Gerrymandering in Virginia

#751
#751
When you’ve voted in whitey Steve Cohen for 2 decades to represent your black community as your community goes downhill for 2 decades, maybe you need others to force you to make a change. Same ole same ole hasn’t been working.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
#752
#752
swampfoxfan said:
They split up a district that was 61% black into 3 separate districts. You can't make that up. Tennessee looses black representation in the state senate due to republican gerrymandering


.
Click to expand...
The new representative front runner is a black woman. The guy she will be replacing is an old white dude that is insane. They upgraded. Be happy
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO
#753
#753
OHvol40 said:
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.
Click to expand...

drawing a district to bundle together people of a particular race is political engineering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, NEO, UT_Dutchman and 6 others
#754
#754
volinbham said:
drawing a district to bundle together people of a particular race is political engineering.
Click to expand...
First, why are maps drawn based on RACE, POLITICAL engineering? Second, maps drawn based on partisan politics is the definition of political engineering. So, even if the former is true, what’s your point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#756
#756
EasternVol said:
That's pretty hypocritical. The Right's been quite active in eroding the BoR too. How many bootlickers here want to deport students for exercising their 1st Amendment rights?
Click to expand...
That doesn't make sense. Why would anyone want to deport students for exercising their rights as Americans? I don't know anyone that wants that.
 
#757
#757
OHvol40 said:
First, why are maps drawn based on RACE, POLITICAL engineering?
Click to expand...
My take is that laws, including those in the Constitution, are made by politicians, therefore, any maps drawn in accordance with the law are, by definition, political.
Maps drawn by race have been determined to be unconstitutional, therefore, there should be none.

(As an aside, while our country has an ugly history related race-based electoral processes, drawing districts specifically to guarantee one race or another a numerical advantage in said district by definition dilutes the votes of whatever race happens to be the minority within that district. That is why it is ugly and wrong. Still. "The way to stop discriminating based on race is to stop discriminating based on race." Roberts, J.)
OHvol40 said:
Second, maps drawn based on partisan politics is the definition of political engineering. So, even if the former is true, what’s your point?
Click to expand...
Maps drawn based on politics have NOT been held unconstitutional. Dems did it for years in NC. The good news is this is easier to change than the Constitution, as it requires a lower threshold to change.

It is still going to be a hard row to hoe. We are counting on those who benefit from the imbalance in power to try to fix it, especially after generations of abuse by the other side (at least where I live.)

Pardon my intrusion, I will step back outside. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and Rickyvol77
#758
#758
OHvol40 said:
First, why are maps drawn based on RACE, POLITICAL engineering? Second, maps drawn based on partisan politics is the definition of political engineering. So, even if the former is true, what’s your point?
Click to expand...

drawing based on race is designed to empower one group of people based on who they are - that's political engineering.

just pointing out that outrage about one form of political engineering substituting another is not about outrage at political engineering; it's about only disliking it when it disfavors your team.

hate the game; not the player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, whodeycin85, UT_Dutchman and 4 others
#759
#759
Ritzwatch said:
My take is that laws, including those in the Constitution, are made by politicians, therefore, any maps drawn in accordance with the law are, by definition, political.
Maps drawn by race have been determined to be unconstitutional, therefore, there should be none.

(As an aside, while our country has an ugly history related race-based electoral processes, drawing districts specifically to guarantee one race or another a numerical advantage in said district by definition dilutes the votes of whatever race happens to be the minority within that district. That is why it is ugly and wrong. Still. "The way to stop discriminating based on race is to stop discriminating based on race." Roberts, J.)

Maps drawn based on politics have NOT been held unconstitutional. Dems did it for years in NC. The good news is this is easier to change than the Constitution, as it requires a lower threshold to change.

It is still going to be a hard row to hoe. We are counting on those who benefit from the imbalance in power to try to fix it, especially after generations of abuse by the other side (at least where I live.)

Pardon my intrusion, I will step back outside. ;)
Click to expand...
So the ultimate question, now, is since politics is largely divided sharply based on race, how do you differentiate the motivations of a map-drawer?
 
