• 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!

The Democrats are fighting for racial segregation

Buster Keaton

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 16, 2025
Messages
1,689
Reaction score
788
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist

Story by Justin Jouvenal

The Supreme Court has signaled that it may rule on the constitutionality of a key section of the landmark Voting Rights Act that allows states to draw majority-minority voting districts mainly to protect the power of Black and Hispanic voters.

The justices on Friday evening asked opposing parties in a battle over a Louisiana voting map to submit briefs addressing whether the state’s creation of a second Black majority congressional district violated constitutional provisions that require all people to be treated equally. The district covers areas stretching from Shreveport to Baton Rouge.

Comment:
The Democrats want racially segregated congressional districts.
They believe that racially segregated congressional districts are part of Voting Rights.
But everyone has the same voting rights.
No one has more voting rights than another person.
Do Latinos have more voting rights than Asians, or do African Americans have more voting rights than White voters?
How do these racially segregated congressional districts protect everyone's equal right to vote?
Racially segregated congressional districts are racist and the Supreme Court should rule against it.
 
Last edited:
Now granted in 2017 a far less right leaning Supreme Court ruled that:

Supreme Court agrees: GOP lawmakers used race to redraw voting districts​

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Republicans in North Carolina unlawfully took race into consideration when drawing congressional district boundaries, concentrating black voters in an improper bid to diminish their statewide political clout.

Supreme Court agrees: GOP lawmakers used race to redraw voting districts

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Republicans in North Carolina unlawfully took race into consideration when drawing congressional district boundaries, concentrating black voters in an improper bid to diminish their statewide political clout.
adams.house.gov
 
so are you for or against racially segregated congressional districts?
 
Who do those racially segregated districts that democrats are trying to grow and or maintain vote for? LOL, yeah, democrats.
Here's the thing. If we can't have decisions made based on race, then how can we have voting districts to maintain votes based on race. We aren't supposed to consider race in hiring, or in advancement but the democrats want to preserve racial separation and preferences. You can't have everyone equal if you want to make rules to give one or the other an advantage. You need to convince people to do the right thing, all across the board. That's not want democrats want. They want rules to force us to create an equality based upon skin color and not upon what MLK said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,"
That goes both ways, for the good or the bad.
 

MLK, famous opponent of the Voting Rights Act.
 
Greenbeard said:
Districts are lines drawn on a map, they don't actually change where anyone actually lives.
Click to expand...
But they do determine where they vote and where their vote is counted. That's what gerrymandering is all about. Since drawing lines can make sure that the majority is white in any given district, it dilutes the voting power of minorities in the district and throughout the state.

Lines can also be drawn so that Democrats are the minority party in any given district. This increases significantly the likelihood that the state legislatures and congressional delegations are mostly GOP.

You can read all about Operation REDMAP starting here.
 
Greenbeard said:
Districts are lines drawn on a map, they don't actually change where anyone actually lives.
Click to expand...
Instead of moving into a different district the criminal politicians get the district moved.
 

Sure, but bundling, instead of diluting, minority votes to ensure they get a voice isn’t “segregation.”
 
The right wing projection and fascist gaslighting is insane.

North Carolina judges slam GOP gerrymandering in stinging ruling, reject district maps

The ruling found state legislative boundaries were so partisan they violated the state constitution.
www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

The court determined that North Carolina's district maps were drawn specifically to disenfranchise African Americans with "surgical precision."

Also ensuring the existence of minority-majority districts isn't "segregation" Jesus ****ing Christ, learn the definition of words. I don't think anything gives away the game more than simultaneously claiming "what racism??" but also "we know only whites vote for us consistently so we're going to disenfranchise everyone else."
 
Slartibartfast said:
This thread makes it obvious that the gop wants to smother the voice of black people.
Click to expand...
Nothing of the kind. We just don't believe anybody ought to get a voting district drawn just for them so they can use it to support a particular party. Hell just draw voting districts by squares on the map with only the slightest modification to allow for the proper number of votes represented. A district shouldn't resemble a snake weaving it's way all over the place. Dems claim they hate racial preferences until it comes to voting districts.
 
Greenbeard said:
Sure, but bundling, instead of diluting, minority votes to ensure they get a voice isn’t “segregation.”
Click to expand...
Sure it is. If you bundle most minorities into one single district, as has been done in Texas and other red states, you effectively silence the minorities in all other districts. That is a form of segregation.
 
Stop lying. You would rather use Republican voices to drown out peoples voice as evidenced by the regerrymandering of Texas.
 
What a crock. Operation REDMAP says you're lying.



 
Stealers Wheel said:
Sure it is. If you bundle most minorities into one single district, as has been done in Texas and other red states, you effectively silence the minorities in all other districts. That is a form of segregation.
Click to expand...

It depends (a lot) on how they are bundled. The correct idea behind drawing maps is to try to have everybody represented. If you are 70% white/30% black, ideally you end up with 30% black representation. If you are 55% Republican/45% Democrat, ideally you end up with 55% Republican representation. Drawing maps that give you 70/30 and 55/45 splits in every district gives you 100% white Republican representation.

By the same reasoning, cities, suburbs, and rural areas all have different agendas, and should have their own representation.

If you simply drew circles around the big cities based on population, you would end up with a better map most of the time, at least as a starting point.
 
So, what, they'll have to ride in the back of the bus to the polling station?
 
One of the ways the founders screwed up is in having districts at all. It should have been proportional by party. Even back then they could have apportioned a state’s representation by % of federal vs anti federalist.
 
Gilded Oppressive Pedo trump;
apartheid south african gerrymandering;
pack ‘em and crack ‘em;
the nativist know-nothings of the 1850’s really are in charge;
tho check the help Alito, Scalia, and Thomas gave the GOP for REDMAP 2010;
 
Slartibartfast said:
One of the ways the founders screwed up is in having districts at all. It should have been proportional by party. Even back then they could have apportioned a state’s representation by % of federal vs anti federalist.
Click to expand...

Even that has problems, though. There are too many groups that should have some direct representation. And how do you represent the independents?
 
JohnfrmClevelan said:
Even that has problems, though. There are too many groups that should have some direct representation. And how do you represent the independents?
Click to expand...

That's the thing about democracy: there's no clear line between what we politely call "representation" and what it actually is, which is a knife fight for scarce resources.
 
Time for mathematical districting.

**** all gerrymandering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…