The Left Unwittingly Admit That Their Excuse Of Gerrymandering Was Always A Sham

[LincolnRossiter]

Dems were already the masters of gerrymandering back when the current GOPers were in diapers. They are the very last people who should ever talk about gerrymandering.

And it allowed them to control the House, nearly without interruption, for 60 years from FDR to the 1994 “Republican Revolution.” Thanks for further clearing that up for your “moderate right” friend. Tu quoque is no defense.

 

[Cardinal]

I have no problem with it ending. The point is that the Dems mastered the art a long time ago and then get insulted that the opposition has used it, too.

Everybody has the right to complain about gerrymandering, because it's bad and should end. The only people who I would agree may not have the right to complain about it (or at least be taken seriously while complaining about it), are those who have argued in favor of gerrymandering.

 

[LincolnRossiter]

I have no problem with it ending. The point is that the Dems mastered the art a long time ago and then get insulted that the opposition has used it, too.

Well if it makes you feel better, Republicans complained about it when they were on the business end of the shaft as well.

 

[veritas1]

Well if it makes you feel better, Republicans complained about it when they were on the business end of the shaft as well.

Of course.

 

[GDViking]

Gerrymandering, for those who like pictures.

View attachment 67242103

The OP is being willfully or otherwise obtuse. No point debating it; he's not fixable.

Thanks for posting that it is a clear and simple explanation as to why we need to get partisan politics out of remapping.

We have the software that can create boundaries by population without even taking into account political or racial trends.

This is how it should be done. Borders should be decided by population, not votes...

 

[Cardinal]

Thanks for posting that it is a clear and simple explanation as to why we need to get partisan politics out of remapping.

We have the software that can create boundaries by population without even taking into account political or racial trends.

This is how it should be done. Borders should be decided by population, not votes...

While I agree with the sentiment, let's not forget that software is programmed by people. Laws must be made governing the methodology of such software.

 

[GDViking]

My only question is why in the world are Republicans so scared.
Texas- arrest and confisacation phone of a campaign person.
North Dakota- blocking mostly rural native Americans from voting because they use P.O. boxes for mail.
Georgia- the SOC who is running for office holding 1000's of voter registrations (the same guy that sent armed militia to arrest & charge people in 2010 for registering their neighbors to vote)
There is some real dirty stuff going on.

Yep we are living in the most corrupt political atmosphere in US history...

 

[<alt>doxygen]

Thanks for posting that it is a clear and simple explanation as to why we need to get partisan politics out of remapping.

We have the software that can create boundaries by population without even taking into account political or racial trends.

This is how it should be done. Borders should be decided by population, not votes...

I believe population is currently used. The problem is that states play a divide and conquer game with the boundaries. They know where the vote clusters for each party are. Those factors - party id and voting records - need to be removed from the algorithm. Then the results need to be checked and agreed on by both sides since accidents can happen.

 

[DH Kirkwood]

Proof: Most Democrats believe in a blue wave coming and a Democratic takeover of the House. The MSM believe in it too. In fact, they all believe it is a foregone conclusion. How is that even remotely possible if Republicans have been so great at gerrymandering the system? Nothing has changed. So, if you believe in the blue wave then you admit that the gerrymandering argument was always a sham, nothing but an excuse.

I'm afraid that your logic is far too easy to deflate. You're making the assumption that gerrymandering will always produce results in favor of the one doing the gerrymandering. It's an advantage, but nobody ever claimed that gerrymandering on either side was so lop-sided as to ensure the results.

Congress flips all the time, and we've always known this. The factors that lead to the results of these elections are many and varied. Both parties play tricks in order to tip things in their favor, but that doesn't always work. If there's a really high turn-out for the side not doing the cheatin', then the cheater is probably still going to lose.

I think the media is a little too enthusiastic about a 'blue wave' due to a heavy reliance on gut-feelings and wishful thinking. We've got some states that are highly competitive. An over-excited commentator may look the odd success that Beto's enjoying, for instance, the energy from his supporters, the fact that he's polling only slightly behind Cruz, under the margin-of-error, and just decide that Texas is going to go to him, but he's still the underdog in that race.

 

[Moderate Right]

With a merely 1% advantage in blackjack, most casinos make countless millions from unsuspecting gamblers. They don't win 1% of the money bet. They win most of it. With a 1% handicap. Or, I can have a balance and scales with perfectly balanced weights on either side, and even if both weigh a literal ton, a few grains of sand on one side will cause that side to sink all the way down. Similarly, in a state where, say, 51% of voters in a given election vote democrat and 49% vote republican, gerrymandering can ensure that republicans still sweep the state by merely shifting the handicap by 3 percentage points.

This wouldn't be such a problem if the result of such an election produced someone who is 52% republican and 48% democrat. But those results produce someone who is typically much more skewed to the values of one party over the other. By winning 1% more of the vote in a district, one side wins the entire district. That's why a very small handicap can result in very big wins for one side or the other.

