Virginia Redistricting PASSED!!

[Aardvark86]

Double A: So the net legal effect of all of this, at least at this point in time, is to preserve the status quo ante (i.e., no redistricting), right? What is the political composition of Virginia's Supreme Court, assuming that is discernible?

That's probably technically correct for the moment, both in the sense that (i) it hasn't actually been implemented and (ii) at least yesterday's order barring certification presumably hasn't been stayed yet (though the preceding orders have). If that order is quickly stayed (which seems likely), the state would not be barred from taking actions to move the process forward. (Note: I suppose it's conceivable that VA supremes might leave the stay on certification in place, in contrast to the prior orders which sought to stay the actual vote, pending the appeal.) The timing of state court litigation, and any potential Scotus appeal (BS or otherwise) could then conceivably prove important. Remember, the closer you get to an election, the less Scotus is inclined to approve the implementation of last-minute map changes. Not that I think this will happen, but here's a nightmare scenario for the paranoid: suppose the Virginia Supremes move at a normal pace and uphold the referendum, and then some sort of appeal (bs or otherwise) is filed with scotus, accompanied by a stay request to the Circuit Justice for the Fourth Circuit, a fellow by the name of ... John Roberts. The stay is granted, for reasons political or otherwise (meaning old lines apply), but...the argument sessions end next week, so the likelihood of the court being able to issue a decision in time for VA to implement is too short under the recent case law. (Sounds like a certain recent NYT article, doesn't it?)

The Virginia Supreme Court is not an elected body. It is, however, appointed by the legislature, and I think the judges serve 15 year terms. I think it leans left based solely on the control of the legislatures that appointed the majority of the judges, and i saw something the other day to the effect that two "republican appointed" judges may be up for renewal during the term of the current legislature which of course is democratically controlled. I don't know whether that means they flip them the bird, or start sucking up.

 

[JohnHughsPartner]

Read the tea leaves dumbass and by all means, bless us with your evidence that proves it won't. Do you have a trans tweet for that?

How Democrats flipped a ruby red Senate seat in North Texas

Observers of the race said Rehmet’s working-class appeal, along with Latino and suburban backlash to GOP policies, fueled his win in a district Donald Trump carried by 17 points.

www.texastribune.org

You live in a fantasy world of rainbows and kweer unicorns. Seriously, wtf is wrong with you? I don’t need evidence you phucking retard. It’s common sense. There’s a reason you never hear Reps talking about turning California Red. Jesus , is there not a No King March you need to be preparing for lol

 

[ClemsonCO14]

so you gone from saying there was no evidence to admitting there was some now, but not enough to matter? RRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIgGHtttttttt!!!!!!

I dismissed it because it’s the definition of statistically irrelevant - illegals voting have never changed the outcome of an election. The conservative Heritage Foundation’s nationwide database of alleged instances of voter fraud identifies only 99 total cases of suspected noncitizen voting going back to the year 2000.

You’re saying Texas is justified in gerrymandering mid-decade WITHOUT a vote (unlike CA and VA) due to a HUNDRED illegal immigrants voting in the last TWENTY YEARS across the ENTIRE US?

I thought you had poor critical thinking skills, but I didn’t think you might be re******. Now I’m not so sure. Hahahaha

 

[LafayetteBear]

Double A: I think you will prove to be prescient with respect to the involvement of the SCOTUS. Given the Court's recent history and its frequent use of the emergency docket (often without any explanation), I suspect that Roberts will accept an appeal and issue a stay. The Court may well follow its recent precedent and decline to get involved with redistricting by calling it a strictly political question, which would allow the referendum to stand, but almost certainly too late for it to apply to this election. IMHO, that would amount to a pyrrhic victory for Virginia Democrats.

 

[dpic73]

You live in a fantasy world of rainbows and kweer unicorns. Seriously, wtf is wrong with you? I don’t need evidence you phucking retard. It’s common sense. There’s a reason you never hear Reps talking about turning California Red. Jesus , is there not a No King March you need to be preparing for lol

So my proof of the leftward shift included:

• His tanking numbers with Hispanics
• The newly drawn districts included large swaths of Hispanics in S. Texas that are no longer reliable
• Democrat over-performance by 30+ points in a ruby red district that Trump previously won by 17 pts.

