August 28, 2012
— Ace Republicans aren't allowed to gerrymander. It's in the Constitution.
Voter maps used in the stateÂ’s general primary election for 2012 on May 29 was set by a San Antonio-based panel of three federal judges, who approved interim electoral maps while awaiting a decision from the Washington court.During a two-week bench trial in January, judges heard testimony from Texas legislators, their staffs and expert witnesses who analyzed voter data in the state.
The Justice Department alleged at trial that Texas “purposely manipulated” proposed congressional districts in the Dallas-Fort Worth area to decrease current and future minority voter strength.
In years past, Democrats held power at the state level and gerrymandered districts to keep the party at near-parity in congressional representation, despite the fact the state voted overwhelmingly for Republicans on the federal level.
Now the Republicans hold power on the state level, too, and have drawn district lines to favor themselves for a change.
Again, that turns out to be imconstitutional. Only Democrats can avail themselves of gerrymandering tricks.
Posted by: Ace at
12:39 PM
| Comments (188)
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Auntie Doodles at August 28, 2012 12:41 PM (FA8CK)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (r4wIV)
Posted by: soothsayer at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (9Q7Nu)
Posted by: Eric Holder at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (ncJgk)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (xYgm6)
Posted by: Auntie Doodles at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (FA8CK)
Posted by: toby928© at August 28, 2012 12:42 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: Ellen Barkin at August 28, 2012 12:43 PM (znT2j)
Libs/Dems/Progs are buried deeper than a tick at every level of government.
Time to get the match and tweezers!
Posted by: General Woundwort at August 28, 2012 12:43 PM (06lNq)
Use a Nokia.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 28, 2012 12:43 PM (r4wIV)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 28, 2012 12:43 PM (f9c2L)
Posted by: steevy at August 28, 2012 12:43 PM (6o4Fb)
Holder's DOJ to petition that Texas votes not count in 2012 election.
Seriously, this gerrymandering is a joke, whether performed by parties or by courts (D). There is no way that the VRA mandates that majority-minority districts be created.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at August 28, 2012 12:44 PM (F0K0r)
But wait... the map drawn up by federal judges was ruled unconstitutional by federal judges? Huh?
WTF exactly do they propose?
Posted by: entropy at August 28, 2012 12:44 PM (TULs6)
Posted by: Roy at August 28, 2012 12:44 PM (VndSC)
Some bill whipped up to crush the South does not trump the US Constitution. Texas should just ignore the court. "Go ahead, enforce your decision."
I'd say take it to the Supreme Court but Justice Roberts would rule to strengthen Section 5 to preserve the legacy of his court.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 28, 2012 12:45 PM (r4wIV)
The real problem is the entire outdated Voting Rights Act framework that is used to subject Southern states to the sort of proctological-level scrutiny that non-Confederate (and now reliably Democratic at the state legislative level) states like IL, NY, MD, and CA don't have to worry about. Once upon a time it was genuinely necessary, but nowadays?
That said, the Texas map was playing with fire in the sense that even though these VRA rules are a fucking travesty, their application is reasonably predictable.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 12:45 PM (Z2wcK)
.........
No, because those districts were manipulated to INCREASE current and future minority voter strength. RACIST!!1!
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at August 28, 2012 12:45 PM (f9c2L)
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 12:46 PM (32do8)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at August 28, 2012 12:46 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: toby928© at August 28, 2012 12:46 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at August 28, 2012 12:46 PM (Q/1Jp)
Posted by: JackStraw at August 28, 2012 12:46 PM (TMB3S)
So even when a Republican appoints a judge we have a better than 50% chance that they are going to actually rule in a liberal and unconstitutional fashion.
Posted by: General Woundwort at August 28, 2012 12:47 PM (06lNq)
Posted by: Roy at August 28, 2012 12:47 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 28, 2012 12:48 PM (r4wIV)
First off, that's complete crap. I live in DFW. You know who didn't get "gerrymandered" out of a seat? Eddie Bernice Johnson. If we didn't kick her out, I don't want to hear about "purposely manipulated." Further, we added a full district (indeed, it takes parts of Fort Worth and Dallas) that is a special "Majority Minority" district, to hand it straight to democrats.
What I really love, though, is that line "future minority voter strength."
Yes, Republicans from the future came back and told us where all the minorities would live. Right.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (8y9MW)
it's right there is the law....
