the vote each party received in the last three House election.

You might get some bipartisan support. What’s occurring this cycle is getting out of hand.
I wonder what brought you to this conclusion. Does it have anything to do, perhaps, with losing the game that Republicans insisted on playing during this cycle?
 
I wonder what brought you to this conclusion. Does it have anything to do, perhaps, with losing the game that Republicans insisted on playing during this cycle?
No. The result of a non gerrymandering playing field will likely put us in the same place as a gerrymandering system since we’re a pretty equally divided country. Only you’ll have a lot less frustrated and angry people who are in the minority in various states: the conservatives who’ll now have no voice or representation in VA or, as you would argue, the liberals in NC. People without a voice in the system will turn to the extremes and even radicalization.

Besides, I don’t think the Republicans will “lose” under the current system after the 2030 census.
 
No. The result of a non gerrymandering playing field will likely put us in the same place as a gerrymandering system since we’re a pretty equally divided country. Only you’ll have a lot less frustrated and angry people who are in the minority in various states: the conservatives who’ll now have no voice or representation in VA or, as you would argue, the liberals in NC. People without a voice in the system will turn to the extremes and even radicalization.

Besides, I don’t think the Republicans will “lose” under the current system after the 2030 census.
This is really instructive. You're much more interested in the results of gerrymandering, rather than just getting rid of it because it's the right goddamn thing to do, because people deserve to have their votes count.
 
No. The result of a non gerrymandering playing field will likely put us in the same place as a gerrymandering system since we’re a pretty equally divided country. Only you’ll have a lot less frustrated and angry people who are in the minority in various states: the conservatives who’ll now have no voice or representation in VA or, as you would argue, the liberals in NC. People without a voice in the system will turn to the extremes and even radicalization.

Besides, I don’t think the Republicans will “lose” under the current system after the 2030 census.
Have North Carolinians turned to extremes and radicalization? Did you have this epiphany recently?

I agree about gerrymandering. Ive been saying it for years. I just wonder why you and Senator Cruz are such recent converts.
 
No. The result of a non gerrymandering playing field will likely put us in the same place as a gerrymandering system since we’re a pretty equally divided country. Only you’ll have a lot less frustrated and angry people who are in the minority in various states: the conservatives who’ll now have no voice or representation in VA or, as you would argue, the liberals in NC. People without a voice in the system will turn to the extremes and even radicalization.

Besides, I don’t think the Republicans will “lose” under the current system after the 2030 census.
It's nice to hear you're against gerrymandering. Gerrymandering and the electoral college has lead to minority rule in the vast majority of recent federal elections.

Perhaps I missed it, but have you shared your thoughts on the federal government seizing ballots in Georgia? There's a great discussion about it on this board.
 
Have North Carolinians turned to extremes and radicalization? Did you have this epiphany recently?

I agree about gerrymandering. Ive been saying it for years. I just wonder why you and Senator Cruz are such recent converts.
VA is trying to give 49 % of its citizens 9% of the vote. In no Universe is this remotely fair. Dems are taking this to new levels.

As bad as Dems think Texas is, 40% of Dems in the state will receive 30% of the representatives.
 
VA is trying to give 49 % of its citizens 9% of the vote. In no Universe is this remotely fair. Dems are taking this to new levels.

As bad as Dems think Texas is, 40% of Dems in the state will receive 30% of the representatives.
Now do North Carolina. Texas. Florida. Heck do the whole confederacy.

 
Back
Top