• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A preliminary injunction has been filed against TX gerrymandering

dseag2

DP Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2023
Messages
5,819
Reaction score
11,600
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Here is an interview with one of the lawyers who is arguing the case against it. He explains why the Constitution doesn't allow discrimination against minority voters. I won't provide details beyond that. If you are really interested, watch it.

 
Gerrymandering is good when the democrats do it.
Gerrymandering is bad and racist when the Republicans do it.

More two faced lying pos crying from the 'peanut gallery'.
 
Here is an interview with one of the lawyers who is arguing the case against it. He explains why the Constitution doesn't allow discrimination against minority voters. I won't provide details beyond that. If you are really interested, watch it.


shrug...

I hope this guy has found a suitably corrupt judge. If not, his suit will be tossed.
 
Gerrymandering is good when the democrats do it.
Gerrymandering is bad and racist when the Republicans do it.

More two faced lying pos crying from the 'peanut gallery'.
Lame. Fact is both major parties gerrymander up the ying yang wherever possible at the beginning of the decade, right after the census. No doubt about that. What’s new here, one can say precedence setting is redistricting, gerrymandering in the middle of the decade, mid-census by Texas for purely partisan reasons of attempting to gain 5 additional GOP seats. There’s no doubt Texas following Trump’s orders to redraw their districts are in the wrong. Again, no doubt about that either.

Mid-decade, mid-census gerrymandering, redrawing of district lines don’t happen. Maps drawn right after the census are expected to stand until the new census is taken a decade later. It’s a shame you don’t see the difference between gerrymandering right after the census which is the norm, expected as both major parties do it. This mid-decade, mid-census redrawing, gerrymandering is a first that wasn’t court ordered, a first for purely 100% partisan reasons. There’s very little that’s ethical when it comes to our politics, unethical, immoral applies here to this mid-decade, mid-census redistricting.
 
shrug...

I hope this guy has found a suitably corrupt judge. If not, his suit will be tossed.
Clueless dimwit Eileen Cannon is about as inept and corrupt as possible.
 
Gerrymandering is good when the democrats do it.
Gerrymandering is bad and racist when the Republicans do it.

More two faced lying pos crying from the 'peanut gallery'.
Marc Elias won every one of 60 plus election suits in the 2020 election fraud Trump lie. The man is the best election lawyer in America. Odds are he wins this one to.
And BTW, I noticed you couldn't refute the substance of his argument. All you can manage is a dig at Democrats.
 
Lame. Fact is both major parties gerrymander up the ying yang wherever possible at the beginning of the decade, right after the census. No doubt about that. What’s new here, one can say precedence setting is redistricting, gerrymandering in the middle of the decade, mid-census by Texas for purely partisan reasons of attempting to gain 5 additional GOP seats. There’s no doubt Texas following Trump’s orders to redraw their districts are in the wrong. Again, no doubt about that either.

Mid-decade, mid-census gerrymandering, redrawing of district lines don’t happen. Maps drawn right after the census are expected to stand until the new census is taken a decade later. It’s a shame you don’t see the difference between gerrymandering right after the census which is the norm, expected as both major parties do it. This mid-decade, mid-census redrawing, gerrymandering is a first that wasn’t court ordered, a first for purely 100% partisan reasons. There’s very little that’s ethical when it comes to our politics, unethical, immoral applies here to this mid-decade, mid-census redistricting.

Here's an opinion piece which points out the origination of gerrymandering, who started it, and how the name came to be:




"The word “gerrymander” originated when the Boston Gazette published a political cartoon depicting a newly drawn serpent-like district in Massachusetts by Jeffersonian Republicans, formally known today as the Democrat Party. The man who signed off on this politicalized map (although admittedly reluctant) was the then governor of the commonwealth and future fifth vice president of the United States, a man by the name Eldridge Gerry. Oppositionists in the press quickly reacted and labeled the political move “The Gerry Mander,” a play on the governor’s last name and the shape of the newly created district that resembled a salamander. This name lives on till this day."
 
Here's an opinion piece which points out the origination of gerrymandering, who started it, and how the name came to be:




"The word “gerrymander” originated when the Boston Gazette published a political cartoon depicting a newly drawn serpent-like district in Massachusetts by Jeffersonian Republicans, formally known today as the Democrat Party. The man who signed off on this politicalized map (although admittedly reluctant) was the then governor of the commonwealth and future fifth vice president of the United States, a man by the name Eldridge Gerry. Oppositionists in the press quickly reacted and labeled the political move “The Gerry Mander,” a play on the governor’s last name and the shape of the newly created district that resembled a salamander. This name lives on till this day."
Although I’m against all forms of gerrymandering, gerrymandering is congress critters choosing their voters instead of the voters choosing their congress critters. I realize gerrymandering is a fact of life in our political system. It is done after ever census, at the beginning of each decade. What I’m opposed to is this mid-decade, mid-census redrawing of districts, gerrymandering. Had Texas done this back in 2021, I would say normal and agree with you. Doing so mid-decade, mid-census is wrong and beyond the pale of normal partisan political gerrymandering. For me that is totally unacceptable and borders on the unethical and over the line of normal partisan politics.

In plain English, gerrymandering right after a census is wrong in my book, but it is the norm and is accepted as such. Gerrymandering in mid-decade, mid-census is not only wrong, but way beyond normal and shouldn’t be accepted. Texas had their chance to gerrymander in 2021. They did which resulted in a 25-13 republican advantage. It’s not the normal one time right after the census gerrymandering, I am opposed to here, it’s gerrymandering for a second time in a decade, mid-decade when the districts drawn in 2021 should be left to stand until after the next census or until 2031. Texas and the GOP are definitely in the wrong with their mid-decade gerrymandering of their districts.
 
Gerrymandering is good when the democrats do it.
Gerrymandering is bad and racist when the Republicans do it.

More two faced lying pos crying from the 'peanut gallery'.
Isn't your position that gerrymandering is good when Republicans do it, but bad when Democrats do it?
 
Back
Top Bottom