I am hoping SCotUS delivers an epic headshot to this shit
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (LRFds)
Because it then would rely on math and everybody knows math is racist.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: MJ at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (TR60b)
Posted by: Bored Bill in Chappaqua at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (msPO3)
As already noted above, why is gerrymandering verboten in Texas with republicans, but the most blatant gerrymandering in Illinois done by democrats is perfectly okay?
Illinois lost a congressional seat this round (fancy that, people are fleeting a blue state run by democrats) and since all levers of power are held by democrats (governorship, state house and state senate), the newly drawn districts are the most bizarre looking things ever drawn on a map. Not to mention that hispanics were slighted so that black districts (which actually lost a lot of population) could emerge unscathed.
Illinois republicans sued based on the diminished hispanic districts and lost. But that's what the dems want, so that's what the dems get.
Posted by: Boots at August 28, 2012 12:49 PM (neKzn)
I repeat, I'd say take it to the Supreme Court but Justice Roberts would rule to strengthen Section 5 to preserve the legacy of his court.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at August 28, 2012 12:50 PM (r4wIV)
Posted by: SpongeBob Saget at August 28, 2012 12:50 PM (SDkq3)
Posted by: Hal at August 28, 2012 12:50 PM (MftY/)
The first and desired method is to hold an Art V convention and restore the power of the courts to the lower level that the framers desired so that they can not invent shit from the bench.
The second method which I do not favor is to start hanging judges until they get their minds right.
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 12:51 PM (YdQQY)
As I recall, she was very bitter about it, since some of her "friends" were behind it.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 12:51 PM (32do8)
some batshit crazy "it is a tax so it is legal change the law" shit...
yeah the GOP should change the law by striking section 5.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 12:52 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 12:52 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Sandra Fluker at August 28, 2012 12:52 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: LGoPs at August 28, 2012 12:52 PM (BJVEF)
Posted by: A Gaggle of Faggots at August 28, 2012 12:53 PM (jucos)
Posted by: brak at August 28, 2012 12:53 PM (nIoiW)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 12:53 PM (05RcU)
Voting rights, smoting rights, still don't even need to be able to show an id in most places and yet never-ending calls of "disenfranchisement'.
F that, enfranchise yourself idiots.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at August 28, 2012 12:54 PM (CrOSO)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 12:54 PM (xYgm6)
Posted by: LGoPs at August 28, 2012 12:55 PM (BJVEF)
I agree he may be that retarded, but this is blatant horseshit...
Roberts may want to you know follow precedent and point out ending racism through racism is retarded...
Whites are fast becoming a plurality in TX anyway...will THEY get Gerrymader protection?
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 12:55 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: sTevo at August 28, 2012 12:55 PM (Tgw9G)
I've never had the pleasure of addressing a gaggle of faggots, but Hank Johnson represents a district because a portion of that district is the city of Atlanta.
Posted by: Adam at August 28, 2012 12:56 PM (/YJYi)
Posted by: JackStraw at August 28, 2012 12:56 PM (TMB3S)
For one and one reason only: the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which established all the states of the former Confederacy (i.e. the Jim Crow south) as "covered jurisdictions" whose election practices and redistricting maps are subject to strict Justice Department and judicial scrutiny to make sure they aren't being drawn to exclude minorities from elected representation. It was justified on the basis of their past behavior, and indeed there was a point there: prior maps had been drawn specifically to prevent black Congressmen from ever being elected, even in states like NC and AL and MS where the population was nearly 25% African-American.
States without any Jim Crow heritage do not have their maps subjected to Justice Department "pre-clearance" procedures and the same level of judicial scrutiny. Hence the ability of IL and MD to do what they do.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 12:57 PM (Z2wcK)
Posted by: toby928© at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (QupBk)
Posted by: Zharkov at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (grXLG)
exactly...add in it is a stated objective to try to get more reps for El Paso than is warranted and the shit makes sense....
this is stupid...
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (LRFds)
Everything is division by race as far as dems and liberals goes.
MLK is spinning in his grave so fast he is creating a mini-gravitational field.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (CrOSO)
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Truman North, iPhone buffoon at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (I2LwF)
Just one vote though...unlike the way Senatorial elections are handled.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (L7hol)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at August 28, 2012 12:58 PM (jucos)
They should call the redistricting plan a tax.