To be clear, this is or should be a bipartisan issue. The dems got away with it for years, and now the republicans have turned the tables. And one day, the dems will turn those tables again. I hope not, of course. The cure for any kind of imbalance is always balance, not retaliation.

Spin, spin, spin. If you believe in Republican gerrymandering then there can be no blue wave. If you believe in a blue wave then you admit that gerrymandering has as much effect as illegal voting. At least you admit that with just a 1% house advantage, millions and millions of illegals can vote, changing election results.

 

[Moderate Right]

I'm afraid that your logic is far too easy to deflate. You're making the assumption that gerrymandering will always produce results in favor of the one doing the gerrymandering. It's an advantage, but nobody ever claimed that gerrymandering on either side was so lop-sided as to ensure the results.

Congress flips all the time, and we've always known this. The factors that lead to the results of these elections are many and varied. Both parties play tricks in order to tip things in their favor, but that doesn't always work. If there's a really high turn-out for the side not doing the cheatin', then the cheater is probably still going to lose.

I think the media is a little too enthusiastic about a 'blue wave' due to a heavy reliance on gut-feelings and wishful thinking. We've got some states that are highly competitive. An over-excited commentator may look the odd success that Beto's enjoying, for instance, the energy from his supporters, the fact that he's polling only slightly behind Cruz, under the margin-of-error, and just decide that Texas is going to go to him, but he's still the underdog in that race.

In other words you admit that voting by illegals, gives Democrats an advantage.

 

[GDViking]

Well if it makes you feel better, Republicans complained about it when they were on the business end of the shaft as well.

That is the problem, whichever party is in power always wants to remain in power.

Now we will have to wait and see which party puts country before party.

It is clear that the people do not want gerrymandering, which party will run on fair redistricting, ,and pass legislation to fix it???

 

[GDViking]

While I agree with the sentiment, let's not forget that software is programmed by people. Laws must be made governing the methodology of such software.

It's simple software let highschool student's design it as a project...

 

[Moderate Right]

And it allowed them to control the House, nearly without interruption, for 60 years from FDR to the 1994 “Republican Revolution.” Thanks for further clearing that up for your “moderate right” friend. Tu quoque is no defense.

LOL. Apparently you haven't been reading your very own fellow lefty's responses. Gerrymandering is just a mere small advantage, not enough to influence anything.

 

[GDViking]

I believe population is currently used. The problem is that states play a divide and conquer game with the boundaries. They know where the vote clusters for each party are. Those factors - party id and voting records - need to be removed from the algorithm. Then the results need to be checked and agreed on by both sides since accidents can happen.

Exactly!!!

 

[Moderate Right]

Yep we are living in the most corrupt political atmosphere in US history...

Every year corruption gets worse and worse. That won't change if Trump is replaced by a Democrat and both the Senate and the House go blue. It will continue to get worse, just as if Hillary had won in 2016.

 

[Cardinal]

Gerrymandering is just a mere small advantage, not enough to influence anything.

How do you know it's "not enough to influence anything"?

 

[Moderate Right]

Now we will have to wait and see which party puts country before party.

I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you.

 

[blarg]

Proof: Most Democrats believe in a blue wave coming and a Democratic takeover of the House. The MSM believe in it too. In fact, they all believe it is a foregone conclusion. How is that even remotely possible if Republicans have been so great at gerrymandering the system? Nothing has changed. So, if you believe in the blue wave then you admit that the gerrymandering argument was always a sham, nothing but an excuse.

that or they think enough people will be sick of the gop to overcome it linking or dividing your supporters by district dosent mean they cant ever turn on you

 

[Moderate Right]

How do you know it's "not enough to influence anything"?

LOL! Because your fellow lefties have said so in this thread! It's only a 1% house advantage.

 

[GDViking]

In other words you admit that voting by illegals, gives Democrats an advantage.

Illegals, don't vote, there are more sasquatch votes than illegal votes.

When you are hiding of the grid the LAST thing in the world you do is register to vote.

I know, I spent a decade of my life completely untraceable...

 

[Moderate Right]

Illegals, don't vote, there are more sasquatch votes than illegal votes.

When you are hiding of the grid the LAST thing in the world you do is register to vote.

I know, I spent a decade of my life completely untraceable...

So, you admit to being an illegal?

 

[Cardinal]

LOL! Because your fellow lefties have said so in this thread! It's only a 1% house advantage.

I'm asking how you know that it hasn't been enough to influence anything. You made a statement of fact. Can you back it up?

 

[GDViking]

I wouldn't be holding my breath if I were you.

Yah I know, we no longer have true Americans like feingold and McCain in office...

 

[DH Kirkwood]

In other words you admit that voting by illegals, gives Democrats an advantage.

So . . . are you really unaware of what a 'straw-man' is, or are you just ****ing with me?

Please don't put words in my mouth. What I said was that both parties play tricks to give themselves an advantage. The only thing that I admitted to in that post is that the Democrats play games to, but I did not elaborate, mostly because gerrymandering is the only thing that I'm certain about.

What I'll readily admit to is that if they thought that they could get away with it, they would.