(CNN) Democrats’ flip in California concludes final unresolved US House race

[eman623]

And the problem with the bolded, is?

The answer to your question is in the last sentence that is not bolded.

 

[SuperDS77]

We can always count on you to counter without links. ️

Yes, because we ALL know that gerrymandering is ONLY done in Republican-led states, right? LOL!

Didn't think you needed a link to prove the sky is blue.

Anyways, for your edification, I found one from a non-conservative source. Enjoy!

How Democrats learned to stop worrying and love the gerrymander

Republicans tilted the House map. Democrats are clawing their way back.

www.vox.com

"
The grinding battle over congressional redistricting is drawing to a close. And, contrary to expectations that the process would result in big Republican gains, the final House of Representatives map may well improve somewhat for Democrats.

The main reason is gerrymandering — redrawing of district lines for partisan benefit. Republicans built on their existing gerrymanders to try to expand their House advantage, but Democrats fired back even more powerfully with gerrymanders of their own.

Basically, Democrats saved themselves by resorting to a tactic they’ve previously denounced as not only unfair but downright unethical — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called gerrymandering “unjust and deeply dangerous” in 2019. But in the absence of national reforms banning the practice, refusing to gerrymander would have meant effective unilateral disarmament, ceding the GOP a significant advantage in the battle for control over the House.

Meanwhile, Democratic gerrymanders in states like New York and Illinois pulled the median district nearly 3 points leftward, so it was actually close to neutral. (Joe Biden’s margin in the median district would have nearly matched his national popular vote margin in the 2020 presidential election.) But an aggressive gerrymander in GOP-controlled Florida could soon shift things right again, if approved. Other state court rulings could shift things further, particularly in New York, where Democrats’ gerrymander is under scrutiny.

 

[Captain Adverse]

If you'd like your "opinion" to carry value, you may consider backing it up with some supporting evidence.

Evidence has been provided in the past on methods and processes back in 2020 and thereafter. Of course, the MSM, government special interests, and the "Intelligence" Agencies pushed to debunk it all.

They always admit that some fraud can and does occur, but assert that there was never enough to affect the election. That is often the go-to response of the Left.

I accept that "our side" had difficulties providing much evidence. But it's like anything else. When the powers that be want something quashed, it usually gets quashed.

I accept the results as a done deal. I'll continue to doubt the results even so.

 

[Chomsky]

Evidence has been provided in the past on methods and processes back in 2020 and thereafter. Of course, the MSM, government special interests, and the "Intelligence" Agencies pushed to debunk it all.

They always admit that some fraud can and does occur, but assert that there was never enough to affect the election. That is often the go-to response of the Left.

I accept that "our side" had difficulties providing much evidence. But it's like anything else. When the powers that be want something quashed, it usually gets quashed.

I accept the results as a done deal. I'll continue to doubt the results even so.

There's been no worthy credible evidence, as can be seen by sixty-odd court failures.

You, obviously, can think as you wish. But you're not swaying discussion or opinion, much less prevailing in debate.

 

[Chomsky]

The answer to your question is in the last sentence that is not bolded.

Wrong! The majority of Californians have confidence in their elections. It's the MAGA's that have a problem. Nothing we can do about that.

 

[eman623]

Wrong! The majority of Californians have confidence in their elections. It's the MAGA's that have a problem. Nothing we can do about that.

The majority get a pleasing outcome. If they did not, then they would be the ones with the problem.

When it literally takes nearly a month to decide the winner of a simple house race in the most technologically advanced state in the country because ballots keep trickling in, that is not a recipe for confidence in the system.

 

[Chomsky]

The majority get a pleasing outcome. If they did not, then they would be the ones with the problem.

When it literally takes nearly a month to decide the winner of a simple house race in the most technologically advanced state in the country because ballots keep trickling in, that is not a recipe for confidence in the system.

Wrong. You admit I'm right, then you double-down again before your post is even finished!

Are you going to go for three?

