BeginnersMind Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 (edited) The decision Agree or not with the majority's reasoning (I do), the outcome of artificially creating division for partisan advantage is helping create more neighborhoods of echo chambers. If would be nice if state legislatures would reign this in and force candidates to listen to more POVs. What you'll see now is redder states getting redder and bluer states bluer. That is a bad outcome. Edited June 27, 2019 by BeginnersMind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 i had Mexican last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 What did the plaintiff's want? A judge to draw the district lines rather than the elected representatives? How would that fix to problem? Roberts is spot on: “Excessive partisanship in districting leads to results that reasonably seem unjust. But the fact that such gerrymandering is ‘incompatible with democratic principles,’ does not mean that the solution lies with the federal judiciary,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote. I don't even understand what Kagan means: “Of all times to abandon the Court’s duty to declare the law, this was not the one,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the dissenters. What does 'declare the law' mean? What law is currently being broken? Essentially this opinion is just saying the courts should usurp the legislature because.......they would (theoretically) be more fair? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 (edited) Remove districts completely and send representatives based on who garnered the most votes. This is how it's done in many countries, since populations often migrate. The problem, of course, is that an entire states' representative pool could all be from the same city/neighborhood... but political parties pretty much eliminated any pretense that candidates share values with their district anyway; they are all told how to vote by their party leaders. Edited June 27, 2019 by unbillievable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 Remember that one time when Chris Cillizza swore up and down that reporters never root for a political side? You member … Today: Chris Cillizza ✔@CillizzaCNN "A huge victory for the Republican party, here." -- @JeffreyToobin on gerrymandering SCOTUS ruling As usual, 100% right Because only Republicans gerrymander. Alrighty. Sean Davis was more than happy to ‘correct’ Chris and Jeffrey Toobin, sort of killing two annoying birds with one stone: Sean Davis ✔@seanmdav As usual, you're 100% wrong. GOP defendants won in the NC case, but GOP plaintiffs lost in the MD case. If you had read only to the second sentence of the ruling, you would know this. https://twitter.com/CillizzaCNN/status/1144248096253206528 … Chris Cillizza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 Slightly off topic, but the idea that Gerrymandering is racist is the dumbest thing... you don't win a seat for having the most black people or white people in your district. You win a seat by having the most people vote for you. This argument reduces votes to race. That's what's racist. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 No amount of Gerrymandering can make up for the results of domestic migration.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 wanna bet that 1.5 million of them were Democrat voters? https://twitter.com/JudicialWatch/status/1144228894654029824 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 21 hours ago, whatdrought said: Slightly off topic, but the idea that Gerrymandering is racist is the dumbest thing... you don't win a seat for having the most black people or white people in your district. You win a seat by having the most people vote for you. This argument reduces votes to race. That's what's racist. I thought racist gerrymandering was good, though, because it ensured racially homogenous districts that would then vote in consistent blocs for their own interests...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 12 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I thought racist gerrymandering was good, though, because it ensured racially homogenous districts that would then vote in consistent blocs for their own interests...? when the Dems were GMing in the 70s and 80s they had a district in North Carolina that was solely a highway with a block on either side of it, ensured an African American House member for awhile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatdrought Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 23 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I thought racist gerrymandering was good, though, because it ensured racially homogenous districts that would then vote in consistent blocs for their own interests...? Good by whose standard? I thought that’s what dems were always complaining about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 National Review would run a crybaby Gerrymanding column in the 70s and 80s when the Dems held a lock on the House and rejiggered the voting lines all the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 One would think a district could be jumbled together rather nicely just from the residents on the "other side of the tracks". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 5, 2019 Share Posted July 5, 2019 SLATE: Democrats Can’t Be Afraid to Gerrymander Now. Ummm, now ?.......................now ? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 5, 2019 Share Posted July 5, 2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaw_v._Reno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 5, 2019 Share Posted July 5, 2019 NC's 2nd district was deliberately constructed in the 1980s to ensure an African-American majority, sometimes narrowed just to a highway and one side of it only with an African-American family living there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts