Republicans loose another gerrymandering case - Michigan and Ohio

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jul 9, 2009
10,719
2,064
136
As I stated above which you have ignored. Why is it you have no issues with GOP activists not allowing people choosing their elected officials?

Southeast Michigan has some of the most blatant gerrymandering in the whole nation. If you overlay the color of the neighborhoods on it. It would be an almost perfect match
Because i don't agree with your assessment.
 

outriding

Diamond Member
Feb 20, 2002
3,107
2,174
136
Because i don't agree with your assessment.

Here is a map of a current SE Michigan district

Let’s look at the ethnicity of the major areas

Detroit. Black
Southfield. Black
Pontiac. Black

Detroit is in Wayne county
Southfield and Pontiac is in Oakland county

So how does this look like it fair and meets your requirement that people are represented equally?
 

Attachments

  • C5B69DEC-F73C-4A3C-A2FC-32AD6217E142.png
    C5B69DEC-F73C-4A3C-A2FC-32AD6217E142.png
    146.1 KB · Views: 22

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
Here is a map of a current SE Michigan district

Let’s look at the ethnicity of the major areas

Detroit. Black
Southfield. Black
Pontiac. Black

Detroit is in Wayne county
Southfield and Pontiac is in Oakland county

So how does this look like it fair and meets your requirement that people are represented equally?

Remember that this isn't about facts, it is about how to troll. It's fun to play with this mindset at times or correct as you have but in the end, it's not about truth, ethics, or justice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54 and Vic
Jul 9, 2009
10,719
2,064
136
PDF of Rucho vs. Common Cause

If i did it right.



"Gerrymandering is a time-honored tradition in American politics. The Constitution expressly assigns power to each state to prescribe its own redistricting rules, and proponents would argue that gerrymandering simply reflects the basic human instinct for people to join groups that reflect their own interests and identity. In general, redistricting is important in that it reflects changes that happen over time in any given state’s population. But gerrymandering also has other significant facets that can impact a district:

  • Enhances competition among the parties
  • Allows a state to group together voters who have common interests
  • Leads to the creation of “safe” districts for incumbents
  • Holds the states accountable to voters
  • Allows minorities to be better represented in Washington
The concern is for “safe districts,” where the incumbent party has an unfavorable advantage."


The Constitution allows it in the same manner that it allows an impeachment hearing.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,592
29,221
146
No, i'm in favor of people choosing their Representatives based on law and common interests, not based on activist liberal judges working to get liberals elected.

which is not at all what is happening. Quite literally: activist conservatives are working to get conservatives elected to represent minority populations for an entire state or community. That is actually what is happening.

Or, how do you think you are honestly arguing that the disparity in representation-to-votes somehow favors liberals? The facts are the same set of facts for everyone. You don't get to make them up to argue against an issue that simply doesn't exist. You believe in phantom issues that keep you up at night, though quite plainly: none of that is happening.

You fully support minority representation in this country, don't you? Just fucking admit it for one god damn time in your life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
I'm still not tired of winning, thanks.

Well that's fine I guess, however I don't think Trump feels like he's winning. After all there's a real rope around his neck and the hanging tree according to Lindsey and all Trump needs is for someone to kick the bucket out from under his feet. Right now he's trying his best to kick it away himself and is nearly there.

Win/win.

Edit- This is a sample of what you've won.

The senior U.S. diplomat in Ukraine said Tuesday he was told release of military aid was contingent on public declarations from Ukraine that it would investigate the Bidens and the 2016 election, contradicting President Trump’s denial that he used the money as leverage for political gain.

Yay for you, me and Trump!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,415
14,305
136
I'm still not tired of winning, thanks.
Especially when you can win 57% of the statehouse seats with 49% of the vote, right?
Let me clue you in on something: that might be winning for you, but for the 51% of the population with 43% of the representation, that's tyranny.
 
Last edited:

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,947
126
Especially when you can win 57% of the statehouse seats with 49% of the vote, right?
Let me clue on something: that might be winning for you, but for the 51% of the population with 43% of the representation, that's tyranny.

They dont care. Given a choice between democracy and "values" they will always choose "values"
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,592
29,221
146
Especially when you can win 57% of the statehouse seats with 49% of the vote, right?
Let me clue you in on something: that might be winning for you, but for the 51% of the population with 43% of the representation, that's tyranny.

Today's GOP really do envy those minority theocracies that the despots in the Middle East are quite fond of. I mean, they openly support theocratic governments here, which can only come at the price of a minority of voters capturing the majority of representation.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,719
2,064
136
Especially when you can win 57% of the statehouse seats with 49% of the vote, right?
Let me clue you in on something: that might be winning for you, but for the 51% of the population with 43% of the representation, that's tyranny.
Not at all, when you have 80%/20% of one district voting Democrat and 3 districts voting 55%/45% Republican you end up getting 3 Republican seats and only 1 Democratic seat, even if the Democrats got more actual votes. Welcome to a Constitutional republic.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ch33zw1z

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The Constitution allows it in the same manner that it allows an impeachment hearing.

Not true. The Constitution does not specifically allow for gerrymandering the way it does impeachment. The Founders merely left an exploitable loophole for reasons unknown.

The purpose of gerrymandering is to achieve greater representation than the voters would allow in fair districting. Period.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
26,135
24,068
136
You really think he missed it?

Nope, but the current rules really prevent an appropriate response.

And there is a thread for discussing the current rules as well as a subforum and this is not either. Trying to make an end run around the new rules is also not allowed.
admin allisolm
 
Last edited by a moderator: