Texas VS. California Redistricting

  • Thread starter Thread starter Callatoroy
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 117
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
Callatoroy said:
Could this be a rare topic that mainstream republicans and democrats find common ground on? I listened to the texas speaker of the house on this issue yesterday and then listened to comments from newsome and other california reps threatening to "fight fire with fire" and both sides sounded like the most spoiled, immature, entitled children I have ever heard. I can't imagine the mainstream residents of either state are happy with the childish arguments and willful hypocrisy displayed. It was the absolute lowest that politics can get. Gerrymandering is all it amounts to and I wonder if moderates on both sides of the aisle agree it should be abolished?
Click to expand...
Why do you think that North Carolina, one of the most evenly split States in the nation per political party, has 10 Republican house reps and 4 Democratic house reps? (Spoiler - the answer may involve Art Pope).

I hate Gerrymandering - hate it with a white hot passion. It should be burned at the stake - it should be unconstitutional. And seeing the Texas redistricting movement that is barefaced "We are doing this to gain more political power", I feel like I have no choice to support Blue States doing the same in retaliation (California, etc) Maybe the 2021 bill wasn't great - has the Republican Party ever even proposed limits on Gerrymandering?

Let's looks at how Red States and Blue States deal with redistricting - between the two, which "team" has more States with independent redistricting vs. partisan redistricting?
 
Callatoroy said:
Such a misleading statement. There was a bill that was proposed and eliminating gerrymandering was but a tiny fraction of the bill.
Click to expand...
Easy solution. How about Johnson puts up a standalone bill that makes political gerrymandering illegal? Nothing else. Does it get out of committee? Does it get TO a committee? No doubt Dems would prefer more voting rights protection than just that, but I can say with confidence 95%+ of Dems would vote for that bill. Can you say the same about Pubs?
 
CFordUNC said:
yeah, now that I do not know- I have no idea what, if any, additional riders were on that bill. i’d have to look it up and read it because I’m curious. Here is a quick link I found might be helpful for both of us:

www.brennancenter.org

Annotated Guide to the For the People Act of 2021

The For the People Act would transform our democracy by making it fairer, stronger, and more inclusive. The Brennan Center explains the key provisions of this historic bill.
www.brennancenter.org www.brennancenter.org
Click to expand...
Reading this article there is only one reason to vote against that bill... because you want to continue to suppress fair representation in order to give your party an advantage.
 
On its face, I believe that the vast majority of people agree that gerrymandering is immoral and wrong. The reason more people don't raise their voices to come up with a fair system is because one party seeks power above all else. With their well-ingrained message being that our opponents are "destroying our country ", the people referenced above who who would normally agree to abolish gerrymandering, believe they're on the side of the righteous fight and support that power grab of their politicians.


Just another example of how our country needlessly complicates things for power and greed.
 
BlooVooDoo said:
I think there’s an argument to be made that gerrymandering in and of itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s gerrymandering for partisan advantage that’s the problem.
Click to expand...
And how would the two be separated?
 
roostra said:
Why do you think that North Carolina, one of the most evenly split States in the nation per political party, has 10 Republican house reps and 4 Democratic house reps? (Spoiler - the answer may involve Art Pope).

I hate Gerrymandering - hate it with a white hot passion. It should be burned at the stake - it should be unconstitutional. And seeing the Texas redistricting movement that is barefaced "We are doing this to gain more political power", I feel like I have no choice to support Blue States doing the same in retaliation (California, etc) Maybe the 2021 bill wasn't great - has the Republican Party ever even proposed limits on Gerrymandering?

Let's looks at how Red States and Blue States deal with redistricting - between the two, which "team" has more States with independent redistricting vs. partisan redistricting?
Click to expand...
Exactly.

I was listening to an interview where they discussed this. It was started as an example a soccer game where one team picked up the ball and ran for a score, which was counted. The other team has two choices. Argue about fairness and get slaughtered or play well the rules of the other team and be competitive.

Note, I hate team apologies for politics because it isn't ultimately a team sport when it impacts everyone.

But it was a good example. You can't win fighting fair against one that followed no rules.

It's sad that e are here. We've almost finished that race to the bottom and we are no longer the great country we once were.

Gerrymandering is blatant cheating because you don't feel that you can win based on ideas.
 
Kingpin said:
I’ll be surprised if either Calla or Ram respond. Everything on that list is right and good, but the polar opposite of what Trump and Pubs are doing.
Click to expand...
Exactly, in my opinion there is only one reason to be against open and fair elections.