Your intelligent repudiation included:

• rainbows
• kweer unicorns
• phucking retard
• No Kings marches
• No proof of a blue seat flipping in California

You could hide your own Easter eggs

 

[GDead_Tiger]

Do you have data behind your claims?

Of course he doesn't. He believes the Democrats are behind everything bad that has happened to Trump and that the SPLC funds the KKK and other extremist groups

 

[Aardvark86]

Double A: I think you will prove to be prescient with respect to the involvement of the SCOTUS. Given the Court's recent history and its frequent use of the emergency docket (often without any explanation), I suspect that Roberts will accept an appeal and issue a stay. The Court may well follow its recent precedent and decline to get involved with redistricting by calling it a strictly political question, which would allow the referendum to stand, but almost certainly too late for it to apply to this election. IMHO, that would amount to a pyrrhic victory for Virginia Democrats.

If there were a more obvious federal hook to the case, I might think it more realistic. But I'm sure there are navel-gazing appellate lawyers that are poring over novel appellate theories as we speak.

 

[dpic73]

 

[JohnHughsPartner]

So my proof of the leftward shift included:

• His tanking numbers with Hispanics
• The newly drawn districts included large swaths of Hispanics in S. Texas that are no longer reliable
• Democrat over-performance by 30+ points in a ruby red district that Trump previously won by 17 pts.

Your intelligent repudiation included:

• rainbows
• kweer unicorns
• phucking retard
• No Kings marches
• No proof of a blue seat flipping in California

You could hide your own Easter eggs

So my proof of the leftward shift included:

• His tanking numbers with Hispanics
• The newly drawn districts included large swaths of Hispanics in S. Texas that are no longer reliable
• Democrat over-performance by 30+ points in a ruby red district that Trump previously won by 17 pts.

Your intelligent repudiation included:

• rainbows
• kweer unicorns
• phucking retard
• No Kings marches
• No proof of a blue seat flipping in California

You could hide your own Easter eggs

“His tanking numbers with Hispanics
The newly drawn districts included large swaths of Hispanics in S. Texas that are no longer reliable
Democrat over-performance by 30+ points in a ruby red district that Trump previously won by 17 pts.”


You obviously pulled these from a far left dumba$$ that probably had Kamala winning Texas in 2024 lol.
I’ll tell you what… let’s do a too early perma ban bet on who takes Texas in 2028. I’ll also spot you 1 million on popular

 

[Chumpsky]

Good, the Democrats need to start campaigning everywhere they've avoided the last decade or so.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Have you not been paying attention? They are pissed about the way the ICE raids have been carried out as well as affordability issues.

Some key groups moved toward Trump in 2024. Here’s what they think now, according to AP-NORC polls

A new AP-NORC poll finds that many of the groups that helped elect Donald Trump as president again are deeply unhappy with his performance.

www.news4jax.com

Dude the Hispanics that voted for him support the ice raids. It's not like he didn't tell everyone what he was going to do. Promises kept.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Why are democrats the only ones who want to ban partisan gerrymandering?

Not true.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Oh really? Then explain this

View attachment 1268552

FAKE NEWS!!!

 

[dpic73]

Dude the Hispanics that voted for him support the ice raids. It's not like he didn't tell everyone what he was going to do. Promises kept.

Then why does every single poll that measures their approval show the same thing? And why did 79% of them vote for Rehmet instead of the Trump endorsed Republican in Dallas?

"Precincts in Senate District 9 with a majority of Hispanic residents swung on average 34 percentage points toward Rehmet compared to the margin garnered by the Democratic nominee in 2022, when the seat was last on the ballot.

Across the entire district, VoteHub estimated that Rehmet captured about 79% of the Hispanic vote, a 26-point improvement on the 53% that went for Democrat Kamala Harris in 2024 — the biggest shift of any racial group in the district."

See how Latinos helped Texas Democrats win Senate District 9

Democrat Taylor Rehmet’s stunning upset victory is explained in part by the massive swing by Latino voters toward his campaign compared to other Democrats in recent elections.

www.texastribune.org

Get your head out of your butt!

