Remember that the idiots who fled Texas to protest the completely legal and appropriate redistricting effort are the same ones who supported…
Increasing the size of SCOTUS to 12 and packing it with 3 liberal justices.
Abolishing the Electoral College.
Preventing ID requirements for voting.
Forces everyone to conform during COVID.
Firings of people who wouldn’t get the jab.
Millions of untested, unvaccinated, unverified immigrants.
Demand mail in ballots and drop boxed.
And they’re hiding in a state known for gerrymandering, political corruption, and fiscal irresponsibility.
https://x.com/endwokeness/status/1952227240718070113?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
Jasmine Corckett just admitted that DFL numbers fell after TX implemented ID for mail in ballots. Because allowing unidentified, and unverified voters to mail in unknown numbers of bogus ballots was always the plan.
6 comments:
The electoral college is just DEI for more rural states.
With the difference being that they already have all the privileges.
Just saying.
Also, if more progressive states act the same way (ie, gerrymandering to reduce gop representation) will y'all be happy for them to do so.
Voting districts should be determined by apolitical GIS experts.
What's more, I'm pretty sure that they've fled the state a couple of years ago to deny the Texas legislature a quorum on another issue. While the lefty whines and cries and stomps their feet about Trump and the GOP being out to destroy our democracy, these Texas Dems again prove just who it is who is the actual threat to our democratic way of governance.
It wouldn't surprise me, they're simply people of little or no integrity who'd be running rampant if they had the majority, and whine when they don't.
No it isn't. What an idiotic comment. The EC was designed to protect the tyranny of the minority by the majority.
What "privileges"? What an absurd notion.
Screw the constitution, right? Just saying.
The "more progressive states" already do gerrymander to diminish GOP representation. IL, MD, and CA are some of the most egregious. I have no real problem with it in principle. It simply the reality that winning elections benefits the winners. In the case of TX, if they don't redistrict they'll be in violation of federal law, I believe. This is one more example of the ASPL getting all pissy when the GOP does exactly what the DFL's been doing for ever. It's not a matter of being "happy", it's a matter of realizing the political reality and accepting it.
You're all for "experts" now, but wait until that redistricting lowers the number of DFL seats in some states and you'll be singing a different tune.
Your objection to both the EC and states having the right to establish their own criteria for redistricting, seems to stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the US as it was established, or from a sense that you know better than the founders.
"The electoral college is just DEI for more rural states."
By this "logic", the Emancipation Proclamation was just DEI for black slaves.
"Also, if more progressive states act the same way..."
"Progressives" (i.e. Democrats) perfected the gerrymander. Anything having to do with rigging elections is most likely the result of the lefties doing it first.
"Voting districts should be determined by apolitical GIS experts."
"apolitical GIS experts." Determined by whom? People like you?
A voting district, at it's most basic, is simply a percentage of the population of the state, with each district being a contiguous connecting of all people therein. It should be strictly numbers, with as simple a bordering of them without regard to any other factor. Geography can make that tricky to some extent, but not so much that the geography of the district must be the farthest from what an actual square or circle looks like.
I believe that when Republicans are in charge of redistricting, they are both seeking to abide this most basic rule as well as to correct the wildly partisan puzzle implemented by Dems to guarantee their power. Given some states, like Illinois, have such huge lefty populations in the bigger cities, they may result in greater Dem seats regardless. That's just the way it is and I don't think they need to gerrymander at all. They just don't want to take any chances.
Art,
In theory, I agree that there should be some way to district that prevents the egregious gerrymandering we see in IL or MD. In practice, I don't see how that would work fairly.
Given that, as long as each state has a consistent rule that doesn't change when power shifts I am fine with the current system. Honestly, the bigger issue seems to be getting illegal aliens out of the census count, and stopping ineligible voters from voting.
Post a Comment