 

[eman623]

Wrong. You admit I'm right, then you double-down again before your post is even finished!

Are you going to go for three?

I have no idea what you are talking about. But I'm glad you think you are winning if that makes you feel better.

 

[Luce]

By that definition there will never be a "mandate".

I agree with @Luce the candidate who won has the "mandate" such as it is....

It's how our government works. There is no level of power diminished or increased by some nebulous "mandate," especially for a president's second term.

People can bitch all they want, the people have spoken.

 

[Chomsky]

I have no idea what you are talking about. But I'm glad you think you are winning if that makes you feel better.

I'm challenging your assertion (unsupported) that Californians' lack confidence in their elections.

 

[ClaraD]

(CNN) Democrats’ flip in California concludes final unresolved US House race
--



--

With the final federal election tally in, it appears Republicans actually lost seats in the People's House.

With Trump not even getting half the popular vote, only 1-1/2 pts over Harris, and only besting his losing 2020 performance by a bit over 3%, I'm at an absolute loss to understand the vociferous claims of a "mandate".

How can there be a mandate, when the majority of the electorate voted against the candidate?

Oh well . . .

They have a zero point advantage in the House....this is going to be funny as crap watching them not do anything at all except for gridlock.

 

[Chomsky]

They have a zero point advantage in the House....this is going to be funny as crap watching them not do anything at all except for gridlock.

I feel for those handful of swing votes. The pressures will be beyond!

 

[Chomsky]

It's how our government works. There is no level of power diminished or increased by some nebulous "mandate," especially for a president's second term.

People can bitch all they want, the people have spoken.

Hear! Hear!

The faster those of us on the losing-end of the election accept the full reality of what occurred, the sooner and better we can plot and effect a better future!

 

[Luce]

Hear! Hear!

The faster those of us on the losing-end of the election accept the full reality of what occurred, the sooner and better we can plot and effect a better future!

And throw sand in the gears.

 

[Chomsky]

And throw sand in the gears.

Yes, that's a valid course at times!

A nearly evenly divided House, Midterms on the way, and MAGA faithful expecting to see big-time legislation passed! It's going to be interesting!

(it's also going to be interesting watching Trump "remove Biden's 'inflation'")

 

[ClaraD]

I feel for those handful of swing votes. The pressures will be beyond!

Its going to be hilarious

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

The bolded doesn't reflect reality.

The Elections Board "stops counting" when the curing period ends, and affected citizens no longer come forward. The end-date is legislatively enacted. It is not arbitrary.

Was there a time limit? Or do we wait until all the votes arrive and/or are found and counted? Was everyone notified that had a mistake on their ballot and did they get to amend their vote? I know everyone who went to the polls that had a problem with their ballot we made sure it is rectified and their vote counted that day. Every election now there is a month of counting the votes until they get the results they are looking for. It used to take 1 day for all the votes to be counted at the polls and the results posted on the door. Now it takes a month? What is the point of posting the results on the door when we no longer know who won until a month later of counting votes somewhere else decides the election. Seems to me we had no problem holding elections since this country was founded and counting the votes until the last couple of years. Seems to me all this controversy is being created to take the vote out of the hands of the people and put it in the hands of the government.

I want We the People holding the elections. I want We the people counting the votes. I want We the People telling the candidates who won. Anything less than this and we might as well put Putin in charge of elections.

 

[eman623]

I'm challenging your assertion (unsupported) that Californians' lack confidence in their elections.

I did not assert that. Go back and read what I actually wrote.

 

[Chomsky]

Was there a time limit? Or do we wait until all the votes arrive and/or are found and counted? Was everyone notified that had a mistake on their ballot and did they get to amend their vote? I know everyone who went to the polls that had a problem with their ballot we made sure it is rectified and their vote counted that day. Every election now there is a month of counting the votes until they get the results they are looking for. It used to take 1 day for all the votes to be counted at the polls and the results posted on the door. Now it takes a month? What is the point of posting the results on the door when we no longer know who won until a month later of counting votes somewhere else decides the election.