Like there not saying you HAVE to vote in that district or that you are a member of that district, just that if you don't it costs $11,000. See? A tax!
Not a poll tax... a poll tax is a tax on voting. This would be a tax on haven voted in the wrong district. Voila! Fixed.
Posted by: entropy at August 28, 2012 12:59 PM (TULs6)
http://resistance.ning.com/group/massachusettscongressionaldistrict4
---
So Bawney doesn't represent P-Town? Now can that be?
Posted by: sTevo at August 28, 2012 12:59 PM (Tgw9G)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 12:59 PM (xYgm6)
Posted by: runninrebel at August 28, 2012 12:59 PM (9Uq0z)
Which was a bad idea on our part when our party worked with the NE Dems to override the Dixiecrats...
Indiana, Ohio, Illinois all engaged in racial gerrymandering at the same time....
it is just junk law
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 12:59 PM (LRFds)
Seriously.
I'm thinking a civil rights lawsuit against these three judges.
If the judiciary wants to play politics, then they've no respect due.
Posted by: RoyalOil at August 28, 2012 01:00 PM (imtbm)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 01:00 PM (05RcU)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 04:59 PM (xYgm6)
I don't think it can go to the 5th District after it has gone to the Washington District. Next stop would have to be the Supremes which could not possibly occur until October.
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 01:01 PM (YdQQY)
# 79
Indiana, Ohio, Illinois all engaged in racial gerrymandering at the same time....
Equal protection? Never heard of it.
Posted by: Charlie Gibson at August 28, 2012 01:02 PM (L7hol)
What about when that court forced the county in New York, IIRC, to switch to proportional voting (a distinctly un-American form) in order to force latino representation on the council - which included illegals who "weren't being represented"?
Our courts are total shit. Our institutions, in general, have made mockeries of themselves ... which doesn't bode well for the continuation of civilized society.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 28, 2012 01:02 PM (X3lox)
pretty much...like I said the other day on Janet N's sorority house antics...
I somehow get the feeling when the magic day comes that whites are the minority we're not gonna get the same love like this....
asshole liberals
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:02 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: JackStraw at August 28, 2012 01:03 PM (TMB3S)
It was the 2002 election where the Maryland Dems shivved Connie (she was my representative and we all loved her here despite her liberal GOP orientation), and hoo boy brother if you think what the legislature up in Annapolis did in 2000 was something just wait until you see the results from the 2010 redistricting.
It's no exaggeration to say that the gerrymandering of Maryland's congressional districts makes what went in on Illinois last year look like child's play. It is literally the most gerrymandered state in the country.
Take a look at this fucking map!: http://tinyurl.com/96dxruk
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 01:03 PM (Z2wcK)
Posted by: SouthCounty at August 28, 2012 01:04 PM (6CSR9)
"Imconstitutional" is one of those serendipitous accidents that makes perfect sense. See, it is not exactly unconstitutional, but we'll read it in there.
Posted by: imp at August 28, 2012 01:04 PM (UaxA0)
More D I believe...
Posted by: the pink cracker formerly known as the hobbit Donna at August 28, 2012 01:04 PM (W2Z3C)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at August 28, 2012 01:04 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Truman North, iPhone buffoon at August 28, 2012 01:05 PM (I2LwF)
SCotUS already said that the SA court's map did not properly defer to the Legislature and so this court struck down the legislature map again so now so far as anyone understands the SA map is the law of the land again....goddamned asshole libs.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:05 PM (LRFds)
@83,
Yeah, I misread that as "federal judge in San Antonio", but those were the ones approving the map, not where the case was tried.
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 01:05 PM (JDIKC)
Posted by: Colonel Pooteh at August 28, 2012 01:05 PM (gCvmI)
Posted by: Soona at August 28, 2012 01:06 PM (zrO2Q)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD/Whiteboard 2012 at August 28, 2012 01:07 PM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Honey the Badger Tibialis at August 28, 2012 01:07 PM (GvYeG)
Yeah, like where I called for the pre-clearance/Jim Crow sections of the Voting Rights Act to be tossed out altogether in this very thread?
Seriously Vic, everybody is fucking tired of your tough-guy "none more conservative than I" bullshit around here. Enough with the heretic-hunting.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 01:08 PM (Z2wcK)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 01:08 PM (05RcU)
Posted by: Eric Holder at August 28, 2012 01:08 PM (jucos)
Posted by: Honey the Badger Tibialis at August 28, 2012 05:07 PM (GvYeG)
------------------------------------------
Or a bucket of fried chicken.