 

[dpic73]

FAKE NEWS!!!

 

[TigerGrowls]

Then why does every single poll that measures their approval show the same thing? And why did 79% of them vote for Rehmet instead of the Trump endorsed Republican in Dallas?

"Precincts in Senate District 9 with a majority of Hispanic residents swung on average 34 percentage points toward Rehmet compared to the margin garnered by the Democratic nominee in 2022, when the seat was last on the ballot.

Across the entire district, VoteHub estimated that Rehmet captured about 79% of the Hispanic vote, a 26-point improvement on the 53% that went for Democrat Kamala Harris in 2024 — the biggest shift of any racial group in the district."

See how Latinos helped Texas Democrats win Senate District 9

Democrat Taylor Rehmet’s stunning upset victory is explained in part by the massive swing by Latino voters toward his campaign compared to other Democrats in recent elections.

www.texastribune.org

Get your head out of your butt!

FAKE NEWS!!!

 

[DailyBuck7]

View attachment 1266850

Typical low knowledge leftists. No knowledge of history. Here is redistricting the Dem way.

"
After the 1980 census California became entitled to 45 congressional districts, a growth of two.[4] Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the governorship but were feeling vulnerable after former Governor Reagan had won California by a landslide in the 1980 presidential election. Democratic Congressman Phillip Burton and new State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown devised a redistricting plan that would result in five new safe Democratic seats.[5] Congressman Burton would boast that the bizarrely shaped map, which included a 385-sided district, was "My contribution to modern art".[6] Reacting to what was called "one of the most notorious gerrymanders" of the decade,[7] Republicans successfully placed a veto referendum on the primary ballot and California voters overwhelmingly rejected the legislature's redistricting plans in the June 1982 election, the same election that enacted the California Constitution's Victim's Bill of Rights.[8]

A majority of the California Supreme Court justices, however, had been appointed by Governor Jerry Brown and a sharply fractured court ordered the rejected districts to be used in the November election, only because it was "practicable".[9] Democrats won 60% of the congressional seats despite only taking 49.9% of the statewide vote.[10] Democrats still lost the statewide elections, losing the governorship and incumbent Governor Jerry Brown losing his U.S. Senate bid to San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson. Governor Brown responded by calling an extraordinary legislative session, amending a previously passed bill with the redistricting plan that had just been rejected by the electorate, and signing the redistricting plan into law hours before being replaced by Republican George Deukmejian.[11] https://www.bing.com/search?form=MOZLBR&pc=MOZR&q=wikipedia+on+california+redistricting

 

[TigerGrowls]

Why are democrats the only ones who want to ban partisan gerrymandering?

You want to stand on this apparently ignorant comment??? This post doesn't even mention Illinois which is heavily gerrymandered to favor democrats.



DEMOCRAT GERRYMANDERING HYPOCRISY ON FULL DISPLAY:

While Democrats scream about “fair maps,” look at these blue states:

- Massachusetts: 36% Republican → 0 seats
- Connecticut: 42% → 0 seats
- Maine: 46% → 0 seats
- New Hampshire: 48% → 0 seats

Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, Vermont, New Mexico, same story.

 

[TigerGrowls]

BREAKING:VIRGINIA REDISTRICTING VOTE RIDDLED WITH MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD - Dozens of poll workers who oversaw the special redistricting vote in Virginia earlier this week have come forward to allege that the election was rampant with OUTCOME DETERMINATIVE FRAUD, including TENS OF THOUSANDS of dead voters and illegal aliens who voted in heavily Democrat precincts as well as the alleged use of DOMINION VOTING MACHINES at polling locations throughout the state. Governor Abigail Spanberger is said to have received LUCRATIVE KICKBACKS from the corrupt electronic voting machines company who infamously helped RIG the 2020 presidential election in exchange for awarding Dominion the contract to be used to conduct elections throughout Virginia. President Trump was right again... The Democrats just STOLE a ballot measure in order to further their brazen effort to STEAL November's midterms from us in broad daylight. THE TREASON STOPS WHEN THE ARRESTS START! Do YOU agree?

