Fight in NJ over redistricting

[JTsyo]

So seems Democrats in NJ are trying to redistrict to lock-in the advantage. There's opposition obviously from Republicans but also some Democrats including the governor.

 

[K1052]

It was only a matter of time before the Democrats started playing all politics as zero sum like the GOP has been. This is not good for democracy at all.

 

[Jhhnn]

It was only a matter of time before the Democrats started playing all politics as zero sum like the GOP has been. This is not good for democracy at all.

*Some* Democrats, please. Some, like Holder & the Governor, have already come out against it. I figure the latter pov will prevail. Just because the GOP abandons the principles of democracy doesn't mean we should do the same.

 

[Vic]

Yeah, the Republicans have gerrymandered WI so badly that they just won more than 60% of the statehouse seats with less than 47% of the popular vote and then used that legislative advantage to strip the newly popularly elected governor of his constitutional powers, but hey let's all be very concerned about the Demoncrats gerrymandering in NJ.
But seriously, it's time for independent, non-partisan districting commissions nationwide. Until that happens, this game is just going to keep being played with predictable results.

 

[BurnItDwn]

*Some* Democrats, please. Some, like Holder & the Governor, have already come out against it. I figure the latter pov will prevail. Just because the GOP abandons the principles of democracy doesn't mean we should do the same.

I think you may have misinterpreted or misread K1052's post.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, the Republicans have gerrymandered WI so badly that they just won more than 60% of the statehouse seats with less than 47% of the popular vote and then used that legislative advantage to strip the newly popularly elected governor of his constitutional powers, but hey let's all be very concerned about the Demoncrats gerrymandering in NJ.
But seriously, it's time for independent, non-partisan districting commissions nationwide. Until that happens, this game is just going to keep being played with predictable results.

Yep, the right answer is for independent districting commissions in every state. Until that happens the right answer is for Democrats to gerrymander things to the maximum extent possible.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think you may have misinterpreted or misread K1052's post.

I just qualified it. He hasn't objected.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I just qualified it. He hasn't objected.

Sorry, just seemed like he and you basically said the same thing, but somehow managed to butt heads to some extent.

 

[repoman0]

Why shouldn't democrats do this? Republicans do to an extreme extent, so if democrats don't they'll be at a constant disadvantage. This is what happens when you break the political system. Both sides do it until they agree on a real fix (independent districting and possibly more representatives)

 

[dainthomas]

Get rid of the human element. Have GIS software calculate districts in every state based solely on population numbers from the latest census.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yep, the right answer is for independent districting commissions in every state. Until that happens the right answer is for Democrats to gerrymander things to the maximum extent possible.

We can't represent ourselves as principled & decent people respectful of everybody's rights if we act that way. When everybody abandons the principles of democracy it can't exist.

 

[1sikbITCH]

Yep, the right answer is for independent districting commissions in every state. Until that happens the right answer is for Democrats to gerrymander things to the maximum extent possible.

Agreed. Snowflake? How about an icicle up the ass! The GOP already killed democracy and now it is time for them to pay the price. If we play nice they will just steal and rob again.

 

[fskimospy]

We can't represent ourselves as principled & decent people respectful of everybody's rights if we act that way. When everybody abandons the principles of democracy it can't exist.

It also can't exist when only one of the two political parties follows them. That's why you work to disarm this weapon once and for all but until you can you use it against them.

 

[ElFenix]

But seriously, it's time for independent, non-partisan districting commissions nationwide. Until that happens, this game is just going to keep being played with predictable results.

screw districts, make each state an MMD w/ ranked choice voting.

 

[Bitek]

It was only a matter of time before the Democrats started playing all politics as zero sum like the GOP has been. This is not good for democracy at all.

That's the problem with this and why the courts need to step in and stop it.

It's a race to the bottom. Ds can play fair and feel good about their principals, meanwhile watching them get systematically locked out of all the levers of power.

It's a terrible situation.

 

[Jhhnn]

That's the problem with this and why the courts need to step in and stop it.

It's a race to the bottom. Ds can play fair and feel good about their principals, meanwhile watching them get systematically locked out of all the levers of power.

It's a terrible situation.

That's right- preach defeatism in the face of our recent victories. And, uhh, if you think people were sick of Trump/GOP shit in November just imagine how they'll feel after 2 more years of it.

 

[Blackjack200]

You have to scroll down quite a bit to get a sense for what's being discussed:

"The most controversial part of the plan would require at least 10 of the Legislature’s 40 districts be within five percent of the statewide party average in statewide elections — for president, U.S. Senate, and governor — the last 10 years. Sponsors say that’s an attempt to help make at least one-quarter of the districts competitive.