Posted by: Soona at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (zrO2Q)
and that really is what it all boils down to...
I am sick and goddamned tired of the Donks always getting their way. When Ma Richards was in charge and the Vitamin D gang used gerrymandering to screw the GOP voter out of his representation "crickets"....but the Donks get to set some impossible to meet standard that the WORST they can do since we gained power finally is a "tie"....
this kind of crap is why I feel the nation will split.
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (05RcU)
Seriously Vic, everybody is fucking tired of your tough-guy "none more conservative than I" bullshit around here.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 05:08 PM (Z2wcK)
I'm not. Speak for yourself, Jeffie.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (X3lox)
No, technically there is no map. Or at least no map based on the current census. They will get what Obama and Holder want, go back to the pre-2010 where TX had fewer districts.
That is the whole purpose of all the challenges under Section V. Also the purpose when they initiate the suit in States not subject to Section V. It is just there they have to win, not defend.
And the real pisser is they are using our own money to do it.
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at August 28, 2012 01:09 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Soona at August 28, 2012 01:10 PM (zrO2Q)
Posted by: Justice Roberts
I dunno. It kinda feels like a penalty to me.
Posted by: Jaws at August 28, 2012 01:10 PM (4I3Uo)
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 05:08 PM (Z2wcK
Personally I am sick of your liberal bullshit and calling yourself a conservative so kiss my ass. You have NEVER supported a conservative candidate and you have never supported anything that I can see as conservative.
So kiss my ass again.
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 01:11 PM (YdQQY)
Seriously Vic, everybody is fucking tired of
your tough-guy "none more conservative than I" bullshit around here.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 05:08 PM (Z2wcK)
I'm not. Speak for yourself, Jeffie.
Posted by: ThePrimordialOrderedPair at August 28, 2012 05:09 PM (X3lox)
Ditto.
Posted by: Soona at August 28, 2012 01:11 PM (zrO2Q)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at August 28, 2012 01:12 PM (jucos)
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:13 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at August 28, 2012 05:12 PM (jucos)
Eww.
Posted by: Adam at August 28, 2012 01:13 PM (/YJYi)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at August 28, 2012 01:14 PM (OBDWE)
a fitting end to this in the event Romney wins is for him to just vacate the damn thing like BAM! and the Philly NBPP gestapo
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:14 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: JW Price at August 28, 2012 01:14 PM (PcoXF)
Vic, don't take it out on Jeff B. He didn't write the thrice-damned VRA, he's just answering a question. Texas is one of this administration's favorite targets, after all. Now the Texas GOP gets to follow through and win, or not. It was never going to be easy.
Posted by: GalosGann at August 28, 2012 01:14 PM (T3KlW)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 01:15 PM (05RcU)
No but he sure as hell entered a post where his stance was supporting it.
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 01:15 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at August 28, 2012 01:16 PM (9TTOe)
If (and, again, the article I found is not clear, here) it invalidates the already invalidated (by the SA court) maps, then it doesn't. It would then just be that the original court's ruling held up on appeal. Problem: I don't think Texas appealed that ruling- the interim maps were something we decided we could live with until 2013.
If they threw out the San Antonio interim maps, however, then I don't see how it can do anything else.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at August 28, 2012 01:17 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at August 28, 2012 01:17 PM (05RcU)
Posted by: nickless at August 28, 2012 01:17 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Vic at August 28, 2012 01:18 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Wonders what Dagny thinks at August 28, 2012 01:19 PM (9TTOe)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at August 28, 2012 01:19 PM (jucos)
# 129
Issac the Storm? Shit give me a break
If it results in Shemp on a spit, slowly roasted over a hot fire by newly converted cannibals, it should be given more air time.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at August 28, 2012 01:19 PM (L7hol)
"Seriously Vic, everybody is fucking tired of your tough-guy "none more conservative than I" bullshit around here."
Yup
Posted by: CSP at August 28, 2012 01:20 PM (1gZhP)
Posted by: s☺mej☼e at August 28, 2012 01:20 PM (HNn1q)
Posted by: polynikes at August 28, 2012 01:20 PM (m2CN7)
and it seldom ever is easy....I really don't get the court's refusal to address the rank partisan use of race as sole criterion for protection....
