Discussion How long before a Federal judge strikes down the just signed Florida congressional map?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
19,029
2,597
126
Democrats tried to do it because the courts said it was okay when Republicans do it. Rules only apply to Democrats once again. Your takeaway is biased as usual.
Right. I'm biased and you're not.... :rolleyes:

Nowhere did I say that it was OK for the Republicans to do it.
 
Last edited:

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
13,017
4,657
136
It does seem to me that if neutral maps were drawn up nationwide, the Democrats would end up being the winners in most states.

Just a hunch seeing as if the Repubs have more so relied on gerrymandering and other such disingenuous ploys to win elections.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
31,901
20,116
136
Right. I'm biased and you're not.... :rolleyes:

Nowhere did I say that it was OK for the Republicans to do it.
Sure, but Republicans are doing it and the courts are approving it, while simultaneously rejecting Democrats when they do it. You don't see a problem with that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
8,104
809
126
I would support going back to the original counting on the house. more districts means that more people are directly represented and will have more sway over the person and their positions. is there any group advocating for that change right now?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
30,544
11,476
136
I would support going back to the original counting on the house. more districts means that more people are directly represented and will have more sway over the person and their positions. is there any group advocating for that change right now?
At the federal level? If yes, then I’ve been advocating that for a while now as have others on this board. The people clearly aren’t being represented right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
8,104
809
126
At the federal level? If yes, then I’ve been advocating that for a while now as have others on this board. The people clearly aren’t being represented right now.
what ! have heard a lot here is making the senate proportional and getting rid of the EC, and I will never support that.
a larger house would be more as the system was meant to be though.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
22,210
15,387
136
what ! have heard a lot here is making the senate proportional and getting rid of the EC, and I will never support that.
a larger house would be more as the system was meant to be though.
Why do you oppose changes to the Senate and the EC?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
30,544
11,476
136
what ! have heard a lot here is making the senate proportional and getting rid of the EC, and I will never support that.
a larger house would be more as the system was meant to be though.
I support expanding the house, not the senate. The senate was designed to slow things down. I do however think the filibuster should ended.

I was originally for keeping the EC only because it was supposed to be a backstop to electing someone egregious like trump who is antithetical to democracy and who puts himself before the country. However when that didn’t happen and he didn’t win the popular vote as well, it pretty much ended any reason to keep it. So now I say get rid of it as the people who vote are just one more thing that can be compromised. I’ll take my chances with 140 million voters vs 538 people appointed by political parties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
11,144
330
126
There's no way the Republicans will go for removing the EC. It would result in them not wining the Presidency again. Since it would take an amendment to remove the EC, it's not going to pass without their support. The work around though is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, though I can see that being challenged and stuck down by the current SC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dawp

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
11,023
2,257
136
There's no way the Republicans will go for removing the EC. It would result in them not wining the Presidency again. Since it would take an amendment to remove the EC, it's not going to pass without their support. The work around though is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, though I can see that being challenged and stuck down by the current SC.
Maine and Nebraska already have proportional EC delegates, need more

 

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
8,104
809
126
Maine and Nebraska already have proportional EC delegates, need more

democrats would rather not have this, it opens it up too much to 3rd parties. neither R or D want more than the 2 parties to ever be viable. its a big problem in our system. things like the pres. debate commission for instance. if any other party gets even close, they move the goal posts.

I am for proportional Ec delegates and ranked choice voting.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
30,544
11,476
136
democrats would rather not have this, it opens it up too much to 3rd parties. neither R or D want more than the 2 parties to ever be viable. its a big problem in our system. things like the pres. debate commission for instance. if any other party gets even close, they move the goal posts.

I am for proportional Ec delegates and ranked choice voting.
I disagree and Bernie sanders says hi.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
30,544
11,476
136
Silly example, given that Sanders was a one-off independent that had to switch D to be taken seriously.

Ranked choice is the answer.
I do agree with ranked choice and I’m pretty sure some democratic states are already doing that so again, I disagree that democrats only want two parties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
11,144
330
126

ASK THE COMMUNITY