Even giving value to their exaggerated claims of undocumented people voting, if everyone voted, the number of potential/supposed fraudulent votes doesn't move the needle.
 
Once upon a time, no taxation without representation led to quite a conflagration. How is this blatant election rigging scheme materially different?
 


www.publicnotice.co

The GOP's gerrymandering frenzy is a sign of weakness

If you can't beat 'em, rig it.
www.publicnotice.co www.publicnotice.co

IMO it's absolutely a sign of weakness on the GOP's part, and absolutely a glaring indicator that they know that their platform is deeply unpopular and unwinnable, but unfortunately this is probably not a fight that the Dems can win even if they do take the "fight fire with fire" approach. My understanding (which may be incorrect) is that the GOP stands to gain significantly more House seats if a large number of red states follow Texas's lead, than the Democrats stand to gain seats if blue states do the same. I appreciate that the Dems have finally decided to show up to a bazooka fight at least somewhat armed, but it may be too little too late. I suppose the only way around it would be for Democratic voters to turn out in the midterms in overwhelming numbers everywhere and thwart the GOP's redistricting nonsense at the ballot box, but I'm well past the point of trusting Democratically inclined voters to turn out in requisite numbers.
 
Last edited:
UNCatTech said:
So, which items are you specifically against?

1000007223.jpg
Click to expand...
I'll give you a short answer because I don't want to spend time on a bill that has ZERO chance of passing unless Dems run the table and somehow elect 60 Senators.

1. It reinstates the preclearance requirement under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for election maps for only SOUTHERN STATES based upon outdated data from 60 years ago as determined by Shelby County decision. It unfairly impacts Southern States (red) and allows a Dem Justice Department to discriminate against and unfairly impact Red States; and

2. It essentially codifies and nationalizes the extremely loose COVID voting requirements (liberal early voting; mail in voting; drop boxes; ballots mailed to everyone, drop boxes on every corner, etc.) which somehow allowed a guy who campaigned in a basement or in front of 30 people in cars honking to obtain 82 million votes. No wonder this was the Dems' # 1 bill once they took the House?
 
Ramrouser said:
I'll give you a short answer because I don't want to spend time on a bill that has ZERO chance of passing unless Dems run the table and somehow elect 60 Senators.

1. It reinstates the preclearance requirement under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for election maps for only SOUTHERN STATES based upon outdated data from 60 years ago as determined by Shelby County decision. It unfairly impacts Southern States (red) and allows a Dem Justice Department to discriminate against and unfairly impact Red States; and

2. It essentially codifies and nationalizes the extremely loose COVID voting requirements (liberal early voting; mail in voting; drop boxes; ballots mailed to everyone, drop boxes on every corner, etc.) which somehow allowed a guy who campaigned in a basement or in front of 30 people in cars honking to obtain 82 million votes. No wonder this was the Dems' # 1 bill once they took the House?
Click to expand...

Early voting, mail-in voting, drop boxes, and mailed ballots are not "liberal" inventions, nor are they unconstitutional, nor are they even nefarious. They are non-partisan ways to ensure that every eligible voter in America- Republican, Democrat, independent, third-party, whatever- can exercise their constitutional right to participate in democracy. It's not Democrats' fault that Republicans are too dim to utilize them. Why do you relish being such an intellectual dwarf at all times on all topics?

Where did the bill in 2021 declare that the preclearance requirement should be reinstated for "SOUTHERN STATES" only? I'll give you a hint: it doesn't! The preclearance requirement under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 mandated that certain states and localities with a history of voting discrimination obtain federal approval, specifically from the DOJ or a three-judge panel in DC, before implementing changes to their voting laws. The aim of preclearance was to prevent the implementation of voting changes that could discriminate against minority voters. This applied to states nationwide, not just "SOUTHERN STATES" only. And the For the People Act of 2021 would have reinstated preclearance on a broader, more data-driven basis than even the previous system allowed- and would have applied to all 50 states uniformly.

You are so, so bad at this. Do you not understand that all of the rest of us have access to the internet and can check and debunk your idiocy within about 15 seconds?
 
Last edited:
CFordUNC said:
Early voting, mail-in voting, drop boxes, and mailed ballots are not "liberal" inventions, nor are they unconstitutional, nor are they even nefarious. They are non-partisan ways to ensure that every eligible voter in America- Republican, Democrat, independent, third-party, whatever- can exercise their constitutional right to participate in democracy. It's not Democrats' fault that Republicans are too dim to utilize them. Why do you relish being such an intellectual dwarf at all times on all topics?
Click to expand...
Lack of choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top