Bush v Vera lays the groundwork for the overturn of Sec V I think.....
Goddamned Sandy D and her "well yes it is unconsttitutional but just a bit longer" bullshit rulings
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:21 PM (LRFds)
Eddie. Bernice. Johnson.
In fact, the only Democrat I know was specifically redistricted out of his district was the much hated (by everyone, apparently, except the idiot college kids at t.u.) Lloyd Dogget.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at August 28, 2012 01:22 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: 98ZJUSMC in Johnson County laughing at Cook County at August 28, 2012 01:22 PM (Vr3cm)
72 delegates for Mitt, 3 for Luap Nor and 1 "undecided."
*bangs head on desk*
Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 28, 2012 01:22 PM (UOM48)
Fuck all of this. Just drop a piece of graph paper on the map, account for population, and those are your districts. And let the chips fall where they may.
Having rorschach districts is not only illogical, it's plain un-American and is the antithesis of a democracy. Or a Republic. Or any form of government that purports to be representative of its fucking people.
Posted by: LGoPs at August 28, 2012 01:23 PM (4x8W0)
I'm going to start carrying Ohio at 50% in my model, along with CT.
New probability of GOP taking the Senate: 94.4%
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 01:23 PM (32do8)
Posted by: the Butcher at August 28, 2012 01:24 PM (8g9qq)
Posted by: Count de Monet at August 28, 2012 01:25 PM (BAS5M)
Posted by: Adam at August 28, 2012 01:25 PM (/YJYi)
Sherrod is a personally popular mule who raged at the Cleveland gang of the Ohio GOP....
He's a barking fucking moonbat who is not as crazy as Trafficant was...
frankly Brown will tell us whether there is a legit wave building IMHO
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:27 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Serious Cat at August 28, 2012 01:27 PM (zrpqj)
Posted by: Brother Cavil presents at August 28, 2012 01:29 PM (GBXon)
OMG. My state, Georgia, is the Stupid State.
72 delegates for Mitt, 3 for Luap Nor and 1 "undecided."
*bangs head on desk*
Posted by: Jane D'oh at August 28, 2012 05:22 PM (UOM4
Lol. That "one" is that guy/gal in line ahead of you who starts looking at the fast food menu only when the cashier says, "next in line, please." And can't make a decision. During the lunch rush.
Posted by: Count de Monet at August 28, 2012 01:29 PM (BAS5M)
http://www.unityparty.us/iowa-congressional-districts.htm
Posted by: Jay in Ames at August 28, 2012 01:31 PM (UEEex)
That's not an electoral map. This sock is an electoral map.
Posted by: a canadian holding a bowie knife at August 28, 2012 01:31 PM (vDl/w)
Sometimes it's better to walk away.
True story: a couple of weeks ago I'm playing golf at Mackinac Island and there's this midget in front of us playing a round alone. When we get to the third green, I see him on One again. Then, when I'm on the sixth tee, he's asking to play through.
I chunked my drive and the midget kinda snickers and says "You hit that one a little chubby, huh?" and drives through. I just gave him a nod and a smile and walked back to my cart.
My FIL is incredulous, saying "I can't believe you didn't say anything to that little fat bastard - Usually you would have told him HE was a little chubby."
"I was being the bigger man."
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at August 28, 2012 01:32 PM (JDIKC)
Posted by: toby928© at August 28, 2012 01:33 PM (QupBk)
Take a look at this fucking map!: http://tinyurl.com/96dxruk"
Maryland is rapidly approaching Washington, Baltimore, and Not Baltimore. The Eastern Shore and Carroll County in the same district? Wow, that takes balls.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 01:33 PM (32do8)
It really is an abomination. Especially when you consider that Maryland has been controlled by Democrats for generations and is effectively a single-party state. And so long as Baltimore City and the DC suburbs continue to vote for more money to fall from the sky, it always will be a Democratic lock.
But the Democratic Party has never been one to rely on an honest vote. And those troublesome rural counties must occasionally be reminded who rules whom.
Incidentally, I've always thought it was odd that Maryland isn't covered by the VRA. Had Lincoln not imposed martial law, Maryland might well have seceded. Maryland was occupied by the Union Army on the orders of President Lincoln. Confederate sympathy was so high that rioters in Baltimore attacked Federal troops when they marched through to city.
