(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.

https://youtu.be/scpfpZ-pL8Q

I see you buy your party's bs. The Democrats didn't control as many states as the Republicans do now.

(01-10-2018 07:33 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  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.

And the Democrats had 17 of the 32 seats in 2002 and hadn't won a statewide race in nearly a decade.

Harris County (Houston) went from 600 voting precincts in 1989 to 1700 in 1991 to deal with the Democratic gerrymanders.

(01-10-2018 07:58 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(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.

https://youtu.be/scpfpZ-pL8Q

I see you buy your party's bs. The Democrats didn't control as many states as the Republicans do now.

I'm talking specifically about North Carolina, not the 50 states. The facts back up what I stated.

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Haven't you learned? Gerrymandering is fine as long as it benefits leftists. It's been shown time and time again the most egregious examples of gerrymandering were done to create "minority majority" districts which benefit the leftists. They never bring them up.

If they were truly against gerrymandering they would be against all of it regardless of the reason. They aren't because that wouldn't benefit them. Typical leftist hypocrisy.

(01-10-2018 08:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Haven't you learned? Gerrymandering is fine as long as it benefits leftists. It's been shown time and time again the most egregious examples of gerrymandering were done to create "minority majority" districts which benefit the leftists. They never bring them up.

If they were truly against gerrymandering they would be against all of it regardless of the reason. They aren't because that wouldn't benefit them. Typical leftist hypocrisy.

In Texas they were trying to create both minority districts and a couple safe districts for white Democrats near Dallas and in Southwest Houston.

(01-10-2018 07:17 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(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.

So a law that REQUIRES gerrymandering that does seem contradictory.... gerrymandering is basically illegal, except to give one specific demographic group an advantage. What gets me about the GOP map, DEMOCRATS complained it diluted minority voter influence by creating a near minority majority district. I guess the democrats don't care as much about a true minority district as having minority votes turn more districts blue. Again seems contradictory, the dems want minority voters spread across more districts for party benefit, it doesn't sound like they care if it results in any a minority candidate winning.

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:35 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.

Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

(01-10-2018 08:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Haven't you learned? Gerrymandering is fine as long as it benefits leftists. It's been shown time and time again the most egregious examples of gerrymandering were done to create "minority majority" districts which benefit the leftists. They never bring them up.

If they were truly against gerrymandering they would be against all of it regardless of the reason. They aren't because that wouldn't benefit them. Typical leftist hypocrisy.

In Texas they were trying to create both minority districts and a couple safe districts for white Democrats near Dallas and in Southwest Houston.

They fail to understand that you can't gerrymander one district without gerrymandering them all. All of the crying isn't about gerrymandering at all, it's because it doesn't help them.

(01-10-2018 08:54 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:50 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Haven't you learned? Gerrymandering is fine as long as it benefits leftists. It's been shown time and time again the most egregious examples of gerrymandering were done to create "minority majority" districts which benefit the leftists. They never bring them up.

If they were truly against gerrymandering they would be against all of it regardless of the reason. They aren't because that wouldn't benefit them. Typical leftist hypocrisy.

In Texas they were trying to create both minority districts and a couple safe districts for white Democrats near Dallas and in Southwest Houston.

They fail to understand that you can't gerrymander one district without gerrymandering them all. All of the crying isn't about gerrymandering at all, it's because it doesn't help them.

XACLY!

and when you dig deeper in the well, it only yields incompetence and partisan politics.....

it's as outdated as going to jail for a day for spittin' on the sidewalk.....

term limits solves the equation.....

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:17 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(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.

So a law that REQUIRES gerrymandering that does seem contradictory.... gerrymandering is basically illegal, except to give one specific demographic group an advantage. What gets me about the GOP map, DEMOCRATS complained it diluted minority voter influence by creating a near minority majority district. I guess the democrats don't care as much about a true minority district as having minority votes turn more districts blue. Again seems contradictory, the dems want minority voters spread across more districts for party benefit, it doesn't sound like they care if it results in any a minority candidate winning.

Districts should be as compact with as much commonality as is possible. Abiding by the Voting Rights Act is difficult with that in mind.

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:35 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.

Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

Loolk at my post history. I've said from the beginning I wish they hadn't done what they did.

However what they did was not illegal just as it was not illegal in the 90s when the Dems did it

It's wrong but it's not illegal

Also do you think that the lack of blue dog democrats has anything to do with the decline of the dems in NC?

(01-10-2018 09:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:35 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.

Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

Loolk at my post history. I've said from the beginning I wish they hadn't done what they did.

However what they did was not illegal just as it was not illegal in the 90s when the Dems did it

It's wrong but it's not illegal

If it violates the constitution it is by definition illegal. The Federal 3 judge panel says it is a violation under the 14th Amendment and one judge also noted that it is a violation under article 1, sections 2 and 4. So it appears to me that it is both wrong and illegal. We will see if the SCOTUS agrees.

(01-12-2018 09:11 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 09:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:35 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.
Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

Look at my post history. I've said from the beginning I wish they hadn't done what they did.
However what they did was not illegal just as it was not illegal in the 90s when the Dems did it
It's wrong but it's not illegal

If it violates the constitution it is by definition illegal. The Federal 3 judge panel says it is a violation under the 14th Amendment and one judge also noted that it is a violation under article 1, sections 2 and 4. So it appears to me that it is both wrong and illegal. We will see if the SCOTUS agrees.

SCOTUS will decide whether it's illegal or not. Any bets?

(01-10-2018 09:09 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you think that the lack of blue dog democrats has anything to do with the decline of the dems in NC?

No the decline in the Democratic Party in NC was caused by a series of bad high profile candidates, a Republican wave in 2010 leading to a systematic, cold blooded, expertly executed voter suppression and gerrymandering plan. The worm will eventually turn.

(01-12-2018 09:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-12-2018 09:11 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 09:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.
Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

Look at my post history. I've said from the beginning I wish they hadn't done what they did.
However what they did was not illegal just as it was not illegal in the 90s when the Dems did it
It's wrong but it's not illegal

If it violates the constitution it is by definition illegal. The Federal 3 judge panel says it is a violation under the 14th Amendment and one judge also noted that it is a violation under article 1, sections 2 and 4. So it appears to me that it is both wrong and illegal. We will see if the SCOTUS agrees.

SCOTUS will decide whether it's illegal or not. Any bets?

ye ol' chicanery....well done!

(01-12-2018 09:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-12-2018 09:11 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 09:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.
Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

Look at my post history. I've said from the beginning I wish they hadn't done what they did.
However what they did was not illegal just as it was not illegal in the 90s when the Dems did it
It's wrong but it's not illegal

If it violates the constitution it is by definition illegal. The Federal 3 judge panel says it is a violation under the 14th Amendment and one judge also noted that it is a violation under article 1, sections 2 and 4. So it appears to me that it is both wrong and illegal. We will see if the SCOTUS agrees.

SCOTUS will decide whether it's illegal or not. Any bets?

Who knows. They are hearing the Maryland case as well and that is a Democratic gerrymandering case. Lets hope they judge them on their merits. We all benefit if politicians stop being able to pick their voters. I did see an article that said the Appeals court ruling set the table for Kennedy to be the deciding vote if we have another 5-4.

(01-12-2018 09:20 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 09:09 PM)solohawks Wrote:  Also do you think that the lack of blue dog democrats has anything to do with the decline of the dems in NC?

No the decline in the Democratic Party in NC was caused by a series of bad high profile candidates, a Republican wave in 2010 leading to a systematic, cold blooded, expertly executed voter suppression and gerrymandering plan. The worm will eventually turn.

Sounds like you are a victim of brain suppression. Maybe one of those worms they used in Star Trek II.

As conservatives leave the Democratic Party, the southern states have been turning more Republican. Its that simple. And the reversal of decades of Democratic gerrymanders doesn't hurt.

As bureaucrats settle Virginia, its turning back to the Democrats.

(01-10-2018 08:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:53 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:35 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:27 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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

Okay if we accept your argument that there is no difference how does that justify what the GOP has done in the years that they have held power? If you remember that spent years calling for an end to gerrymandering, demanding that a nonpartisan committee be used to draw districts and saying that if they ever took power it would end, they would do the right thing. Then they take power and all that righteous indignation disappeared. Then they proceeded to take gerrymandering to an art form with no apologies and with a swagger. See the David Lewis you tube link I put up and after it plays let the next one play.

Are you willing to point out that hypocrisy and call for an end to the partisan gerrymandering or are you one of those that says if they did it we get to do it too?

I've never really heard that from Republicans. Maybe they did in NC, but I haven't heard it.

(01-10-2018 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:29 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 07:13 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(01-10-2018 06:52 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(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.

https://youtu.be/scpfpZ-pL8Q

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.

Since 1980 in presidential elections:
Republicans 9
Democrats 1

Its a red state, just not deep red.