 

[TigerGrowls]

A lot of people are celebrating a Tazewell Co. Judge stopping the certification of the Virginia redistricting referendum.


That's great, but it was also inevitable.


That same judge had already ruled in two separate cases that it was unconstitutional and laid out SIX different ways in which it was so.


The Virginia Supreme Court stayed his injunction and allowed the election to continue, acknowledging they would have to address this IF the referendum won.


This is like taking a dangerous toy away from a kid after he's played with it for a little bit and enjoyed it, rather than not allowing him to play with the dangerous toy in the first place because it was a known threat to his safety.


This is not how our justice system should be. This is going to cause a lot more chaos if and when the VA Supreme Court strikes this election down rather than ruling on the merits before it happened.

 

[GDead_Tiger]

You want to stand on this apparently ignorant comment??? This post doesn't even mention Illinois which is heavily gerrymandered to favor democrats.



DEMOCRAT GERRYMANDERING HYPOCRISY ON FULL DISPLAY:

While Democrats scream about “fair maps,” look at these blue states:

- Massachusetts: 36% Republican → 0 seats
- Connecticut: 42% → 0 seats
- Maine: 46% → 0 seats
- New Hampshire: 48% → 0 seats

Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, Vermont, New Mexico, same story.

Sorry this guy is a moron. Just because there are 0 congressional districts held by a republican doesn't mean they are gerrymandered.

1) Yes, I stand by that comment. Democrats in congress have written a bill to ban partisan gerrymandering. Whenever it comes up Republicans don't want to sign it.

2) Many of these states are not partisan gerrymandered. There are simply not enough Republicans in large enough concentrations to get someone elected. They are too spread out. The states are too liberal. Many of these are also tiny states with 1 or 2 CDs.

3) MA hasn't had a Republican congressman since 1997. CT since 2009. Maine only has 2 CDs, one flipped red to blue in in the 2018 midterm. It is a Trump district but they keep re-electing a Democrat. NH has two districts and they've been blue since the 2016 election. Delaware has 1 CD, of course a state that is 60% Democrat has a Democratic congressman. RI has 2 CDs and they've been blue since the 90s. VT has 1 CD. Of course the representative is a Democrat. HI has 2 CDs. They have only ever had 2 Rs in congress ever. NM has 3 CDs and the GOP has been historically competitive in one of them.

4) Do you even know what partisan gerrymandering is? The GOP is moribund in many of these states. The voters don't like electing Republicans there. You can't draw a map to get a Republican district there. The only way you can do it is to do Partisan gerrymandering. Go look at the maps of these states.

5) Partisan gerrymandering is an issue in states with large racial and rural polarization aka the South and the Midwest. Southern whites vote for the GOP at a rate far greater than the rest of whites nationally, and, due to historical issues, there is a decent amount of racial separation in those states. It is very easy to do partisan gerrymandering in those contexts.

 

[DailyBuck7]

A lot of people are celebrating a Tazewell Co. Judge stopping the certification of the Virginia redistricting referendum.


That's great, but it was also inevitable.


That same judge had already ruled in two separate cases that it was unconstitutional and laid out SIX different ways in which it was so.


The Virginia Supreme Court stayed his injunction and allowed the election to continue, acknowledging they would have to address this IF the referendum won.


This is like taking a dangerous toy away from a kid after he's played with it for a little bit and enjoyed it, rather than not allowing him to play with the dangerous toy in the first place because it was a known threat to his safety.


This is not how our justice system should be. This is going to cause a lot more chaos if and when the VA Supreme Court strikes this election down rather than ruling on the merits before it happened.

Unfortunately, the chances of the Virginia supreme Court invalidating the election in my mind are very small. According to aardvark88, it is a majority democratic supreme court. In Ohio over the past 35 years when there has been disputes over redistricting, the justices sided with their party 99.9% of the time. Only on one occasion, did a retiring Republican Justice side with the Democratic redistricting plan. Little reason to believe it is different in Virginia although in Ohio the justices are elected while in Virginia apparently they are pointed by the legislature.

I would add that the genie is out of the bottle and the US supreme Court will have to limit this on both sides. Otherwise, we are just a banana Republic.

