CSNbbs

Haven't seen this one referenced. The Supreme Court upheld (Kennedy & 4 liberals) a commission based redistricting in Arizona. The Republicans in the legislature sued based on the Constitution making legislatures responsible. Arizona voters had done a refendum to create the commission.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/29/politics/s...index.html

I dont know the details of this case at all, but a lot of states need to have redistricting based on logic rather than ridiculous gerrymandering.

Look at NC:



Districts 9, 4, 12, and 13 are hilariously terrible.

12 is what happens when you create a minority-safe district. IIRC, that district or something like it has been in NC pretty much since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Alma Adams is one of 3 democrats, the only woman, and the only African-American in the NC congressional delegation, so it's achieving its intended purpose. 9 is sort of the flip side, what's left over when you carve out 12.

The other two democrats represent 1 and 4, both of which appear to have been carved out to create safe democrat seats. 4 includes Raleigh-Durham, which is going to lean left, plus two or three tentacles into other areas that are probably safe for democrats. 1 also has some odd tentacles. I'm guessing the core area is predominantly democrat and the tentacles reach down to other predominately democrat areas. 13 is kind of like 9, what you are left with when you carve the democrat areas out for 1 and 4.

So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

we have one that looks like that through Jacksonville and it is to create a minority safe district also. It runs from the GA-FL border almost all the way to Orlando.

(06-29-2015 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]12 is what happens when you create a minority-safe district. IIRC, that district or something like it has been in NC pretty much since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Alma Adams is one of 3 democrats, the only woman, and the only African-American in the NC congressional delegation, so it's achieving its intended purpose. 9 is sort of the flip side, what's left over when you carve out 12.

The other two democrats represent 1 and 4, both of which appear to have been carved out to create safe democrat seats. 4 includes Raleigh-Durham, which is going to lean left, plus two or three tentacles into other areas that are probably safe for democrats. 1 also has some odd tentacles. I'm guessing the core area is predominantly democrat and the tentacles reach down to other predominately democrat areas. 13 is kind of like 9, what you are left with when you carve the democrat areas out for 1 and 4.

So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

I believe most of the districts were actually carved out by democrats over the years, but demographics have changed in NC considerably.

I do know that in the last election, about 60% of votes went to democratic candidates in NC, but only 3/13 seats are filled by democrats.

You've got some pretty f'd districting if 60% of votes were cast for a party, yet less than 25% of representatives are for that party.

(06-29-2015 01:30 PM)Niner National Wrote: [ -> ]I dont know the details of this case at all, but a lot of states need to have redistricting based on logic rather than ridiculous gerrymandering.

Look at NC:



Districts 9, 4, 12, and 13 are hilariously terrible.

Yep. You can't let the Fox watch the hen house.

(06-29-2015 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]12 is what happens when you create a minority-safe district. IIRC, that district or something like it has been in NC pretty much since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Alma Adams is one of 3 democrats, the only woman, and the only African-American in the NC congressional delegation, so it's achieving its intended purpose. 9 is sort of the flip side, what's left over when you carve out 12.

The other two democrats represent 1 and 4, both of which appear to have been carved out to create safe democrat seats. 4 includes Raleigh-Durham, which is going to lean left, plus two or three tentacles into other areas that are probably safe for democrats. 1 also has some odd tentacles. I'm guessing the core area is predominantly democrat and the tentacles reach down to other predominately democrat areas. 13 is kind of like 9, what you are left with when you carve the democrat areas out for 1 and 4.

So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts. They do it in GA & FL all the time. Look at Corrine Brown's ridiculous district. It's all the black areas in Jacksonville, Orlando and between.

(06-29-2015 04:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2015 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts.

It's Bush's fault.

(06-29-2015 04:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2015 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]12 is what happens when you create a minority-safe district. IIRC, that district or something like it has been in NC pretty much since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Alma Adams is one of 3 democrats, the only woman, and the only African-American in the NC congressional delegation, so it's achieving its intended purpose. 9 is sort of the flip side, what's left over when you carve out 12.

The other two democrats represent 1 and 4, both of which appear to have been carved out to create safe democrat seats. 4 includes Raleigh-Durham, which is going to lean left, plus two or three tentacles into other areas that are probably safe for democrats. 1 also has some odd tentacles. I'm guessing the core area is predominantly democrat and the tentacles reach down to other predominately democrat areas. 13 is kind of like 9, what you are left with when you carve the democrat areas out for 1 and 4.

So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts. They do it in GA & FL all the time. Look at Corrine Brown's ridiculous district. It's all the black areas in Jacksonville, Orlando and between.

Correction-these districts are created by Republicans AND minority Democrats all the time to create safe minority Democratic districts and more favorable Republican districts.

(06-29-2015 04:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts. They do it in GA & FL all the time. Look at Corrine Brown's ridiculous district. It's all the black areas in Jacksonville, Orlando and between.

Why would they want to create a 'safe' district for minorities, who by definition would get out-voted in the larger districts? If you mean it's a compromise, then fine... but the alternative is that they create districts where the minority vote is destined to be over-ruled.

