• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Discussion Trump voters have made a deal with Trump - so how do you win elections?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,667
13,747
136
And the resident waterboy bitch misrepresents data. I see California, Hawaii, Washington and New Jersey as marked in green. “Several”.

Also, even “non-partisan” committees sometimes result in the mapping of districts to help solidify the power of incumbents, as is the case in Washington.

And in California, due to their jungle primary system, Democrats have run ads to support fringe Republican candidates to dilude the playing field, which is simply a variation of gerrymandering. See also the 38th district in Los Angeles. Independent commissions do not always balance cities, counties and neighborhoods with racial, incumbency or political considerations.

Republicans have taken it to the next level to solidify their power in some states, but as I said previously, the Democrats do not have clean hands.
Such commissions exist in 8 states-

https://ballotpedia.org/Independent_redistricting_commissions

Ohio voters instituted rules to prevent extreme gerrymandering. Pennsylvania is protected by their state Constitution with current districts drawn by the state SCOTUS. The GOP has opposed both measures.

Your example of Washington's maps & California advertising are both red herrings & a form of gish galloping.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,626
1,872
126
Aka, I was wrong about "several" and want to forget I said anything about it.
aka let’s argue the semantics, as I predicted, while completely ignoring the inconvenient truths that break the narrative

Dems aren't perfect,
Far from it

so it's cool if GOP just goes and shows Dems how it's REALLY done, cuz lol both sides.
Gerrymandering, partisan self-interest and consolidation of power manifests itself in different ways.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,158
20,850
136
And the resident waterboy bitch misrepresents data. I see California, Hawaii, Washington and New Jersey as marked in green. “Several”.

Also, even “non-partisan” committees sometimes result in the mapping of districts to help solidify the power of incumbents, as is the case in Washington.

And in California, due to their jungle primary system, Democrats have run ads to support fringe Republican candidates to dilude the playing field, which is simply a variation of gerrymandering. See also the 38th district in Los Angeles. Independent commissions do not always balance cities, counties and neighborhoods with racial, incumbency or political considerations.
Independent expenditures to support candidates has zero to do with gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is using the power of the state to achieve these outcomes. If it isn’t using state power it isn’t gerrymandering, period.

California’s jungle primary is the best and fairest any primary system can be. (Although I would prefer to eliminate primaries entirely)

Republicans have taken it to the next level to solidify their power in some states, but as I said previously, the Democrats do not have clean hands.
No one has claimed that Democrats don’t gerrymander, they just don’t do it to the extent Republicans do. It should be abolished entirely but sadly the partisan majority in SCOTUS decided to uphold it.

I have to say the judicial apocalypse that liberals predicted is proceeding apace. It’s now explicitly legal to rig elections so your opponents can never win.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,667
13,747
136
Independent expenditures to support candidates has zero to do with gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is using the power of the state to achieve these outcomes. If it isn’t using state power it isn’t gerrymandering, period.

California’s jungle primary is the best and fairest any primary system can be. (Although I would prefer to eliminate primaries entirely)



No one has claimed that Democrats don’t gerrymander, they just don’t do it to the extent Republicans do. It should be abolished entirely but sadly the partisan majority in SCOTUS decided to uphold it.

I have to say the judicial apocalypse that liberals predicted is proceeding apace. It’s now explicitly legal to rig elections so your opponents can never win.
GOP formula- first, gain power. Next, rig the system so that elections are of no consequence. Extract capital from the state in question & invest it more profitably elsewhere. Keep collecting the rent. Blame Libs, immigrants & poor people.

Because that's what freedom means when you're rich enough.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,158
20,850
136
GOP formula- first, gain power. Next, rig the system so that elections are of no consequence. Extract capital from the state in question & invest it more profitably elsewhere. Keep collecting the rent. Blame Libs, immigrants & poor people.

Because that's what freedom means when you're rich enough.
I also expect to see gerrymandering become much more aggressive in coming years. There's no actual requirement that states only redistrict every ten years after a census, they can redistrict whenever they want. I think in the not too distant future you'll see cases where a party gains a governing trifecta in a state and immediately gerrymanders it so the other party can never gain power again. After all, if a party doesn't gerrymander their opponents into a permanent minority they place themselves at risk of having the same thing happen to them.

It's pretty wild that people think SCOTUS hasn't been the shit show liberals predicted when it basically just endorsed extinguishing democracy at the state level. Like I said before in PA for example, Democrats won the vote for state assembly by 11 points and they still got 17 fewer seats in the Assembly than the Republicans. They weren't even CLOSE to getting a majority despite a blue tsunami. State government in Pennsylvania is effectively no longer a democracy and SCOTUS is fine with it.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,626
1,872
126
Such commissions exist in 8 states-

https://ballotpedia.org/Independent_redistricting_commissions

Ohio voters instituted rules to prevent extreme gerrymandering. Pennsylvania is protected by their state Constitution with current districts drawn by the state SCOTUS. The GOP has opposed both measures.

Your example of Washington's maps & California advertising are both red herrings & a form of gish galloping.
My examples show that the existance of independent commissions does not necessarily lead to better representation, as there are a myriad of factors that define the consolidation of political power.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
32,002
10,780
146
aka let’s argue the semantics, as I predicted, while completely ignoring the inconvenient truths that break the narrative
Yea, you made it about what the word "several" meant

Far from it
And?

Gerrymandering, partisan self-interest and consolidation of power manifests itself in different ways.
Clearly, and the GOP has shown just how far they'll go to maintain a minority rule. Oh well, guess that's called winning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ASK THE COMMUNITY