Because of UNPRECEDENTED gerrymandering, TEN MILLION more people will vote for dems, but

[Libertas]

vote for Democrats than cons, and yet the cons still have a better chance of taking the House.

This is why America is broken. One of the reasons.


And then there is this


https://twitter.com/RetireMarco/status/ ... DgkMg3eTRQ

Marco Rubio has stated that he will cut social security completely once he’s re-elected.

RT to make senior citizens in Florida aware!

[Libertas]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Un ... _elections


2018 there was TEN MILLION MORE votes from Dems than cons...same thing will happen or more this time and if the cons take the HOUSE it is proof that we are done, we are then NOT a democracy or a republic.

[carmenjonze]

vote for Democrats than cons, and yet the cons still have a better chance of taking the House.

This is why America is broken. One of the reasons.


And then there is this


https://twitter.com/RetireMarco/status/ ... DgkMg3eTRQ

But hey! HEY! Carter wuzz the werst president ever, tho.

H E Y!

[Glennfs]

No it is because democratic party voters live in a more concentrated area. Which is why Joe Biden can win fewer than 600 counties and still win tug he popular vote.

In fact our system is working exactly as it was set up. We live in a representative republic not a true democracy. Our founding fathers were wise enough to know that all people needed a voice in order for our union to survive.
Something people on the left are now wanting to change ti the one party authoritarian government they crave.

[Drak]

No it is because democratic party voters live in a more concentrated area. Which is why Joe Biden can win fewer than 600 counties and still win tug he popular vote.

In fact our system is working exactly as it was set up. We live in a representative republic not a true democracy. Our founding fathers were wise enough to know that all people needed a voice in order for our union to survive.
Something people on the left are now wanting to change ti the one party authoritarian government they crave.

No, gerrymandering is a thing and it’s been explained to you before with diagrams. Really simple ones, too.

[Glennfs]

No, gerrymandering is a thing and it’s been explained to you before with diagrams. Really simple ones, too.

Are you claiming that there are no districts gerrymandered for liberals

[Drak]

Are you claiming that there are no districts gerrymandered for liberals

No, I’m not.

[ProfX]

Glenn, your usual BS on this aside, where it is various voters do or don't live ....

The point is legislators are drawing spaghetti-string districts like these.



These can reach the heights of absurdity. Redistricting should be based on attempting (as best as possible) dividing the states into districts of (roughly) equivalent population, without drawing things that look like acid-inspired abstract art. Which are really intended and designed to cheat voters of the state.

And no, I don't like it when any party does it, not just Rethugs.

[Libertas]

Millions more of us than them, always will be but with gerrymandering and Scty's of State unwilling to certify any election they lose, problems.

With earthquakes, floods, fires and climate change issues coming exponentially, the fact that the cons will destroy our democracy and economy, may not matter.

[Glennfs]

Glenn, your usual BS on this aside, where it is various voters do or don't live ....

The point is legislators are drawing spaghetti-string districts like these.



These can reach the heights of absurdity. Redistricting should be based on attempting (as best as possible) dividing the states into districts of (roughly) equivalent population, without drawing things that look like acid-inspired abstract art. Which are really intended and designed to cheat voters of the state.

And no, I don't like it when any party does it, not just Rethugs.

According to the WAPO article which your post came from the democratic party won in 9 of the most 10 gerrymandered districts. So much for the notion of the OP

[ProfX]

I won't claim Democrats don't do it also. However, here is the 2022 facts & reality according to 538.

The New National Congressional Map Is Biased Toward Republicans
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th ... publicans/

Some of the House map’s GOP bias is due to geography (i.e., the Democratic tendency to cluster in cities, plus rural areas’ tendency to vote Republican). But a lot is also due to deliberate decisions by partisan mapmakers — namely, Republican lawmakers drawing congressional maps that advantage their own party. In 2014, a pair of academics created a metric called the efficiency gap, which attempts to quantify this phenomenon by measuring how efficient a map is at converting votes into seats for a given party. And using this measure, we find that seven of the 11 most biased congressional maps in the country were drawn by Republicans, while only one Democratic-drawn map (Illinois’s) provides Democrats with more than 1.2 undeserved seats.

[snip][end]

Republicans do it MORE.

[Bludogdem]

Because they have 30 state legislatures. If the numbers were reversed then the Democrats would be doing it more.

[Libertas]

Gerrymandered maps in 4 states ruled illegal, but the SC said go ahead and use them anyway

all cons of course

[carmenjonze]

Something people on the left are now wanting to change ti the one party authoritarian government they crave.

You're just mad because we took the authoritarianism of segregation away from you.

You're not getting it back, either.

[Glennfs]

You're just mad because we took the authoritarianism of segregation away from you.

You're not getting it back, either.

And once again we see another discussion brought to an end in the usual fashion

[carmenjonze]

And once again we see another discussion brought to an end in the usual fashion

Replying to your lazy commiebaiting doesn't end a discussion.

Blame yourself if you're unable to come up with a rational counterargument, or deny that segregation is authoritarianism.

By the way, Republican gerrymandering is based on your Jim Crow-era, anti-minority history. It's an extension of it, since you can no longer get away with simply beating Black people for trying to register to vote.

[Glennfs]

Replying to your lazy commiebaiting doesn't end a discussion.

Blame yourself if you're unable to come up with a rational counterargument.

By the way, Republican gerrymandering is based on your anti-minority voting history. It's an extension of it, since you can no longer get away with simply beating Black people for trying to register to vote.

No you are the master of ending discussions by declaring racism.

It is the liberal version of the bible says it I believe it and that ends it.

[carmenjonze]

No you are the master of ending discussions by declaring racism.

not one discussion has ended, just because YOU don't have the intelligence to come up with a reply that won't get you banned.

That's not the same as a discussion ending.

It is the liberal version of the bible says it I believe it and that ends it.

Today's Republican gerrymandering is based in anti-Black racism. And also, people here don't let you get away with the commiebaiting trollbait you just tried.

You should always keep in mind where you picked up the habit: commiebaiters' number one anxieity was civil rights and the idea that nonwhites -- especially those of African descent -- have an equal vote to your own.

[carmenjonze]

In fact our system is working exactly as it was set up. We live in a representative republic not a true democracy.

It was set up as a slaveocracy by these clowns:

Our founding fathers ...

Crying "this is a republic not a democracy" is a very old Republican conservative canard. It's kind of incredible to me that you really think nobody can recognize it as such.

No one anywhere in this country argues that this is a "true democracy."

were wise enough to know that all people needed a voice in order for our union to survive.

Well, there are people, and then there are 3/5ths of a person.

So no, the founding clowns had NO intention of all people having a voice.

Reminder: the founding clowns crowbarred the 3/5ths clause in there to skew Congressional representation in favor of the slavedrivers.

Something people on the left are now wanting to change ti the one party authoritarian government they crave.

One-party government, like Dixiecrat Mississippi prior to the Voting Rights of 1965?

Or Dixiecrat Alabama, the vote-suppression capitol of Planet Earth?

Or Georgia, in which Dixiecrat conservative whites refused to seat duly-elected Julian Bond?

Maybe you can tell us why you think these states, among many others, remain the centers of vote-suppression in this country.

Or maybe you can just speak clearly and say you're rationalizing the indefensible, because the reality of this country's voting history causes you severe cognitive dissonance.

[ProfX]

Let me lay my cards on the table. This is what I want to do about gerrymandering. No, I don't want any side doing it.



See the blue states on the map? Democratic control, Democrats control redistricting.
See the red states? Rethug control, "" ... that's obvious. (Right now, this is where the most gerrymandering is happening.)
Yellow states have bipartisan or split control, regardless of who controls the legislature.
Green states have an independent redistricting commission, neither partisan nor legislature controlled, ... truly "independent" who just draw the lines according to the best mathematical/geographical algorithms. No attempt to cluster voters.

In my ideal planet, the whole map should be yellow (good) or green (much better).

The yellow or green way should be the way it is done in all 50 states. That is actually fair, and then no one can gerrymander.

For those worried about excessive extremist partisanship, BTW, gerrymandering helps enable and preserve it. Without gerrymandered districts, many of the Congressional extremists would be long gone.

[Glennfs]

Let me lay my cards on the table. This is what I want to do about gerrymandering. No, I don't want any side doing it.



See the blue states on the map? Democratic control, Democrats control redistricting.
See the red states? Rethug control, "" ... that's obvious. (Right now, this is where the most gerrymandering is happening.)
Yellow states have bipartisan or split control, regardless of who controls the legislature.
Green states have an independent redistricting commission, neither partisan nor legislature controlled, ... truly "independent" who just draw the lines according to the best mathematical/geographical algorithms. No attempt to cluster voters.

In my ideal planet, the whole map should be yellow (good) or green (much better).

The yellow or green way should be the way it is done in all 50 states. That is actually fair, and then no one can gerrymander.

For those worried about excessive extremist partisanship, BTW, gerrymandering helps enable and preserve it. Without gerrymandered districts, many of the Congressional extremists would be long gone.

I am glad you brought that up. I recently looked up the non partisan California commission and learned it was basically 40pct Democrats 40pct Republican and 20pct people to the left of the democratic party.
There is no such thing as a non partisan group when it comes to drawing districts

[ProfX]

I am glad you brought that up. I recently looked up the non partisan California commission and learned it was basically 40pct Democrats 40pct Republican and 20pct people to the left of the democratic party.
There is no such thing as a non partisan group when it comes to drawing districts

... a) this is why some people say it should be done by AI
... b) of course, yes, I know, and have pointed out, AI's are programmed by human programmers who themselves have bias, and their implicit biases might be replicated in how the AI is coded.

Still, on my list of things that might be better done by AI, redistricting is one I'd put on the queue. But yeah, the work of the programmers will have to be checked, hopefully by a truly independent authority. I personally say the code will have to be open source.

[carmenjonze]

I recently looked up the non partisan California commission and learned it was basically 40pct Democrats 40pct Republican and 20pct people to the left of the democratic party.

According to...

There is no such thing as a non partisan group when it comes to drawing districts

Does it bother you that Republican politicians like Marco Rubio are trying to end Medicare?

Do you wonder why it's overwhelmingly the slavery/segregation states in red?

Or why suppression of Black voters is crucial to Republican wins, so dorks like Rubio can push this agenda?

Or..would you rather keep kidding yourself that 5 generations of violent government-based anti-minority voter suppression it totally coincidental to this strategy.

Difference is, now if you guys bomb our churches and beat and shoot protesters in the back for asserting equal rights, you guys and your cops go right up on Youtube within minutes.

[carmenjonze]

According to the WAPO article which your post came from the democratic party won in 9 of the most 10 gerrymandered districts.

Link, please.

[ap215]

We had one job to do The For The People Act had it passed in the Senate we could've had true voting reform but since it didn't pass we're back to square one & now you could see years of gridlock & perhaps compromising deals between The U.S. House & Senate when the GOP wins The House back.