 

[GDead_Tiger]

Unfortunately, the chances of the Virginia supreme Court invalidating the election in my mind are very small. According to aardvark88, it is a majority democratic supreme court. In Ohio over the past 35 years when there has been disputes over redistricting, the justices sided with their party 99.9% of the time. Only on one occasion, did a retiring Republican Justice side with the Democratic redistricting plan. Little reason to believe it is different in Virginia although in Ohio the justices are elected while in Virginia apparently they are pointed by the legislature.

I would add that the genie is out of the bottle and the US supreme Court will have to limit this on both sides. Otherwise, we are just a banana Republic.

SCOTUS already said that Texas's gerrymandering is OK and I believe said the same about California, no way they touch Virginia.

 

[DailyBuck7]

BREAKING:VIRGINIA REDISTRICTING VOTE RIDDLED WITH MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD - Dozens of poll workers who oversaw the special redistricting vote in Virginia earlier this week have come forward to allege that the election was rampant with OUTCOME DETERMINATIVE FRAUD, including TENS OF THOUSANDS of dead voters and illegal aliens who voted in heavily Democrat precincts as well as the alleged use of DOMINION VOTING MACHINES at polling locations throughout the state. Governor Abigail Spanberger is said to have received LUCRATIVE KICKBACKS from the corrupt electronic voting machines company who infamously helped RIG the 2020 presidential election in exchange for awarding Dominion the contract to be used to conduct elections throughout Virginia. President Trump was right again... The Democrats just STOLE a ballot measure in order to further their brazen effort to STEAL November's midterms from us in broad daylight. THE TREASON STOPS WHEN THE ARRESTS START! Do YOU agree?

Let's hope that they substantiate their claims and do the grunt work. Trump did himself no favors in the 2020 election challenge to the Georgia votes when he claimed that because his rallies were bigger he won the vote.

 

[DailyBuck7]

SCOTUS already said that Texas's gerrymandering is OK and I believe said the same about California, no way they touch Virginia.

They have no alternative but to get involved. This is a joke that disenfranchises about 47% of the population. Every state will do this now whether it is Republican or Democrat unless some restrictions are placed on partisan gerrymandering. It will be a race to the bottom.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Typical low knowledge leftists. No knowledge of history. Here is redistricting the Dem way.

"
After the 1980 census California became entitled to 45 congressional districts, a growth of two.[4] Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature and the governorship but were feeling vulnerable after former Governor Reagan had won California by a landslide in the 1980 presidential election. Democratic Congressman Phillip Burton and new State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown devised a redistricting plan that would result in five new safe Democratic seats.[5] Congressman Burton would boast that the bizarrely shaped map, which included a 385-sided district, was "My contribution to modern art".[6] Reacting to what was called "one of the most notorious gerrymanders" of the decade,[7] Republicans successfully placed a veto referendum on the primary ballot and California voters overwhelmingly rejected the legislature's redistricting plans in the June 1982 election, the same election that enacted the California Constitution's Victim's Bill of Rights.[8]

A majority of the California Supreme Court justices, however, had been appointed by Governor Jerry Brown and a sharply fractured court ordered the rejected districts to be used in the November election, only because it was "practicable".[9] Democrats won 60% of the congressional seats despite only taking 49.9% of the statewide vote.[10] Democrats still lost the statewide elections, losing the governorship and incumbent Governor Jerry Brown losing his U.S. Senate bid to San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson. Governor Brown responded by calling an extraordinary legislative session, amending a previously passed bill with the redistricting plan that had just been rejected by the electorate, and signing the redistricting plan into law hours before being replaced by Republican George Deukmejian.[11] https://www.bing.com/search?form=MOZLBR&pc=MOZR&q=wikipedia+on+california+redistricting

Buck: "Low knowledge?" Sigh ... You focus on ancient history while ignoring more recent (and relevant) history. Which is understandable, because it undercuts your Trumpian narrative.

California has had a nonpartisan redistricting commission since 2008. That commission served its intended purpose. Unfortunately for Republicans, the electorate in California has grown steadily bluer during that period, putting a serious crimp in the electoral fortunes of Republican candidates. Here's some information on that nonpartisan commission:

California created a nonpartisan, independent redistricting commission in 2008 by passing Proposition 11 (the Voters FIRST Act), which shifted authority to draw state legislative districts from the legislature to a 14-member commission. Voters expanded this commission's power to include congressional districts in 2010 by passing Proposition 20.
California Citizens Redistricting Commission (.gov) +4

Key details regarding California’s redistricting system:

• The Commission: Known as the Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC), it consists of 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans, and 4 unaffiliated/third-party voters.
• Purpose: The goal was to eliminate partisan gerrymandering and increase competition, moving the map-drawing power away from the Legislature.
• Implementation: The first commission maps, based on the 2010 census, took effect for the 2012 election cycle.
• Expanded Scope: While Prop 11 (2008) covered state Assembly and Senate districts, Prop 20 (2010) added congressional districts to the commission's duties.

Further, Proposition 50, which California voters approved with a 64.4% affirmative vote, gave redistricting authority back to the California legislature only if Texas went through with its non voter-approved redistricting plan, and even then only for a few years.

Nice try, though ...

 

[GDead_Tiger]

They have no alternative but to get involved. This is a joke that disenfranchises about 47% of the population. Every state will do this now whether it is Republican or Democrat unless some restrictions are placed on partisan gerrymandering. It will be a race to the bottom.

Only one political party is interested in stopping partisan gerrymandering and has drawn up bills to do so.

Also, Florida state republicans are highly skeptical of DeSantis wanting to do gerrymandering. They know it will probably backfire

 

[dpic73]

They have no alternative but to get involved. This is a joke that disenfranchises about 47% of the population. Every state will do this now whether it is Republican or Democrat unless some restrictions are placed on partisan gerrymandering. It will be a race to the bottom.

You don't get to complain about the outcome when you were opposed to the solution.


There isn't a single clean count of every anti-gerrymandering bill Democrats have ever introduced, but the record shows a clear and recurring pattern across multiple Congresses. Here's a summary of the major legislative efforts:

Key Bills Introduced by Democrats:

1. Redistricting Reform Act (2005–present) — This legislation, championed by Rep. Zoe Lofgren since 2005, would prohibit mid-decade redistricting nationwide and require every state to establish independent redistricting commissions. Zoe Lofgren
2. Independent Redistricting Commission Act (2018) — House Democrats led by Reps. Zoe Lofgren, Alan Lowenthal, Julia Brownley, and John Sarbanes introduced legislation to end partisan gerrymandering and reform the nation's redistricting system, requiring each state to establish an independent, multi-party commission. House
3. For the People Act / H.R. 1 (2019, 2021) — Originally introduced by Congressman John Sarbanes in 2019 on behalf of the newly elected Democratic House majority, this sweeping bill included a ban on partisan gerrymandering. The House passed it in 2019 by a party-line vote, but it was blocked in the Republican-controlled Senate. Democrats reintroduced it in 2021 in the 117th Congress. Wikipedia
4. Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act (2021–2022) — This omnibus democracy bill included anti-gerrymandering reforms and narrowly failed on the Senate floor due to the filibuster, which the Brennan Center noted would have had significant consequences for the 2022 midterms. Brennan Center for Justice
5. Redistricting Reform Act of 2024 — Senators Amy Klobuchar and Laphonza Butler introduced this bill, which would ban partisan gerrymandering by prohibiting maps that favor or disfavor any political party, among other reforms. Democracy Docket
6. Redistricting Reform Act of 2025 — Most recently, a group of Democratic senators — including Alex Padilla, Adam Schiff, and Raphael Warnock — introduced legislation that would forbid redrawing maps between census cycles and require independent commissions, partly in response to Republican-led mid-decade redistricting efforts in states like Texas and Missouri. Truthout

The Bottom Line: Democrats have introduced anti-gerrymandering legislation in nearly every Congress for at least the past two decades — the specific count across all sessions would be in the dozens when you include companion bills and reintroductions. However, none have become law, primarily because Republican-controlled Senates have blocked them, often via the filibuster.

