Rickyvol77
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2019
- Messages
- 21,040
- Likes
- 26,732
Declared legal by a heavily partisan SC. Chief justice has certainly noticed the public sentiment, commenting on it recently, even inferring that they are in danger of being “Cavalier” in overturning precedent.
I’m against any gerrymandering, no matter how much it “sounds like” to you to the contrary.what is the legal flaw in the argument of the majority? you can write it off as "heavily partisan" but can you point to the Constitutional flaws?
sounds like you favor race-based gerrymandering even though you claim to be against gerrymandering
~55-60% of whites favor Republican, so upwards of 40% favor Democrat. That’s “sharply divided”, but certainly not in the manner you were implying.A majority of whites have voted Republican the last 50 years, with a significant minority of whites voting Democrat and even fewer Independent. Any others you want to break down?
You’re the one that cherry picked whites and wanted and explanation, I gave you one that was correct. Now, if you want to be thorough you’ll keep going.~55-60% of whites favor Republican, so upwards of 40% favor Democrat. That’s “sharply divided”, but certainly not in the manner you were implying.
2024 Election: According to 2024 NBC News Exit Polls, 57% of white voters supported the Republican candidate, while 42% supported the Democrat. [1, 2, 3, 4]
“cherry picked”? The largest example is a cherry pick lol?You’re the one that cherry picked whites and wanted and explanation, I gave you one that was correct. Now, if you want to be thorough you’ll keep going.
These are your words. Politics is divided based on race.politics is largely divided sharply based on race,
That's a pretty significant miss. It's kind of like saying Baton Rouge when you mean Osaka. Could that have been wishful thinking?. He wrongly said the 14th Amendment, he clarified that. He was talking about Article 2 of the Voting Rights Act being in violation of the 14th Amendment. Which the Supreme Court did overturn. Not the 14th Amendment you
.
![]()
Full exchange undercuts claims Ledbetter called for ending 14th Amendment
Speaker says remarks were misconstrued during discussion of Alabama’s congressional map litigation now moving toward Supreme Court review.www.alreporter.com
You haven't been paying attention. Look carefully at the VaSC's decision and see what Spanberger et al did wrong. They can run it through again unless there's a time lockout between attempts.They would still violate the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and would be wasting their time. The Virginia Supreme Court knew that. It's a moot point.
And you yankees aren't doing it? Give me a break. The South has been catering to the yankees long enough. F'em.Maybe it’s because too many of you fools lack nuance, you’re not even asking a relevant question. Nobody is complaining about the right to vote, the issue is having your representatives chosen for you through political engineering rather than the other way around, you know, they way it was designed originally.
Maybe the wording screwed you up. That’s ok. Let’s try this:“cherry picked”? The largest example is a cherry pick lol?
These are your words. Politics is divided based on race.
Clearly they are not. The largest single race in the US, comprising roughly 60% of the population, is divided.
But by all means, keep trying to move the goal posts.
