Gerrymandering in Virginia

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?
It is proof positive that the left is not really interested in the color of skin as they claim, (straight up racism... but it's "good" racism though... I guess) but rather the letter after the name. Either way it is a hypocritical argument for them. The problem is that their base will refuse to acknowledge that hypocrisy. Especially now because.... the MSM tells them to hate Trump. They don't even know why.
 
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.
Nope. They knew when they did it it was 🐂 💩. They are just used to getting away with crap and they thought they could get it in before the clock ran out.
It is all over now 'cept the crying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SuzyVol
That's a pretty significant miss. It's kind of like saying Baton Rouge when you mean Osaka. Could that have been wishful thinking?
Listen, you people swallow a strait up Nazi in Platner and are obsessing on a dude who is against racist practices in voting. Then again the democrats have always been rabid racists. The founders of Jim Crow are now claiming the people who ended it are racist. Priceless.
Go away.
 
Maybe the wording screwed you up. That’s ok. Let’s try this:

“Race heavily influences American politics, acting as a key determinant in voter alignment, party affiliation, and policy debates. White voters are statistically more likely to support the Republican Party, while Black, Hispanic, and Asian voters tend to align with the Democratic Party, creating a deeply divided electoral”

Backpedal.

Speaking of wording, here’s yours -

politics is largely divided sharply based on race

The largest demographic, which by itself represents 3/5 of the population, is not. But by all means keep flailing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
Backpedal.

Speaking of wording, here’s yours -



The largest demographic, which by itself represents 3/5 of the population, is not. But by all means keep flailing.
Mmhhmm, every accusation is an admission. Refute the quote or gtfo 😂.
 
Mmhhmm, every accusation is an admission. Refute the quote or gtfo 😂.
Lmao you screwed up your first post and now want to amend and move the goal posts. You can actually gtfo here with that nonsense.

White - 55/40
Hispanic - 60/40
Asian - 60/40

Those are indeed “sharply divided” 🤣

Why don’t you try again to say what you actually meant with your first post where you incorrectly alluded to “all” races.
 
Listen, you people swallow a strait up Nazi in Platner and are obsessing on a dude who is against racist practices in voting. Then again the democrats have always been rabid racists. The founders of Jim Crow are now claiming the people who ended it are racist. Priceless.
Go away.
The SPLC needs to chime in and straighten this up. We know they set the standard on racism identification. 🫢
 
I’m against any gerrymandering, no matter how much it “sounds like” to you to the contrary.

Yes, the majority practiced some serious cognitive dissonance in ruling that racial gerrymandering is illegal while partisan gerrymandering is just fine, all while ignoring the fact that the whole reason the VRA was necessary in the first place was because of racially-motivated Jim Crow. Now, the same states that enacted Jim Crow have a green light to gerrymander under the thin “partisan” veil, that just happens to fold majority black districts into counties with just enough Republican base to nullify the former majority black district. Plain and simple. It nullifies the VRA, section 2.

It’s so bad that Robert’s felt it was necessary to come out and point out that despite public opinion, they are not part of partisan politics… which of course with this bunch in DC, every denial and accusation is often an admission.

you could have just said you can't point out the legal flaws in the ruling.
 
"I went back to Ohio and my city was gone."
My Goodness we miss Rush, the last thing to come out of Blowhio that was worth a damn. Ryan Day is a homo.

I hope you think that’s insulting to me personally for some reason.
 
Lmao you screwed up your first post and now want to amend and move the goal posts. You can actually gtfo here with that nonsense.

White - 55/40
Hispanic - 60/40
Asian - 60/40

Those are indeed “sharply divided” 🤣

Why don’t you try again to say what you actually meant with your first post where you incorrectly alluded to “all” races.
So after a few of these I think I’ve got you pegged. You latch on to some semantics position that you think wins you some imaginary superior position and completely ignore the actual subject matter discussed. I’m trying to get to the point where we narrow it down to a discussion on the region that is actually doing this gerrymandering, and how races vote in those places specifically… but I assume you’ll be stuck on a loop taking some imaginary victory lap. So, go ahead with your bad self.
 
So after a few of these I think I’ve got you pegged. You latch on to some semantics position that you think wins you some imaginary superior position and completely ignore the actual subject matter discussed. I’m trying to get to the point where we narrow it down to a discussion on the region that is actually doing this gerrymandering, and how races vote in those places specifically… but I assume you’ll be stuck on a loop taking some imaginary victory lap. So, go ahead with your bad self.
I was incorrect in my original statement where i alluded to all races. What I meant to say was black Americans. But now I’m going move the goalposts to what I originally meant to say, and declare that actually using my own words is simply “semantics”. I am the pigeon on the chessboard.
-OHvol40
 
It is proof positive that the left is not really interested in the color of skin as they claim, (straight up racism... but it's "good" racism though... I guess) but rather the letter after the name. Either way it is a hypocritical argument for them. The problem is that their base will refuse to acknowledge that hypocrisy. Especially now because.... the MSM tells them to hate Trump. They don't even know why.

Hate? Extreme disapproval is a better term. And if MSN didn't exist there's tons of reasons to disapprove Trump. If you can't agree with that you are not very smart, the kind of people diaper donnie likes.
 
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.
The overwhelming sentiment is a what-about-ism used to justify ill-intentioned map drawing? No way 😁
 
I was incorrect in my original statement where i alluded to all races. What I meant to say was black Americans. But now I’m going move the goalposts to what I originally meant to say, and declare that actually using my own words is simply “semantics”. I am the pigeon on the chessboard.
-OHvol40
Whatever that ego requires. Some require more than others…
 
Hate? Extreme disapproval is a better term. And if MSN didn't exist there's tons of reasons to disapprove Trump. If you can't agree with that you are not very smart, the kind of people diaper donnie likes.
A lot of us disapprove of Trump more than you realize. But we despise the American left too much to EVER vote for any of their candidates ever again.
Think of Trump as political chemotherapy. He can be very unpleasant at times and can even make you sick. But it gets rid of cancer; which is exactly what the democrat party became after Clinton.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77

Advertisement



Back
Top