• 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!

Leaked chart by Politico shows winners and losers in California's redistricting. Wow.

Michael Cole said:
That may be what you're talking about, but I was specifically addressing this:


This was true for a few years, but no longer the case.

My gripe with the Census Bureau is in how they define metro/micropolitan areas in Northern Nevada. The designations made sense when they were created. Not so much today. Carson City, an independent city, is its own metro area. Douglas County as well as Lyon County are micropolitan areas. Decades ago, there were miles of undeveloped land between Reno-Sparks and Carson City as well as between Carson City and Minden/Gardnerville in Douglas County. Fernley in Lyon County is separated from Sparks by the Virginia Range.

Today, (sub)urban sprawl has connected each into one metropolis. Fernley is still disconnected by undevelopable mountain terrain, but it has grown into a bedroom community. As well, the Bureau does not cross the state line. Truckee (separated by the Sierra) is another bedroom community of Reno, but it is included in Sacramento's metro area. Incline Village at Lake Tahoe is included in Reno's metro area, but Kings Beach across the state line is not.

That's my gripe with the Bureau. Lol. The actual population of the Reno/Tahoe area is about 750,000, which you'd never figure out if unfamiliar with the region.
Click to expand...
They are losing Domestic immigration. They are gaining illegal immigrants. We saw you palm that card.
 
Brack said:
And Arizona: Harris received 46.7% of the vote from this state, but 3 out of the 9 (33.33%) Reps from this state are Dems. However, it doesn't mean that Arizona is a "heavily gerrymandered" state. Both Arizona and California have an independent commission that draws district boundaries.
Click to expand...
Since Arizona has an independent commission that draws district boundaries all the less reason for you to complain about it.

The vote put to the CA voters is whether to override their independent commission that draws district boundaries. We'll see this November if they stick to their principals on this, or not.
 
Bullseye said:
Let me be a little cleare. This is what I want:
Click to expand...
OK. Then in accordance with the states' Tenth Amendment powers, I support California telling Republicans to stick their one-sided bipartisan commission straight up their ass. Texas and Florida should definitely do this though. They should lead the way on this good governance reform, which you totally support in good faith. (y)
 
Gatsby said:
OK. Then in accordance with the states' Tenth Amendment powers, I support California telling Republicans to stick their one-sided bipartisan commission straight up their ass.
Click to expand...
What the hell are you talking about? How can a bipartisan commission be "one sided"
Gasby said:
Texas and Florida should definitely do this though. They should lead the way on this good governance reform, which you totally support in good faith. (y)
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
Bullseye said:
What the hell are you talking about? How can a bipartisan commission be "one sided"
Click to expand...
Because if it's a state-by-state decision, then what you are really saying is that you want fairness in blue states and hyperpartisanship in red states. Sorry, we are done with that nonsense. There's either a nationwide compromise to have nonpartisan districting across the board in ALL states, or else California is going to inflict maximum pain on Republicans.

When you say you want each state to decide for themselves, don't think your game isn't obvious. "Oh yeah, California should totally have a bipartisan commission, out of fairness to Republicans! Texas and Florida? Oh, I'm sure they'll get to it when they get to it." 🤡
 
Gatsby said:
Because if it's a state-by-state decision, then what you are really saying is that you want fairness in blue states and hyperpartisanship in red states. Sorry, we are done with that nonsense. There's either a nationwide compromise to have nonpartisan districting across the board in ALL states, or else California is going to inflict maximum pain on Republicans.
Click to expand...
Absolutely idiotic. Why are reds states different than blue states, other than in your twisted viewpoint.
Gatsby said:
When you say you want each state to decide for themselves, don't think your game isn't obvious. "Oh yeah, California should totally have a bipartisan commission, out of fairness to Republicans! Texas and Florida? Oh, I'm sure they'll get to it when they get to it." 🤡
Click to expand...
LOL, You do realize I'm advocating the Constitutional process that I quoted above.
 
Bullseye said:
Absolutely idiotic. Why are reds states different than blue states, other than in your twisted viewpoint.
Click to expand...
They aren't. I'm saying I want ALL states to stop gerrymandering, as in we need a nationwide solution. When you hide behind a state-by-state approach, we've already seen the outcome: Hyperpartisanship in all red states, bipartisan commissions in (some) blue states.

