If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Maybe, just maybe, NC has always had a natural advantage on the federal level that has been masked by the Dems gerrymander. You're also forgetting to include the political execution of the Blue Dog Democrats by the Democratic party. Reps like McIntyre in my district were Democrats but now the district is Republican because a Blur Dog cannot win the Democratic primary
So many factors go into the Dems having an even number of House seats on the federal level.
The dems gerrymandered the best they could just like the GOP did. Do you agree with that statement?
The courts did nothing about it then so why are they doing something now?
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Under the voting rights act NC is required to create two districts that a minority candidate would have a fighting chance to win, thus the 12 district that you see on the 90 map. That isn't gerrymandering.
The 2010 map packs Democrats into 3 districts to such an extreme that they have little to no chance to win in other 10. Look at the 2nd and 4th Districts. Now that's some gerrymandering for you there. I know because I've been bounced from one to the other for years.
(01-10-2018 09:53 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: It doesn't matter. The current map is unconstitutional. I like where the court has gotten aggressive with the GOP, who seeks to frustrate the courts by stalling. Lets see if they have enough cajones to stick to their ruling.
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Maybe, just maybe, NC has always had a natural advantage on the federal level that has been masked by the Dems gerrymander. You're also forgetting to include the political execution of the Blue Dog Democrats by the Democratic party. Reps like McIntyre in my district were Democrats but now the district is Republican because a Blur Dog cannot win the Democratic primary
So many factors go into the Dems having an even number of House seats on the federal level.
The dems gerrymandered the best they could just like the GOP did. Do you agree with that statement?
The courts did nothing about it then so why are they doing something now?
I think that is a false equivalency. There is certainly gerrymandering regardless of party but the extent that the GOP went to once they gained power is over the top. Also the courts did do something about it when Democrats were in power. There were court challenges and various districts had to be redrawn on more that one occasion.
(01-10-2018 07:11 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: If memory serves, the one on the right was drawn by democrats to ensure a Blue district with a minority majority.
either way....does it matter in making a difference relative to macro change???
(01-10-2018 07:11 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: If memory serves, the one on the right was drawn by democrats to ensure a Blue district with a minority majority.
As required by law under the Voting Rights Act. But it actually doesn't have to be minority majority, just minority populated enough that minorities have political influence that could make it possible that a minority candidate could possibly be elected.
(01-10-2018 07:11 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: If memory serves, the one on the right was drawn by democrats to ensure a Blue district with a minority majority.
As required by law under the Voting Rights Act. But it actually doesn't have to be minority majority, just minority populated enough that minorities have political influence that could make it possible that a minority candidate could possibly be elected.
(01-10-2018 09:53 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote: It doesn't matter. The current map is unconstitutional. I like where the court has gotten aggressive with the GOP, who seeks to frustrate the courts by stalling. Lets see if they have enough cajones to stick to their ruling.
Article I Sections 2 & 4 per one of the judges ( the one appointed by Republicans ) on the three judge panel that ruled the map unconstitutional.
(01-10-2018 06:56 PM)dawgitall Wrote: Under the voting rights act NC is required to create two districts that a minority candidate would have a fighting chance to win, thus the 12 district that you see on the 90 map. That isn't gerrymandering.
That is actually the very definition of gerrymandering
The district is being drawn to render a certain outcome
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Maybe, just maybe, NC has always had a natural advantage on the federal level that has been masked by the Dems gerrymander. You're also forgetting to include the political execution of the Blue Dog Democrats by the Democratic party. Reps like McIntyre in my district were Democrats but now the district is Republican because a Blur Dog cannot win the Democratic primary
So many factors go into the Dems having an even number of House seats on the federal level.
The dems gerrymandered the best they could just like the GOP did. Do you agree with that statement?
The courts did nothing about it then so why are they doing something now?
I think that is a false equivalency. There is certainly gerrymandering regardless of party but the extent that the GOP went to once they gained power is over the top. Also the courts did do something about it when Democrats were in power. There were court challenges and various districts had to be redrawn on more that one occasion.
Not at all a false equivalency. In a red state getting 6 dems at the federal level is pretty good
(01-10-2018 07:11 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: If memory serves, the one on the right was drawn by democrats to ensure a Blue district with a minority majority.
As required by law under the Voting Rights Act. But it actually doesn't have to be minority majority, just minority populated enough that minorities have political influence that could make it possible that a minority candidate could possibly be elected.
o' boy o' boy.....
#yummymandates
#fuckthemselves
Just stating the facts there stinky. Have you had your Jeff Session yet this evening?
(01-10-2018 07:11 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote: If memory serves, the one on the right was drawn by democrats to ensure a Blue district with a minority majority.