Curing is allowed until 2 days before certification, therefore 1 DEC.

Seems to me we had no problem holding elections since this country was founded and counting the votes until the last couple of years. Seems to me all this controversy is being created to take the vote out of the hands of the people and put it in the hands of the government.

I haven't seen any changes then or now, besides Trump not accepting defeat and doing his best to tarnish our elections.

I want We the People holding the elections. I want We the people counting the votes. I want We the People telling the candidates who won. Anything less than this and we might as well put Putin in charge of elections.

Who doesn't?

 

[Chomsky]

I did not assert that. Go back and read what I actually wrote.

Sure, you didn't!

Of course. California is a state that allows ballot harvesting and uses the most generous standards for late ballots and ballots that are not filled out or signed correctly.

The Dem supermajority stacked the deck to ensure they would win as much as possible. Confidence in the result be damned,

The majority get a pleasing outcome. If they did not, then they would be the ones with the problem.

When it literally takes nearly a month to decide the winner of a simple house race in the most technologically advanced state in the country because ballots keep trickling in, that is not a recipe for confidence in the system.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Curing is allowed until 2 days before certification, therefore 1 DEC.

I am routinely getting bills in the mail after they are due. It seems like every month I have late arriving mail. I am not sure I would trust sending my ballot in the current postal system. If it does not arrive on time I assume it ends up in the trash.

I haven't seen any changes then or now, besides Trump not accepting defeat and doing his best to tarnish our elections.

I have been working the elections for a long time and I have seen a lot of changes. Most in the last 4 years. So many that it needs its own thread. While recently we have some of the best voter security ever in election history now with mail in voting I see lots of ways to bring voter fraud back into the election process. If you had worked the polls for 40+ years you would know what I am saying is true.

Who doesn't?

One of my big problems with drop boxes and mail in vote is how do you verify that the voter actually filled out the ballot. I could easily order a ballot for my father who has Alzheimer's fill it out and mail it in. There are a lot of people out there who are taking care of people who can easily fill out a ballot for them and mail it in. In a close race it does not take many votes to change the outcome.

 

[eman623]

Sure, you didn't!

Comprehension is not your strong suit today.

 

[OpportunityCost]

We can always count on you to counter without links. ️

Dude, you live in Illinois, stop it.

A Tale of Two Midwestern Gerrymanders: Illinois and Ohio - Sabato's Crystal Ball

KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE — Gerrymanders by Democrats in Illinois and Republicans in Ohio seek to build upon their dominance of their respective states. — The Ohio Supreme Court could intervene against the GOP gerrymander there, which perhaps helps explain why Republicans were not as...

centerforpolitics.org

Gerrymandered as ****.

 

[SuperDS77]

They have a zero point advantage in the House....this is going to be funny as crap watching them not do anything at all except for gridlock.

Which is exactly what would have happened if the democrats had won control of the house, regardless of margin. As I would expect from either side.

There is likely to be much less gridlock with the upcoming session. Obviously, with a small margin that becomes more difficult, unless a few democrats cross over on some of these issues.

 

[Chomsky]

Which is exactly what would have happened if the democrats had won control of the house, regardless of margin. As I would expect from either side.

There is likely to be much less gridlock with the upcoming session. Obviously, with a small margin that becomes more difficult, unless a few democrats cross over on some of these issues.

I think Trump will get some pushback from the Senate in his nomination, but the main problem will be his 100 Day Agenda in the House.

Due to Trump picking 3 House members for his Administration, initially the GOP will have no votes to spare with a scant 218-216 majority (remember there's no tie-breaker). This will get slightly better as those seats eventually get filled, but they will be vacant for the initial push. And that initial push is critical, as political momentum coming out of the election wains as the session progresses, and before you know it the midterms are on the horizon.

tl;dr I'm expecting substantive - but incomplete - Senate Confirmation support, and big problems in House Legislative support.