#760
#760
volinbham said:
drawing based on race is designed to empower one group of people based on who they are - that's political engineering.

just pointing out that outrage about one form of political engineering substituting another is not about outrage at political engineering; it's about only disliking it when it disfavors your team.

hate the game; not the player.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “who they are? Also, Who substituted anything? They are just two different ways to gerrymander. Gerrymandering of any kind is at least unethical, I would call it immoral. It’s inherently unfair to some group, no matter how you slice it. So, why are people here cheerleading these efforts, regardless of party?
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#761
#761
OHvol40 said:
What do you mean by “who they are? Also, Who substituted anything? They are just two different ways to gerrymander. Gerrymandering of any kind is at least unethical, I would call it immoral. It’s inherently unfair to some group, no matter how you slice it. So, why are people here cheerleading these efforts, regardless of party?
Click to expand...

race is a characteristic of who you are. race-based gerrymandering was substituted with another type of gerrymandering

you seemed to be okay with race-based gerrymandering but upset at other gerrymandering - it's all bad.

the only distinction I see is that race-based gerrymandering is illegal while other types are not (as pointed out by another poster). I don't like either but I'd think legal is better than illegal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, SpaceCoastVol, UT_Dutchman and 1 other person
#762
#762
OHvol40 said:
What do you mean by “who they are? Also, Who substituted anything? They are just two different ways to gerrymander. Gerrymandering of any kind is at least unethical, I would call it immoral. It’s inherently unfair to some group, no matter how you slice it. So, why are people here cheerleading these efforts, regardless of party?
Click to expand...

How would you draw districts?

Be specific please.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#763
#763
OHvol40 said:
So the ultimate question, now, is since politics is largely divided sharply based on race, how do you differentiate the motivations of a map-drawer?
Click to expand...
My very inadequate answer to that is: we'd have to use the same criteria we use to determine the motivations and intent of people in other contexts and areas of our lives.

Truth is, lots of people have anti-social intent in their actions, while still finding ways to accomplish some, or all of their goals through legal means. Tax shelters, casinos strategically set at state lines, and duty free shops all allow people to avoid responsibilities for conduct for which they would be accountable in other locations or circumstances.

The thing that makes the Tennessee redistricting example so very interesting to me is that those who claim this gerrymandering as an example of malice based on race are all too quick to dismiss the fact that the person holding the seat currently is white. Some have said that one of the potential leading candidates is a black woman. I don't know if that is true, but it would be ironic if all those claiming the Rs are doing this out of racial malice had to acknowledge that Rs actually might increase the number of black representatives in congress.

If a black woman were elected to a seat that was gerrymandered based on "politics," would you find that a net gain, or a net loss to the political strength of the black population?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#764
#764
OHvol40 said:
What do you mean by “who they are? Also, Who substituted anything? They are just two different ways to gerrymander. Gerrymandering of any kind is at least unethical, I would call it immoral. It’s inherently unfair to some group, no matter how you slice it. So, why are people here cheerleading these efforts, regardless of party?
Click to expand...
The overwhelming sentiment I hear expressed is, "Rs aren't doing anything the Ds didn't do for years."

I don't know that the goose/gander scenario is in the nation's long term interests, but when you find a political party that is willing to act in ways they believe to be in the nation's best interest when they know it will cost them their power, please let me know. There have been very few individual instances of that in our nation's history - few enough that the instances are noteworthy, rather than commonplace - but I don't know that an entire party has ever done it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#768
#768
NEO said:
How would you draw districts?

Be specific please.
Click to expand...
Not sure about Ohio but I would base it on geography. I live in powell my congressman, pass the buck chuck, is in Chattanooga. A friend out Nashville way has a congressman from Memphis. This is ridiculous.
 
#772
#772
swampfoxfan said:
Not sure about Ohio but I would base it on geography. I live in powell my congressman, pass the buck chuck, is in Chattanooga. A friend out Nashville way has a congressman from Memphis. This is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

geography and local jurisdiction lines - keep counties together to the extent that you can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#775
#775
volinbham said:
race is a characteristic of who you are. race-based gerrymandering was substituted with another type of gerrymandering

you seemed to be okay with race-based gerrymandering but upset at other gerrymandering - it's all bad.

the only distinction I see is that race-based gerrymandering is illegal while other types are not (as pointed out by another poster). I don't like either but I'd think legal is better than illegal.
Click to expand...
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.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top