Posted by: GalosGann at August 28, 2012 01:36 PM (T3KlW)
Posted by: nickless at August 28, 2012 01:37 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: cynder ella at August 28, 2012 01:40 PM (oZfic)
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 01:40 PM (32do8)
My wife just texted me to let me know Romney got the nomination. She is so cute when she gets excited.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 01:42 PM (32do8)
Yes, but Brown v Mandel is a little different...
Brown actually won some populist GOP support in Ohio God only knows how but he did....
Ohio has the MOST donk friendly indys in a balanced state I know of....I am watching that race like a hawk to guesstimate the trends and movement of the undecideds...
Posted by: sven10077 at August 28, 2012 01:42 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Auntie Doodles at August 28, 2012 04:42 PM (FA8CK)
Most devices allow you to turn off "predictive typing". Use the search term, how to turn off predictive text on ipad, and there are lots of articles.
Posted by: Will Be Taking Applications and Assimilating The Love-slaves at August 28, 2012 01:43 PM (kXoT0)
Luap Nor has to be devastated. No pudding for you, asshole.
Posted by: Soona at August 28, 2012 01:45 PM (zrO2Q)
It was 2006 and we were in the middle of Foleymania. Ask Montana why they elected Tester.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at August 28, 2012 01:46 PM (32do8)
TO: Federal Government/DOJ/ Federal Judges/ Obama
RE: Redistricting decision
Sirs:
Get bent!
Posted by: Yip in Texas at August 28, 2012 01:51 PM (Mrdk1)
Think about that statement. Now you whities who live in districts run by crazy liberals...do you have the ability to elect *your* preferred candidate?
I'm just...
You know those cartoons with steam coming out of someone's ears? Yeah.
Posted by: DangerGirl at August 28, 2012 01:59 PM (GrtrJ)
You're a goddamned fool who types first and thinks last, you realize that? Where in this thread did I SUPPORT THIS OR THE VRA IN ANY WAY?
What I did say is that under the current legal regime this wasn't a wholly unexpected outcome. That's called "not having my goddamn head in the sand like a Happy Talk Nothing Bad Can Ever Happen Conservative." Also, being familiar with the general contours of federal election law in my professional capacity.
I then pointed out that the whole damn system is rotten and should be tossed out.
But then since you flunked reading comprehension this not-all-that-subtle point was apparently lost on you.
Hey, you want to come at me? Feel free, but you better bring your A-game. Attacking me for positions I didn't take and don't hold -- and which can be DEFINITIVELY PROVEN WITHOUT LEAVING THE THREAD -- just makes you look like a retard, regardless of your ability to summon the support of similarly inclined cheering section who are willing to overlook logic. Don't come at me with that weak shit, son.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2012 02:02 PM (/COnL)
# 143
Having rorschach districts is not only illogical, it's plain un-American and is the antithesis of a democracy. Or a Republic. Or any form of government that purports to be representative of its fucking people.
Yep. Once you're shoe-horned into one of those Rorschach districts, they're just telling you which party your next 'Representative' will be a member of. Hardly democratic, or representative.
At Large representation fixes that...though yeah, it does introduce other problems.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at August 28, 2012 02:07 PM (L7hol)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2012 02:17 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: blindside at August 28, 2012 02:17 PM (x7g7t)
"Texas used an 'improper standard or methodology' when determining
whether minorities had the ability to elect their preferred candidates."
I really hope that irony hurts sometimes.
HEY! You know what term is commonly used for the people who supported the candidate that came in second? THE MINORITY.
IF THEY WERE THE MAJORITY, THEIR CANDIDATE WOULD HAVE WON.
But no. Minority is now raysis dog whissle. So time for the self renouncin'.
Posted by: reason at August 28, 2012 02:18 PM (V40IZ)
Yeah, I live in LLoyd fuckin Doggetts district. My Congressional rep is a marxist. I have no representation. I cannot remember if I ever have.
Just because I am gerrymandered into Austin.
Posted by: Artruen at August 28, 2012 02:20 PM (fDGF1)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2012 02:20 PM (bxiXv)
Federal Judges Strike Down Texas Redistricting Plan
Another Prop. 8 type deal.