Obviously I can't tell how many people are in those districts, but it seems that those votes would be divided among 6 other districts effectively rendering them fairly moot.

They are created to comply with federal voting rights laws. The effect of making every other district more republican is a necessary consequence. It's simple math.

ITT: A bunch of idiotic statements by Republicans trying to spin the shameful GOP tactics as "bipartisan" or the work of democrats

In 2012, 51 percent of North Carolina voters cast their ballots for a Democratic U.S. House candidate, yet only four out of 13 seats, or 31 percent, went to Democrats.

It is an embarrassment to this country to have people on here acting like the Ds truly wanted those districting plans.

(06-29-2015 04:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]They are created to comply with federal voting rights laws. The effect of making every other district more republican is a necessary consequence. It's simple math.

Right.

If you spread all those people among the GOP districts, they make them marginally less GOP, but you eliminate the 'safe' Dem representative. If you create the 'safe' Dem district, you by default make the GOP districts 'more' GOP.

(06-29-2015 05:12 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]ITT: A bunch of idiotic statements by Republicans trying to spin the shameful GOP tactics as "bipartisan" or the work of democrats
In 2012, 51 percent of North Carolina voters cast their ballots for a Democratic U.S. House candidate, yet only four out of 13 seats, or 31 percent, went to Democrats.
It is an embarrassment to this country to have people on here acting like the Ds truly wanted those districting plans.

If you create one safe minority seat that is 80% democrat, then that's pretty much the result you should expect. Simple math.

Say state is 51-49 D, and with 13 districts, each district is roughly 8% of vote. You have one district where that 8% splits 6.4% D/1.6% R. That leaves the rest of the state 47.4% R/44.6% D. 10 out of 12 remaining districts is entirely possible in that situation as long as all are "first past the post" contests.

(06-29-2015 05:12 PM)john01992 Wrote: [ -> ]ITT: A bunch of idiotic statements by Republicans trying to spin the shameful GOP tactics as "bipartisan" or the work of democrats

In 2012, 51 percent of North Carolina voters cast their ballots for a Democratic U.S. House candidate, yet only four out of 13 seats, or 31 percent, went to Democrats.

It is an embarrassment to this country to have people on here acting like the Ds truly wanted those districting plans.

I find this comment, combined with your signature to be amusing.

Your quote, in and of itself, is not enough information to dram any conclusion.

If one district had a long seated and popular democrat running unopposed, he would almost assuredly get 90+% of the vote.. especially in a Presidential cycle. In another district, the vote might be 55/45 for a Republican.... So assuming equal numbers, Democrats would get 75% of the votes, but only 50% of the seats. You need to know how many seats were challenged and what those individual outcomes were, both in numbers and percentages in order to actually make a conclusion.

You can blame that on gerrymandering, and it might be true... but until a court agrees with you, it's just dancing around the ring.

Public Education: We elect people by popular majority.

Reality: No, we really do not.

(06-29-2015 04:48 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2015 04:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts. They do it in GA & FL all the time. Look at Corrine Brown's ridiculous district. It's all the black areas in Jacksonville, Orlando and between.

Why would they want to create a 'safe' district for minorities, who by definition would get out-voted in the larger districts? If you mean it's a compromise, then fine... but the alternative is that they create districts where the minority vote is destined to be over-ruled.

Obviously I can't tell how many people are in those districts, but it seems that those votes would be divided among 6 other districts effectively rendering them fairly moot.

I think Florida has 27 districts. It's worth consistently losing 3 districts in order to win 10. GOP knows that the dems have little power to ungerrymander (is that a word) them because minorities would scream racism.

(06-29-2015 04:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote: [ -> ]

(06-29-2015 02:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote: [ -> ]12 is what happens when you create a minority-safe district. IIRC, that district or something like it has been in NC pretty much since the civil rights legislation of the 1960s. Alma Adams is one of 3 democrats, the only woman, and the only African-American in the NC congressional delegation, so it's achieving its intended purpose. 9 is sort of the flip side, what's left over when you carve out 12.

The other two democrats represent 1 and 4, both of which appear to have been carved out to create safe democrat seats. 4 includes Raleigh-Durham, which is going to lean left, plus two or three tentacles into other areas that are probably safe for democrats. 1 also has some odd tentacles. I'm guessing the core area is predominantly democrat and the tentacles reach down to other predominately democrat areas. 13 is kind of like 9, what you are left with when you carve the democrat areas out for 1 and 4.

So republicans create one safe minority seat and two other safe democrat seats, and in the process create 10 relatively safe republican seats.

Those minority safe districts are often created by republicans in order to create more GOP safe districts. They do it in GA & FL all the time. Look at Corrine Brown's ridiculous district. It's all the black areas in Jacksonville, Orlando and between.

Let's not pretend the Democrats don't do the same thing in NY, CA, etc.

There's an interesting lawsuit arguing that districts should be based on eligible voters. That would significantly decrease the number of Hispanic districts as large numbers are illegal aliens. It would also reduce the strength of districts with large numbers of minors.

There is a great article on WaPo that illustrates the issue of "minority safe" and other gerrymandered districts well.