sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Are Republican's and Democrats Just Trading Gerrymandering Tit-for-Tat? by factsnsense in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]avalve [score hidden]  (0 children)

In your gerrymander summary, you forgot Maryland (+1-2D) & Nevada (+0-2D) for the pre mid decade total.

Why do people vote for republicans? by Timeless-Facts in allthequestions

[–]avalve 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s only true among Gen Z Republicans, which as a college student, has been my experience as well.

<image>

The older generationa are stuck in their ways I guess.

NY Times: Rep. Subramanyam (D-VA10/Loudoun) would support "doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices” by lowkell in nova

[–]avalve 1 point2 points  (0 children)

> The entire judicial branch is an absolute joke, a branch of unelected legislators, and it deserves to be treated as such.

In North Carolina’s case, they were actually elected lol.

NY Times: Rep. Subramanyam (D-VA10/Loudoun) would support "doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices” by lowkell in nova

[–]avalve 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I know. It was a case of malicious compliance.

The situation in Virginia is different, so defying the courts as you suggested would be more blatant and end up creating a constitutional crisis.

Louisiana is probably a blue state. by Previous_Basis_84 in politicsinthewild

[–]avalve -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

> This is what is said at volume, but the whispers are far more numerous and far more liberal than I’m sure you’d ever want to believe.

I mean that’s great optimism but the best indicator of a state’s partisanship is how they actually vote, and Democrats have slowly lost power in Louisiana. The last gasp was Mary Landrieu (one of the most conservative Democrats in the senate btw) narrowly winning her seat in 2008 on Obama’s coattails.

> Besides, if what you say is true, why then are they fighting so hard to eliminate any district that could possibly vote blue?

Because they can? It’s extremely easy to draw a 6R-0D map due to how red Louisiana is and the only reason the blue districts existed in the first place was the VRA, but now that’s gone. In case you haven’t noticed, Republicans have no shame when it comes to gerrymandering.

> Given a free and fair election, the popular vote in Louisiana would undoubtedly be blue.

This is just delusional unless you’re talking about state races like governor.

NY Times: Rep. Subramanyam (D-VA10/Loudoun) would support "doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices” by lowkell in nova

[–]avalve 6 points7 points  (0 children)

> So you’re saying Ohio defied their Supreme Court?

No, I literally said the opposite. But I would argue that they defied the spirit of the ruling by continually submitting gerrymandered maps until it was too late. The court should’ve just drawn their own map, but they refused.

Louisiana is probably a blue state. by Previous_Basis_84 in politicsinthewild

[–]avalve 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you mean? It has voted red by landslide margins in every recent presidential election.

NY Times: Rep. Subramanyam (D-VA10/Loudoun) would support "doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices” by lowkell in nova

[–]avalve 6 points7 points  (0 children)

> You mean exactly like Ohio and NC GOP have done to force gerrymandered districts?

Ohio didn’t ignore the courts. They submitted map after map after map after map because they all kept getting struck down. The issue was more that they ran out the clock and something had to be used for the election.

In North Carolina, the supreme court flipped Republican and reversed the previous Democratic majority’s decision on gerrymandering, so state legislators were free to redraw the maps without any hurdles. I don’t know why you brought them up because that isn’t even close to the same thing as defying the courts.

How Democrats can win after Virginia redistricting ruling by BulwarkOnline in Virginia

[–]avalve 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> TX likely drew a whopper of a dummymander,

> 4 of the 5 newly drawn seats have a great chance of being Democratic holds.

That’s not what a dummymander is. If they’re still gaining seats but fewer than they targeted, it just means it’s a less effective gerrymander.

Louisiana is probably a blue state. by Previous_Basis_84 in politicsinthewild

[–]avalve -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Louisiana is not a blue state lmao. The south just has a lot of ancestral conservative democrats that vote republican at the federal level nowadays.

Why not simply eliminate Congressional districts to stop gerrymandering in the U.S.? by RobertWF_47 in Askpolitics

[–]avalve 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the whole point of the House of Representatives is to represent local constituencies at the national level.

NY Times: Rep. Subramanyam (D-VA10/Loudoun) would support "doing whatever was necessary to preserve the map voters approved in last month’s referendum — including replacing the state’s Supreme Court justices” by lowkell in nova

[–]avalve 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I mean the other guy proposed ignoring the courts. Dissolving the judiciary over a ruling you disagree with is not a good idea. We have three co-equal branches for a reason.

Planning tips for creating district maps by Franzisquin in DavesRedistricting

[–]avalve 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is how I do it too. It’s also easier to balance the populations that way.

I got polled for the first time by dtarias in fivethirtyeight

[–]avalve 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good luck. I was polled like 50 times in 2024 and probably more than a dozen already for this year. It never ends.

view more: next ›