Yes, the general remark + "yet they're the bad guys".

(09-21-2016 10:24 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Yes, the general remark + "yet they're the bad guys".

Whatever dude. Hard to argue that the GOP isn't being painted as the bad guys despite all the progress NC has made in the past 4 years.

Funny how you point to a bunch of things that have nothing to do with gerrymandering, to apologize for the blatant gerrymandering. You didn't even deny it.

(09-21-2016 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Funny how you point to a bunch of things that have nothing to do with gerrymandering, to apologize for the blatant gerrymandering. You didn't even deny it.

I ignored the gerrymandering. Both sides have been accused of it, and done it.

NC draws the districts that the Federal Voting Rights Act requires them to. The result is two Minority/Dem majority districts, three other Dem districts, two toss up districts, and six Rep districts. They could draw districts starting with circular districts around Charlotte, the Triangle, and the Triad; and the results would be the same. But if they did that they'd be "violating the law".

(09-21-2016 10:17 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 08:40 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 08:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  You did defend it/apologize for it in #125.

Where?

(09-20-2016 04:06 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Courts: NC must have racial minority-majority districts
NC: Okay
Courts: You can't use race to draw districts

Funny how Republicans finally get control of NC, economy recovers then becomes one of best in country, teacher pay raises, multiple cities in "best retirement" or "best cities to live in" lists, budgets come under control, and taxes go down; yet they're the bad guys.

How about this. NC stops acting like dirtbags and draws fair districts. majority-minority districts happened because NC couldn't be trusted. so they take that law and see how the can abuse the intent of the law. they were quite successful packing all the black votes in a single district and say...see...can't blame us.

stop trying to abuse the intent of these laws, start drawing districts that are fair, and call it a day.

but no NC can

Intent of the law. That's a road liberals don't wanna go down lol

(09-21-2016 11:37 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Funny how you point to a bunch of things that have nothing to do with gerrymandering, to apologize for the blatant gerrymandering. You didn't even deny it.

I ignored the gerrymandering. Both sides have been accused of it, and done it.

Dema gerrymandered NC until 2010 for 50 plus years. GOP has only gerrymandered for 6 years.

US congressmen get to vote on laws that affect all the citizens of the state of NC.

I decree that all NC citizens should get to vote on all congressmen.

(09-21-2016 01:35 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  US congressmen get to vote on laws that affect all the citizens of the state of NC.

I decree that all NC citizens should get to vote on all congressmen.

I decree you go get educated and pay some taxes before acting like you have a clue as to what you are talking about.

(09-21-2016 12:40 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 11:37 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Funny how you point to a bunch of things that have nothing to do with gerrymandering, to apologize for the blatant gerrymandering. You didn't even deny it.

I ignored the gerrymandering. Both sides have been accused of it, and done it.

Dema gerrymandered NC until 2010 for 50 plus years. GOP has only gerrymandered for 6 years.

Yes, it's astounding how it suddenly became a problem when Republicans were doing it. Prior to that the only time you heard a liberal say anything about gerrymandering it was in a classroom talking about 1800's politics.


I wish we would get rid of gerrymandering. Then South Carolina would rid itself of do-nothing Jim Clyburn because the only reason he gets sent to Washington is because his Justice Department gerrymandered district avoids every white majority community between Charleston and Columbia, including a section in the city of Columbia where it's only two miles wide, in order to unnaturally get him elected.

Or just get rid of the house of reps, altogether.

Talk about a BS entity. Senate alone is plenty fine, and would actually get something done.


Why the hell do a hodgepodge collection of 600k people (or whatever it is) need a representative in Washington????

(09-21-2016 01:53 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 12:40 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 11:37 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(09-21-2016 11:17 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Funny how you point to a bunch of things that have nothing to do with gerrymandering, to apologize for the blatant gerrymandering. You didn't even deny it.

I ignored the gerrymandering. Both sides have been accused of it, and done it.

Dema gerrymandered NC until 2010 for 50 plus years. GOP has only gerrymandered for 6 years.

Yes, it's astounding how it suddenly became a problem when Republicans were doing it. Prior to that the only time you heard a liberal say anything about gerrymandering it was in a classroom talking about 1800's politics.