There are times I wonder why we ever bother voting. If we get it wrong, as judged by some clowns in black muumuus, they just invalidate our decisions until we get our minds right.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at August 28, 2012 02:24 PM (oX7vY)
"I thank the members of the House of Representatives for reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act. Soon, the Senate will take up the legislation. I look forward to the Senate passing this bill promptly, without amendment so I can sign it into law,"
Republican President G W Bush speaking to the NAACP, 7-20-06
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at August 28, 2012 02:36 PM (kdS6q)
Repeat after me:
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
the state - no matter it the judiciary, the legislature, or any executive branch or agency - will always protect the left and will always frustrate or destroy any right-of-left interest.
This explains everything about our federal government today.
Don't believe me? Just apply it to any issue, action, or matter taken on by the federal government in the last few years.
And it won't change. This is the way it will be.
You get no relief. Because from the State's perspective, you are the enemy. we are all the enemy.
Again:"THE STATE IS THE LEFT AND THE LEFT IS THE STATE."
Posted by: Harold at August 28, 2012 02:56 PM (2qDRX)
(Please note that my numbers are imprecise, but reasonably accurate from what I remember of this analysis I last did almost 2-years ago. With that caveat, here we go...)
Democrats in Texas contested roughly 80% of the CD's in Texas and racked-up about 45% of the votes in them. They won about 45% of the congressional seats. That, to me, seems about right and I suspect the new map would have led to similar results.
Now I live in Massachusetts. Last time around the GOP challenged in 8 of the 10 CD's and won, about, 35% of the vote - and was completely shut out. 0-for-10. The new CD's drawn entirely by Democrats, approved entirely by Democrats, and to be overseen at election time entirely by Democrats, have made 7 of the 9 resulting CD's (thank God we at least lost one) entirely uncompetitive for the GOP - meaning that, at best, the GOP could only reasonably expect to compete (much less win) 22% of the state's congressional delegation.
So Texas, where the congressional delegation roughly reflects the vote of the state? Not Democrat enough.
But Massachusetts, where the Democrats are guaranteed 88% of the congressional delegation - and will be favoured to win them all - even while winning only about 65% of the congressional vote? That's just peachy-keen.
So no, I frankly don't give a flying Shiite about the Voting Rights Act and other similar creations of Constitutional Fiction that allow Democrats the freedom to gerrymander congressional and other districts while the GOP has to play by their rules. Everywhere. All the time.
Posted by: DocJ at August 28, 2012 03:08 PM (V20sy)
Those loonies made up their own map (totally against our constitution) and said go by it.
The Great Greg Abbot (as he will become known) said 'No way Jose(s)' and won on appeal.
Greg was on the radio this afternoon. He will take this to the SCOTUS and he will win. (It's in his record look it up if you don't believe me)
NOW lay off SA damn it.
Posted by: Blacksmith8✡ at August 28, 2012 05:10 PM (O2Gu6)
Posted by: Manolo at August 28, 2012 05:13 PM (PttbO)
"...The question is not whether I can make words mean so may different things, the question is - who is the Master?"
Posted by: Shoey at August 28, 2012 06:11 PM (m6OUa)
Promote folks to learn how to work together -- allow winning candidates with votes to spare to donate their spare votes to other candidates at a 50% discount -- two votes for A gives one vote to B (and takes two away from A). This might cut down on the divisiveness of campaigning..
No more safe seats -- everyone has to campaign on the issues that they feel important enough for them to represent. If you want to represent the big city fine -- do it. If you want to represent the rural area interests -- go there.
No more gerrymandering -- if a politician can run a special interest campaign to get elected by a special interest, fine... Beware -- special interest campaigns may or may not get help from others if they fall short by bad mouthing everyone else in sight.
Optionally, alternate open and district elections every other session. Or have half one year be districts, the other half open, then switch the next session. Stir the pot, keep the coals of independence and creativity stoked, rather than stifled by well established backroom special interest deals.
Think out of the box... Clearly what we've currently have is not working for anyone but to maintain pretty much the current power structure no matter who that represents. Let the people decide -- open up the elections, get rid of divide and conquer.
Posted by: drfredc at August 28, 2012 08:55 PM (0L8oU)
And I'd hardly call cumulative voting "un-American"--it is commonly used in the corporate setting so that large minority stockholders can get a seat on the board of directors. (Its summary: you get as many votes as there are seats--or seats times shares, in corporate use--and can divide them among one or more candidates any way you like.)
Posted by: silverpie at August 29, 2012 05:01 AM (LbwgI)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2134 seconds, 316 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Not First at August 28, 2012 12:40 PM (afwhe)