Gerrymandering

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Danny Bateman]

4 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Racial bias was pretty much the lowest bar to clear regarding the legality of maps. It was well-established they didn't give a rip about maps that discriminate solely based on political ideology, but at one point in time they appeared to be willing to pump the brakes if there was clear discrimination based on race.

 

If they've established they don't care about that any hopes for redirecting reform for fairer maps is dead. I guess good for the states that already remedied this with non-partisan or balanced groups in charge of drawing maps. Gerrymandering will continue and worsen everywhere else. 

[Danny Bateman]

I was just perusing 538's elections blog tonight and found a couple redistricting blurbs.

 

Compare this:

 

'

Quote

For the first time, Colorado’s new congressional map was drawn by an independent commission this cycle, after Colorado voters passed a ballot measure in 2018 that took the redistricting process out of the state Legislature’s hands. The Democrats who control state government may now regret that decision, though, as the map is slightly biased toward the GOP: for example, the state’s median congressional districts is 5 percentage points redder than the state as a whole. However, it’s plausible that the map could produce anything from a five-Democrat, three-Republican congressional delegation to a five-Republican, three-Democrat delegation.

 

To this:

 

Quote

In 2018, voters passed a ballot measure to bring an independent redistricting commission to Utah. But the legislature reacted to the new law by watering it down, so that the commission was purely advisory in nature. As a result, when the commission recommended a series of maps that created one blue district around Salt Lake City and three red districts in the rest of the state, the legislature was able to ignore them and pass this map instead:

 

Utah’s new map has four solidly Republican districts and no Democratic, or even swing, districts whatsoever. During the last decade, the 4th District was somewhat competitive, so we had to pay attention to who won both parties’ primaries there and whether they were strong candidates. Now, the Republican primary is all that matters.

 

This just makes me want to give up on the issue of gerrymandering. Dems unilaterally disarming with what's objectively a fairer, more democratic process while Republicans go hard the other direction. I'm sure everyone is going to be thrilled with the results.

[TGHusker]

after reading this I have no faith that the national GOP can ever be trusted to do anything outside of trying to grab all the power they can even if it is at the expense of voters 
 

https://www.rawstory.com/desantis-elections/?cx_testId=15&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EXQZWTHDAGO3#cxrecs_s

[Born N Bled Red]

2 hours ago, TGHusker said:

after reading this I have no faith that the national GOP can ever be trusted to do anything outside of trying to grab all the power they can even if it is at the expense of voters 
 

https://www.rawstory.com/desantis-elections/?cx_testId=15&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EXQZWTHDAGO3#cxrecs_s

 

It took reading that to get you there? They've practically had a freaking billboard up stating their intentions to do exactly this since McConnell became speaker.

[TGHusker]

14 hours ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

It took reading that to get you there? They've practically had a freaking billboard up stating their intentions to do exactly this since McConnell became speaker.

No - I'm just now expressing it out of even greater frustration.   I' think I've advertised my disgust wt the GOP pretty clearly on HB.  

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Born N Bled Red]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

It sucks that it won't happen, but it would be really freaking fantastic if the Supreme Court would rule that all congressional and legislative district boundaries may not have more than four corners unless those boundaries consists of existing county or state boarders. 

[commando]

20 minutes ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

It sucks that it won't happen, but it would be really freaking fantastic if the Supreme Court would rule that all congressional and legislative district boundaries may not have more than four corners unless those boundaries consists of existing county or state boarders. 

how many corners?

 

[Born N Bled Red]

14 minutes ago, commando said:

how many corners?

 

 

So what exactly are you trying to show here? That it would take 3 hours (clear exaggeration) to count all the current corners of those two districts? 

[Moiraine]

8 hours ago, Born N Bled Red said:

 

It sucks that it won't happen, but it would be really freaking fantastic if the Supreme Court would rule that all congressional and legislative district boundaries may not have more than four corners unless those boundaries consists of existing county or state boarders. 

 

 

I think 4 is too constricting. It would result it too much variation in district sizes. It should be 6 straight sides, except a river/large body of water can count as a side. I don't know why someone laughed at your post. This would resolve a lot of issues and reduce the ability to gerrymander by all political parties.

[knapplc]

Today's ruling could have a significant affect on 2024. 

 

It would be great to get some of the republican cosplayers out of congressional committees.

 

 

[knapplc]

 

[Ratt Mhule]

Uh oh. The MINORITY party is losing their one way to hold power. Hopefully soon, they will be a nothing more than a footnote in the history. 2/3 of the country laughs at you clowns. 

[BigRedBuster]