As required by law under the Voting Rights Act. But it actually doesn't have to be minority majority, just minority populated enough that minorities have political influence that could make it possible that a minority candidate could possibly be elected.
o' boy o' boy.....
#yummymandates
#fuckthemselves
Just stating the facts there stinky. Have you had your Jeff Session yet this evening?
aw heyall yeah.....was agree'n with ya.....we're on the same side of reason with the exception that shite needs to change....
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2018 07:32 PM by stinkfist.)
I remember when Texas had something like 55% of the vote go to republicans but only got about 45% of the seats (may be a bit off on actual percentages, but the gist is correct). Democrats had gerrymandered congressional districts when they controlled the legislature. After republicans took over legislature, they set about to redistrict, and that's when we had the democrat "killer bees" who left the state to prevent a quorum.
(01-10-2018 06:56 PM)dawgitall Wrote: Under the voting rights act NC is required to create two districts that a minority candidate would have a fighting chance to win, thus the 12 district that you see on the 90 map. That isn't gerrymandering.
That is actually the very definition of gerrymandering
The district is being drawn to render a certain outcome
We can argue semantics but I would say the difference is that in this case it is court ordered whereas gerrymandering is done by a political party for party benefit. Whichever party is in control of the process they have to create these districts.
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2018 07:35 PM by dawgitall.)
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Maybe, just maybe, NC has always had a natural advantage on the federal level that has been masked by the Dems gerrymander. You're also forgetting to include the political execution of the Blue Dog Democrats by the Democratic party. Reps like McIntyre in my district were Democrats but now the district is Republican because a Blur Dog cannot win the Democratic primary
So many factors go into the Dems having an even number of House seats on the federal level.
The dems gerrymandered the best they could just like the GOP did. Do you agree with that statement?
The courts did nothing about it then so why are they doing something now?
I think that is a false equivalency. There is certainly gerrymandering regardless of party but the extent that the GOP went to once they gained power is over the top. Also the courts did do something about it when Democrats were in power. There were court challenges and various districts had to be redrawn on more that one occasion.
Not at all a false equivalency. In a red state getting 6 dems at the federal level is pretty good
What state are you talking about with 6 Democrats? The only Democrats in the NC delegation are Price, Butterfield and Adams.
(01-10-2018 06:56 PM)dawgitall Wrote: Under the voting rights act NC is required to create two districts that a minority candidate would have a fighting chance to win, thus the 12 district that you see on the 90 map. That isn't gerrymandering.
That is actually the very definition of gerrymandering
The district is being drawn to render a certain outcome
We can argue semantics but I would say the difference is that in this case it is court ordered whereas gerrymandering is done by a political party for party benefit. Whichever party is in control of the process they have to create these districts.
Sure they have to follow the law
But that doesn't change the fact that it's gerrymandering
Nor does it change the fact that the courts never ordered an out of state map drawer for the Dems gerrymander like they did the GOP's
Gerrymandering is bad but it's hypocrisy for the court the call out the GOP's gerrymander of less than 10 years when they did nothing about the decades of gerrymandering the Dems did.
I point out hypocrisy because it's poison to our system
(01-10-2018 06:43 PM)dawgitall Wrote: If you want to debate the extent of gerrymandering executed by the two parties you need only look at the party breakdown from the last two decades. When the Democrats controlled the process the split was always close. Since the Republicans took control it isn't close. In fact my very own state representative runs the process and it appears his own words played a major role in the court ruling.
Maybe, just maybe, NC has always had a natural advantage on the federal level that has been masked by the Dems gerrymander. You're also forgetting to include the political execution of the Blue Dog Democrats by the Democratic party. Reps like McIntyre in my district were Democrats but now the district is Republican because a Blur Dog cannot win the Democratic primary
So many factors go into the Dems having an even number of House seats on the federal level.
The dems gerrymandered the best they could just like the GOP did. Do you agree with that statement?
The courts did nothing about it then so why are they doing something now?
I think that is a false equivalency. There is certainly gerrymandering regardless of party but the extent that the GOP went to once they gained power is over the top. Also the courts did do something about it when Democrats were in power. There were court challenges and various districts had to be redrawn on more that one occasion.
Not at all a false equivalency. In a red state getting 6 dems at the federal level is pretty good
What state are you talking about with 6 Democrats? The only Democrats in the NC delegation are Price, Butterfield and Adams.
NC isn't a red state. We are a purple state.
In the 90s the GOP was a clear southern red state at the federal level but the split was 6 to 6, mostly due to a Dem gerrymander. Under natural districts it would have likely been between 8 to 4 - 10 to 2 GOP advantage
(This post was last modified: 01-10-2018 07:57 PM by solohawks.)