But that would likely favor Democrats because the state has 900,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans, hasn’t elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 1972, and hasn’t gone to a Republican presidential candidate since 1988."

So, the *most* controversial measure is one that says that 25% of the states' districts must be in alignment with statewide party registration? What exactly is the problem with that? It favors Democrats because the voters support Democrats? Sounds like a typical Republican objection.

 

[Jhhnn]

You have to scroll down quite a bit to get a sense for what's being discussed:

"The most controversial part of the plan would require at least 10 of the Legislature’s 40 districts be within five percent of the statewide party average in statewide elections — for president, U.S. Senate, and governor — the last 10 years. Sponsors say that’s an attempt to help make at least one-quarter of the districts competitive.

But that would likely favor Democrats because the state has 900,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans, hasn’t elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 1972, and hasn’t gone to a Republican presidential candidate since 1988."

So, the *most* controversial measure is one that says that 25% of the states' districts must be in alignment with statewide party registration? What exactly is the problem with that? It favors Democrats because the voters support Democrats? Sounds like a typical Republican objection.

If Eric Holder doesn't like it, I don't like it either. He's studied it more than I ever will & is likely smarter, too.

We won't save the village by burning it.

 

[Blackjack200]

If Eric Holder doesn't like it, I don't like it either.

LMAO. Okay champ.

 

[Bitek]

That's right- preach defeatism in the face of our recent victories. And, uhh, if you think people were sick of Trump/GOP shit in November just imagine how they'll feel after 2 more years of it.

Don't know how recognizing the rules of the game is defeatism.

Not knowing them is living in a fantasy land.

Yeah, dems won big in Wi.... What did it get them? Managed to win NC gov previously. What did it get them?

So what's the choice? Accept it, but behave responsibly, and slowly get locked out.

Or, behave as devilishly the Rs (which they can never do), race to the bottom, and the end result is we have a totally fucked up, undemocratic system everywhere that doesn't serve people, but rather the accumulation of power.

2020 is just one election. Important, but it will pass. I'm thinking much longer term about the security of our democracy.

 

[Jhhnn]

Don't know how recognizing the rules of the game is defeatism.

Not knowing them is living in a fantasy land.

Yeah, dems won big in Wi.... What did it get them? Managed to win NC gov previously. What did it get them?

So what's the choice? Accept it, but behave responsibly, and slowly get locked out.

Or, behave as devilishly the Rs (which they can never do), race to the bottom, and the end result is we have a totally fucked up, undemocratic system everywhere that doesn't serve people, but rather the accumulation of power.

2020 is just one election. Important, but it will pass. I'm thinking much longer term about the security of our democracy.

If the last election is any indication we're not getting locked out but rather making a comeback.

 

[nickqt]

Face it. The only way Gerrymandering is going to be fixed, is if the Democrats do it, thereby giving the USSC a reason to hear a case and finally decide that Gerrymandering effectively destroys the entire concept of voters choosing their representatives, as Gerrymandering allows the Representatives to choose their voters.

I'm all for it. It's the only way that it's ever going to be fixed. Otherwise, Republicans will continue drawing illegal Gerrymandered districts whenever they have a chance, as they've proven that when they can't count on a democratic victory, they'll work the refs to get the power they want.

 

[JTsyo]

You have to scroll down quite a bit to get a sense for what's being discussed:

"The most controversial part of the plan would require at least 10 of the Legislature’s 40 districts be within five percent of the statewide party average in statewide elections — for president, U.S. Senate, and governor — the last 10 years. Sponsors say that’s an attempt to help make at least one-quarter of the districts competitive.

But that would likely favor Democrats because the state has 900,000 more registered Democrats than Republicans, hasn’t elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate since 1972, and hasn’t gone to a Republican presidential candidate since 1988."

So, the *most* controversial measure is one that says that 25% of the states' districts must be in alignment with statewide party registration? What exactly is the problem with that? It favors Democrats because the voters support Democrats? Sounds like a typical Republican objection.

That's the trick. Make something that sounds reasonable but is advantageous to you. It's like rich people calling for a flat tax because it's fair that everyone pays the same rate.

 

[Blackjack200]

That's the trick. Make something that sounds reasonable but is advantageous to you. It's like rich people calling for a flat tax because it's fair that everyone pays the same rate.

What’s unreasonable about it?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Get rid of the human element. Have GIS software calculate districts in every state based solely on population numbers from the latest census.

Who programs the machine to interpret GIS data?