Democrat Gerrymandering Proposals

 

[FLaw47]

They have no alternative but to get involved. This is a joke that disenfranchises about 47% of the population. Every state will do this now whether it is Republican or Democrat unless some restrictions are placed on partisan gerrymandering. It will be a race to the bottom.

They already weighed in an said that partisan gerrymandering was fine. I think it was abhorrent and all of the liberal justices dissented but here we are.

Edit: Link to the case

 

[LafayetteBear]

You want to stand on this apparently ignorant comment??? This post doesn't even mention Illinois which is heavily gerrymandered to favor democrats.



DEMOCRAT GERRYMANDERING HYPOCRISY ON FULL DISPLAY:

While Democrats scream about “fair maps,” look at these blue states:

- Massachusetts: 36% Republican → 0 seats
- Connecticut: 42% → 0 seats
- Maine: 46% → 0 seats
- New Hampshire: 48% → 0 seats

Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, Vermont, New Mexico, same story.

LOL, Trump Cultist. YOUR Orange Demigod started this whole redistricting battle, so your complaints about having lost that battle are both hypocritical and entertaining. And BTW, you omitted to mention that virtually all of the supposed gerrymanders you brayed about involve states with small populations and few House seats.

Connecticut - 5 House seats
Maine - 2 House seats
New Hampshire - 2 House seats
Rhode Island - 2 House seats
New Mexico - 3 House seats
Hawaii - 2 House seats

Delaware and Vermont each have one (1) seat in the House, and one (1) voting district comprising the entire state. How, pray tell, do you gerrymander a single, statewide voting district?

Massashusetts has 9 house seats. I don't know where you got your figures, but Republicans DO NOT represent 36% of the Commonwealth's electorate. According to the Massachusetts Secretary of State, only 8.46% of the Commonwealth's registered voters are Republicans. 26.31% are Democrats, which is more than three times the number of registered Republicans. The biggest single percentage of Massachusetts voters is "unenrolled" (i.e., independent) voters, at 64.22%. Those frickin' independents! DAMN their eyes!

Here's the link to the foregoing data on Massachusetts voters: https://www.sec.state.ma.us/divisio...ccessible-table/enrollment-breakdown-2024.htm

 

[UrHuckleberry]

They have no alternative but to get involved. This is a joke that disenfranchises about 47% of the population. Every state will do this now whether it is Republican or Democrat unless some restrictions are placed on partisan gerrymandering. It will be a race to the bottom.

Someone should put forth a law that ban's partisan gerrymandering.

 

[dpic73]

You want to stand on this apparently ignorant comment??? This post doesn't even mention Illinois which is heavily gerrymandered to favor democrats.



DEMOCRAT GERRYMANDERING HYPOCRISY ON FULL DISPLAY:

While Democrats scream about “fair maps,” look at these blue states:

- Massachusetts: 36% Republican → 0 seats
- Connecticut: 42% → 0 seats
- Maine: 46% → 0 seats
- New Hampshire: 48% → 0 seats

Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, Vermont, New Mexico, same story.

Why did you not mention that there are more red states with no Democratic representation?

Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Sorry this guy is a moron. Just because there are 0 congressional districts held by a republican doesn't mean they are gerrymandered.

1) Yes, I stand by that comment. Democrats in congress have written a bill to ban partisan gerrymandering. Whenever it comes up Republicans don't want to sign it.

2) Many of these states are not partisan gerrymandered. There are simply not enough Republicans in large enough concentrations to get someone elected. They are too spread out. The states are too liberal. Many of these are also tiny states with 1 or 2 CDs.

3) MA hasn't had a Republican congressman since 1997. CT since 2009. Maine only has 2 CDs, one flipped red to blue in in the 2018 midterm. It is a Trump district but they keep re-electing a Democrat. NH has two districts and they've been blue since the 2016 election. Delaware has 1 CD, of course a state that is 60% Democrat has a Democratic congressman. RI has 2 CDs and they've been blue since the 90s. VT has 1 CD. Of course the representative is a Democrat. HI has 2 CDs. They have only ever had 2 Rs in congress ever. NM has 3 CDs and the GOP has been historically competitive in one of them.