I wish we would get rid of gerrymandering. Then South Carolina would rid itself of do-nothing Jim Clyburn because the only reason he gets sent to Washington is because his Justice Department gerrymandered district avoids every white majority community between Charleston and Columbia, including a section in the city of Columbia where it's only two miles wide, in order to unnaturally get him elected.

When the dems controlled congress until the 90s was there no democrat gerrymandering occurring?

Or was gerrymandering invented by newt

Nothing to the degree that the Republicans took it to after 2010.

Simply put: the last time a major switch in congress happened to coincide with the census update, the data wasn't so easily accessible, sortable, categorizable, computable, etc.

So this was the first time that they were able to take advantage of it to this degree.


Forget the guy's name that they hired, but he was/is a master map maker and demographer. Basically handed him the keys and told him "build us districts that will vote republican no matter what".

(09-21-2016 02:27 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Nothing to the degree that the Republicans took it to after 2010.

Simply put: the last time a major switch in congress happened to coincide with the census update, the data wasn't so easily accessible, sortable, categorizable, computable, etc.

So this was the first time that they were able to take advantage of it to this degree.


Forget the guy's name that they hired, but he was/is a master map maker and demographer. Basically handed him the keys and told him "build us districts that will vote republican no matter what".

Elections have consequences. Maybe the dipshit libturds should start helping the people, instead of demonizing them.

Damned basket of deplorables.

(09-21-2016 02:27 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Nothing to the degree that the Republicans took it to after 2010.

Simply put: the last time a major switch in congress happened to coincide with the census update, the data wasn't so easily accessible, sortable, categorizable, computable, etc.

So this was the first time that they were able to take advantage of it to this degree.


Forget the guy's name that they hired, but he was/is a master map maker and demographer. Basically handed him the keys and told him "build us districts that will vote republican no matter what".

That's a lot of wasted typing just to say you are OK with gerrymandering as long as your precious leftists do it.

(09-21-2016 02:27 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Nothing to the degree that the Republicans took it to after 2010.

Simply put: the last time a major switch in congress happened to coincide with the census update, the data wasn't so easily accessible, sortable, categorizable, computable, etc.

So this was the first time that they were able to take advantage of it to this degree.


Forget the guy's name that they hired, but he was/is a master map maker and demographer. Basically handed him the keys and told him "build us districts that will vote republican no matter what".

So the dems gerrymandered but the gopers really gerrymandered. Didn't know you were such an expert in local nc politics

Of course I'm not ok with gerrymandering, regardless which party does it.

My first choice would be to abolish the useless anti-government entity that is the HoR.
Second choice would be for each state to keep it's total number of reps, based on population, but to have the entire state vote on each chair.

Third choice is to slice the state up using the most basic geometrical shapes possible, to achieve even numbers per district.

(09-21-2016 03:43 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Of course I'm not ok with gerrymandering, regardless which party does it.

My first choice would be to abolish the useless anti-government entity that is the HoR.
Second choice would be for each state to keep it's total number of reps, based on population, but to have the entire state vote on each chair.

Third choice is to slice the state up using the most basic geometrical shapes possible, to achieve even numbers per district.

1. The House of Representatives is the people's house because the Congressman comes from your general area and is far more in-tune with what Main St, USA wants than the Senate.

2. That defeats the purpose of the House altogether.

3. Fine with me, but don't start crying that the south didn't send the token leftists you are accustomed to via Dept of Justice mandated gerrymandering to Washington.

(09-21-2016 03:43 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Of course I'm not ok with gerrymandering, regardless which party does it.

My first choice would be to abolish the useless anti-government entity that is the HoR.
Second choice would be for each state to keep it's total number of reps, based on population, but to have the entire state vote on each chair.

Third choice is to slice the state up using the most basic geometrical shapes possible, to achieve even numbers per district.

If we are going to eliminate congressional districts why not states. Under your logic I should get a vote on who the senator of Wyoming is since he/she could become chair of a committee that directly impacts me

Solo,

Indeed. Since we're talking stuff that will never happen, anyway, why not go for it? I guess I figured getting rid of congressional districts and going statewide was more plausible than having the entire nation vote on 400+ chairs (or whatever the number is).


Kap,

"the Congressman comes from your general area and is far more in-tune with what Main St, USA wants"

That's a bald faced lie. There are no laws requiring the congressman to live in the district. Just the state.


What purpose does the HoR serve that the Senate can't fulfill on its own? None that I can see. Other than to be obstructionist.