Or the Democrats in Pennsylvania could do what they did in Virginia during the last election. Present better candidates and better ideas to the voters and almost take control of the House of Delegates despite the districts given to them by the Republicans. Which is pretty much what the Republicans did in Virginia after the Democrats created the districts they wanted after the 1990 census. Better ideas presented by better people will always win the day.

But I guess what we learn from most Democrats is that whining and bitching and moaning is much more fun.

(12-08-2017 01:00 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn in order to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of giving them power, and I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of keeping them from having power in OTHER districts.

Two sides of the same coin, and I've heard people who strongly and vocally support minority positions advocate for them both.

Which is better, for them to have say 20% of the vote in 10 districts or for them to have 80% of the vote in 1?

Opinions can vary

Same with parties.

Good point.

I guess in a perfect world, the 20% minority population in 10 districts would receive a proportional amount of representation by their elected official, but alas...

(12-08-2017 01:54 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 01:00 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn in order to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of giving them power, and I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of keeping them from having power in OTHER districts.

Two sides of the same coin, and I've heard people who strongly and vocally support minority positions advocate for them both.

Which is better, for them to have say 20% of the vote in 10 districts or for them to have 80% of the vote in 1?

Opinions can vary

Same with parties.

Good point.

I guess in a perfect world, the 20% minority population in 10 districts would receive a proportional amount of representation by their elected official, but alas...

Brilliant.

(12-08-2017 01:46 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  Or the Democrats in Pennsylvania could do what they did in Virginia during the last election. Present better candidates and better ideas to the voters and almost take control of the House of Delegates despite the districts given to them by the Republicans. Which is pretty much what the Republicans did in Virginia after the Democrats created the districts they wanted after the 1990 census. Better ideas presented by better people will always win the day.

But I guess what we learn from most Democrats is that whining and bitching and moaning is much more fun.

And its what the Republicans have done throughout the South and much of the midwest over the last 20 years to take over states Democrats controlled for decades or as long as 130 years.

(12-08-2017 01:54 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 01:00 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn in order to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of giving them power, and I've seen some absolutely ridiculous lines drawn to CREATE 'minority' districts as a means of keeping them from having power in OTHER districts.

Two sides of the same coin, and I've heard people who strongly and vocally support minority positions advocate for them both.

Which is better, for them to have say 20% of the vote in 10 districts or for them to have 80% of the vote in 1?

Opinions can vary

Same with parties.

Good point.

I guess in a perfect world, the 20% minority population in 10 districts would receive a proportional amount of representation by their elected official, but alas...

If a minority candidate needs a protected district to get elected then perhaps they shouldn't be elected at all.

(12-08-2017 12:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

This is how Republicans win elections.


Linkypoo

That district map is like a Rorschach test....when I look at it I see a weeping snowflake.

fit why do you ignore Maryland gerrymandering if its such an important issue to you?

(12-08-2017 04:06 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 12:05 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

This is how Republicans win elections.


Linkypoo

That district map is like a Rorschach test....when I look at it I see a weeping snowflake.

but yeah, compare that to

Looks about the same to me


Houston has one like that as well, and that one I know was designed by Democrats to ensure representation for a particular minority group. I'm sure there are others.

point, not only do they all do it, but SOMETIMES it is for the benefit of under-represented groups and not to harm them.


and looking at a picture doesn't tell you

Someone should mention BOTH SIDES DO IT!

(12-08-2017 05:41 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Someone should mention BOTH SIDES DO IT!

me thinks it's been mentioned a few times by some in this thread.... ???

(12-08-2017 12:25 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 12:05 PM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Both sides do it, and it sucks.

Yup... Maryland is pretty egregious... But so is North Carolina and Ohio.

I wish there was a solution both sides could agree to to eliminate this sorta thing.

Shortest splitline algorithm

The bottom line is that redistricting is a political process which should be controlled by whichever side wields the most power. But politicians being who they are will inevitably abuse their power and the pendulum will swing to the other side.

(12-08-2017 12:09 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  and this is how democrats lose elections....

Exactly.

What these Donks don’t seem to realize, or don’t want to recognize, is that this is largely done to CONCENTRATE minority votes/voters.

Without many of these districts the conyers and pelosis of the world may well not exist.

Locally, Bobby Scott has made a career out of one of the most convoluted districts probably ever seen.

Tidy that up? He’s back to being a school teacher or community organizer or whatever.

Oft times defies logic or common sense. Not sure what folks are bitching about(?)...