4) Do you even know what partisan gerrymandering is? The GOP is moribund in many of these states. The voters don't like electing Republicans there. You can't draw a map to get a Republican district there. The only way you can do it is to do Partisan gerrymandering. Go look at the maps of these states.

5) Partisan gerrymandering is an issue in states with large racial and rural polarization aka the South and the Midwest. Southern whites vote for the GOP at a rate far greater than the rest of whites nationally, and, due to historical issues, there is a decent amount of racial separation in those states. It is very easy to do partisan gerrymandering in those contexts.

Based on the facts you are badly incorrect. Does it reflect badly on you being this wrong??? Yes imo.

 

[TigerGrowls]

LOL, Trump Cultist. YOUR Orange Demigod started this whole redistricting battle, so your complaints about having lost that battle are both hypocritical and entertaining. And BTW, you omitted to mention that virtually all of the supposed gerrymanders you brayed about involve states with small populations and few House seats.

Connecticut - 5 House seats
Maine - 2 House seats
New Hampshire - 2 House seats
Rhode Island - 2 House seats
New Mexico - 3 House seats
Hawaii - 2 House seats

Delaware and Vermont each have one (1) seat in the House, and one (1) voting district comprising the entire state. How, pray tell, do you gerrymander a single, statewide voting district?

Massashusetts has 9 house seats. I don't know where you got your figures, but Republicans DO NOT represent 36% of the Commonwealth's electorate. According to the Massachusetts Secretary of State, only 8.46% of the Commonwealth's registered voters are Republicans. 26.31% are Democrats, which is more than three times the number of registered Republicans. The biggest single percentage of Massachusetts voters is "unenrolled" (i.e., independent) voters, at 64.22%. Those frickin' independents! DAMN their eyes!

Here's the link to the foregoing data on Massachusetts voters: https://www.sec.state.ma.us/divisio...ccessible-table/enrollment-breakdown-2024.htm

Size of the state doesn't matter related to gerrymandering.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Size of the state doesn't matter related to gerrymandering.

1. So please explain how someone, anyone, can gerrymander a state with only one (1) House seat. In such a state, the voting district includes every voter in the state!

2. In a state with two (2) House seats, there would be two (2) congressional districts. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the distribution of voters in that two district state allowed you to allocate black and hispanic voters so that they comprised a minority in each congressional district (which is quite an assumption in itself), you would get exactly one (1) additional House seat.

Do you not understand how silly your complaint is here?

 

[TigerGrowls]

1. So please explain how someone, anyone, can gerrymander a state with only one (1) House seat. In such a state, the voting district includes every voter in the state!

2. In a state with two (2) House seats, there would be two (2) congressional districts. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the distribution of voters in that two district state allowed you to allocate black and hispanic voters so that they comprised a minority in each congressional district (which is quite an assumption in itself), you would get exactly one (1) additional House seat.

Do you not understand how silly your complaint is here?

This is a non statement bear. Your statement works both ways. Democrats are benefiting more from gerrymandering than Republicans. This is not even including census fraud and racially constructed districts which favor democrats.

 

[tigres88]

This is a non statement bear. Your statement works both ways. Democrats are benefiting more from gerrymandering than Republicans. This is not even including census fraud and racially constructed districts which favor democrats.

This is what it looks like when making a toddler cry when taking their toy away

 

[TigerGrowls]

1. So please explain how someone, anyone, can gerrymander a state with only one (1) House seat. In such a state, the voting district includes every voter in the state!

2. In a state with two (2) House seats, there would be two (2) congressional districts. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the distribution of voters in that two district state allowed you to allocate black and hispanic voters so that they comprised a minority in each congressional district (which is quite an assumption in itself), you would get exactly one (1) additional House seat.

Do you not understand how silly your complaint is here?

 

[TigerGrowls]

One of the reasons the judge overturned the redistricting decision in Virginia was that the actual question on the ballot was incredibly leading and unfair.

Believe it or not, here it is:

"Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia's standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?"

I mean come on man.

 

[LafayetteBear]

The fact that you can't actually engage with me in discourse over our respective positions, and simply continue to parrot whatever nonsense MAGA talking heads spew out, tells everyone all they need to know. I don't dislike you at all, but I DO feel sorry for you.