Bullseye said:
LOL, You do realize I'm advocating the Constitutional process that I quoted above.
Click to expand...
Yup. And so, likewise, I'm advocating that California exercise its 10th Amendment powers to kick Republicans in the balls as hard as possible in their redistricting. Enjoy. (y)

If you'd like to stop getting kicked in the balls as hard as possible at some point in the future, Democrats will be happy to negotiate a nationwide detente. Keyword is nationwide. Not Democrats unilaterally disarming.
 
Gatsby said:
They aren't. I'm saying I want ALL states to stop gerrymandering, as in we need a nationwide solution. When you hide behind a state-by-state approach, we've already seen the outcome: Hyperpartisanship in all red states, bipartisan commissions in (some) blue states.


Yup. And so, likewise, I'm advocating that California exercise its 10th Amendment powers to kick Republicans in the balls as hard as possible in their redistricting. Enjoy. (y)

If you'd like to stop getting kicked in the balls as hard as possible at some point in the future, Democrats will be happy to negotiate a nationwide detente. Keyword is nationwide. Not Democrats unilaterally disarming.
Click to expand...
Ok, never mind, All you doing is spewing partisan nonsense.
 
Republicans love to bitch and moan about California doing this, but most of them are totally opposed to any kind of nationwide solution. Because they don't actually want to solve the problem of gerrymandering, they're just working the refs to get an edge for their team. Democrats would be wise not to fall for it.

Democrats can and should come to the table in good faith to negotiate a nationwide end to gerrymandering, if Republicans are ready for that conversation. But until that happens, inflict maximum pain on Republicans. Total scorched earth in blue state redistricting.
 
Gatsby said:
Republicans love to bitch and moan about California doing this, but most of them are totally opposed to any kind of nationwide solution. Because they don't actually want to solve the problem of gerrymandering, they're just working the refs to get an edge for their team. Democrats would be wise not to fall for it.

Democrats can and should come to the table in good faith to negotiate a nationwide end to gerrymandering, if Republicans are ready for that conversation. But until that happens, inflict maximum pain on Republicans. Total scorched earth in blue state redistricting.
Click to expand...
Not a single MAGA will tell Greg Abbott that what he's doing is wrong.

Not one.
 
Gatsby said:
You have a great evening. 👋
Click to expand...
Nicely done on the dismantling of @Bullseye's posts. Granted it wasn't a fair fight since he has his hands tied - he literally is prohibited from publicly criticizing Abbott's efforts since that would be a betrayal of Trump, so he has no choice but to whine about California's efforts while taking extreme care to avoid any comments on Texas that may be construed as disloyal or treasonous. Still, the flailing was mildly entertaining to watch, and the "partisan nonsense!" throwing in of the towel on his part was a solid ending.
 
Get rid of single member first past the post.

Party list proportional representation, that's the ticket.
 
Bullseye said:
LOL, You do realize I'm advocating the Constitutional process that I quoted above.
Click to expand...

Don't be surprised when someone points out that the Constitution empowers Congress with making rules that pertain to Federal Elections.

(Which could include rules about the redistricting process. Not that Congress will, but they could.)

WW
 
Fletch said:
How is it fascist? Gerrymandering has been happening since the nations founding. It is your argument that its only fascist when republicans do it? Or do you have no real argument
Click to expand...
It is fascist because they are taking orders, as a state, from the federal government. Are you familiar with the concept of federalism as a foundational part of our constitutional republic?
 
mrjurrs said:
It is fascist because they are taking orders, as a state, from the federal government. Are you familiar with the concept of federalism as a foundational part of our constitutional republic?
Click to expand...
You mean when the DOJ enforced the Voting Rights Act on southern states, that was fascism?
 
JMB1911A1 said:
You mean when the DOJ enforced the Voting Rights Act on southern states, that was fascism?
Click to expand...
When do you feel like enforcing a federal law is fascistic?

What federal law is TX trying to enforce? Oh yeah, you think Dear Leaders words are law don't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom