Gerrymandering Supreme Court Case

Kaines · Nov 15, 2017

Is our resident idiot liberal still not understanding the concept of Federalism? Or why it's perfectly fine if 2 Dem Senators win their respective elections by 5,000,000 votes but every other Dem Senator in every other state loses by 1 vote and Dems are outnumbered 98 to 2 in the Senate?

I am never surprised by the level of ignorance shitlibs are able to sink to.

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

TJT said:
Dude. You have to win The States. You know that word in the USA? You can't just cater to major population centers for your victories.

This is by design and the foundation of our society.

We are talking at state level gerrymendering.

This case is not about federal, but rather state level.

Kaines · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios said:
We are talking at state level gerrymendering.

This case is not about federal, but rather state level.

State level districts are the exact same concept as Federal level States.

OMFG, REPUBLICAN GERRYMANDERING!!!!

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 8.11.10 AM.png

Araysar · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios said:
We are talking at state level gerrymendering.

This case is not about federal, but rather state level.

Sigh

Breakdown · Nov 15, 2017

Lend, the Raft-erman seems to not understand that arbitrary lines drawn on a map are the same at all levels.

Breakdown · Nov 15, 2017

Lend,

What are your feelings about the Horribly disfigured and gerrymandered districts in many states that lash together minority neighborhoods which give them their own district instead of being crushed by white neighborhoods. Are these forced minority disctricts bad?

Did you know that Latino Congressional representation would be cut in half without them.

How is that stacking the deck working out for you fucking mud people?

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

Araysar said:
Sigh

Why the sigh?

This case is about Winscosin Act 43. An act that redrew state houses, nothing federal.

Wisconsin Legislature: 2011 Wisconsin Act 43

Araysar · Nov 15, 2017

Look at that Wisconsin map and tell me how redrawing the districts would help Democrats.

It wouldn't. The problem isn't gerrymandering. The problem is that Dems suck at local level.

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

I don't know how to draw a political map. My first instinct would be by county. then split the county by city. Reason been is because the counties have political independence from each other, same as the cities.

Szlia · Nov 15, 2017

I don't understand how showing the outcome of a gerrymandered map is somehow proof that gerrymandering has no effect. I also fail to see how federal level is relevant to a electoral map redrawing discussion unless I missed all these state boundaries changes that happen between elections...

Araysar · Nov 15, 2017

Szlia said:
I don't understand how showing the outcome of a gerrymandered map is somehow proof that gerrymandering has no effect. I also fail to see how federal level is relevant to a electoral map redrawing discussion unless I missed all these state boundaries changes that happen between elections...

Democrats are basically concentrated in 4 cities but think that somehow entitles them to at least 50 districts in entire state. Please split the map that you see into 100 districts in such a way, that the 4 tiny metro areas represent 50+ districts.

I mean those districts on the map arent even crazily drawn.

TJT · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios suppose you put up a totally geographically fair grid-based voting district system. Just a square grid applied to a state as best as they can. No partisan shit. Just a literal square grid like on a map.

Guess who would never win an election again?

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

I dont understand why the idea of people who live in cities, counting less than those in rural communities.

TJT · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios said:
I dont understand why the idea of people who live in cities, counting less than those in rural communities.

This is because you somehow can't comprehend that a voting district is a GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY. It is not a group of any specific people.

Araysar · Nov 15, 2017

TJT said:
This is because you somehow can't comprehend that a voting district is a GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY. It is not a group of any specific people.

not only that but urban areas are overwhelmingly blue. so democrats win contests there 80-20 because theres virtually no republicans, all their votes are concentrated in fewer districts. whereas the red districts are more like 60-40 red. a lot more blue votes get wasted this way

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

TJT said:
This is because you somehow can't comprehend that a voting district is a GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY. It is not a group of any specific people.

You are using the word "GEOGRAPHICAL" the wrong way. For example the Mason-Dixon line is not a geographical boundary

A district line is not a geographical boundary, is a human made distinction with very little geographical boundaries, such as rivers, mountains, inlets

It is actually in reality closer to your second definition, at least that is the way they are used nowadays.

TJT · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios said:
You are using the word "GEOGRAPHICAL" the wrong way. For example the Mason-Dixon line is not a geographical boundary

A district line is not a geographical boundary, is a human made distinction with very little geographical boundaries, such as rivers, mountains, inlets

It is actually in reality closer to your second definition, at least that is the way they are used nowadays.

This is some retarded semantics bullshit.

Lendarios · Nov 15, 2017

No man I'm sorry.
It is bullshit to claim that the current state boundaries are geographical boundaries. Just look at your city and see into how many districts and think about the geographical boundaries around them, I bet you there are none.
BTW a road/street is not a geographical boundary.

Breakdown · Nov 15, 2017

TJT said:
Lendarios suppose you put up a totally geographically fair grid-based voting district system. Just a square grid applied to a state as best as they can. No partisan shit. Just a literal square grid like on a map.

Guess who would never win an election again?

Besides that, if you just did a grid there would be no way to account for proper per capita representation. Do that and all of a sudden Urban districts with 200K people count the same as a rural with 2K

Lendarios said:
I dont understand why the idea of people who live in cities, counting less than those in rural communities.

Are you a fucking moron? Im sorry to be so harsh, but you realize t hese districts are geographically drawn with population in mind.

The issue isnt that they are gerrymanderingdistricts to dliute voter numbers, its that the ydrew the lines based on partisan voting.

The city areas are smashed full of small dense districts that vote blue. Nationally there are a few districts that are drawn to exclude Blue or Red Sections to change the makeup of a district.

But even those ones, where independent commissions try to redraw the districts based on a grid or only on population result in the same outcome, because as Araysar said, Dems are so deeply stacked that they are losing.

sadris · Nov 15, 2017

Lendarios said:
Why the sigh?

This case is about Winscosin Act 43. An act that redrew state houses, nothing federal.

Wisconsin Legislature: 2011 Wisconsin Act 43

It seems our raftcoon is having trouble applying the concept of this case beyond anything outside this case. I now believe he doesn't understand abstract concepts at all.

Gerrymandering Supreme Court Case

Potato Supreme

Trump's Staff

Potato Supreme

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.

Gunnar Durden

Gunnar Durden

Trump's Staff

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.

Trump's Staff

Member

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.

Mr. Poopybutthole

Trump's Staff

Mr. Poopybutthole

Loser Araysar

Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.

Trump's Staff

Mr. Poopybutthole

Trump's Staff

Gunnar Durden

Karen