Virginia Redistricting PASSED!!
- Thread starter Chumpsky
- Start date
This should be the default take on this situation. Gerrymandering is a horrible thing, and since the GOP owns the Presidency, House, and Senate they could conceivably submit a law banning gerrymandering. Makes you wonder why the GOP refuses to do that right now.
So, I'm quite saddened by this outcome, both generally and as a Virginian, and for the record, I think it's just as grotesque in Texas, California, Illinois, North Carolina, or any other state you want to name.
If I had the inclination to visit candidate fora in the fall (since any primaries won't be until late August), I'd probably ask two questions: (i) what motivated you to run for a temporary district that will not exist in two years? and (ii) what specific processes will you be following to make sure that you can adequately represent the disenfranchised citizens of Texas?
In all seriousness though, the next steps:
1. There are two court cases pending (actually three, but two theories) before the Virginia supreme court, which basically put them on hold until after a vote was held, in a remarkable act of political courage (but only after the equally remarkable act of political courage by the intermediate appellate court that just punted them upstairs immediately without even considering them). In both cases, the 'no' proponents won in the self-selected trial court. The first relates to some odd timing issues, where a proposed amendment referendum has to be out there for a specified interval of time between two elections, and the long and short of the argument is that it wasn't because the second election for purposes of measurement started with the early voting for the initiative. Interesting argument, and while fundamentally an issue of state rather than federal law, it might be interesting to see whether the scotus case on "election day" might come into play. The second relates to state requirements that proposed amendments have to be worded neutrally, and takes aim at the "restore fairness" language. I don't know that either of these dogs will hunt.
2. Then, there's the potential 'other shoe'. While I tend to think that the R's are unlikely to overcome broader headwinds in the fall no matter what they do, Florida unfortunately waits in the wings. Not only that, but they might be waiting in the wings (i) with certain handcuffs taken off and (ii) accompanied by some other southern states, perhaps as early as this morning. If Scotus does something dramatic in Louisiana v Callais relating to race-based districts (and they well might), you could easily see even more aggressive moves. I take no joy or even hope for schadenfreude in that prospect. Is there dilution risk to that for R's? Absolutely, and maybe significant dilution risk.
All politics is now national.
Edit: there's actually another theory I'd forgotten which is that the special session that authorized the referendum was called for an entirely different purpose relating to budget reconciliation, which may or may not be appropriate under VA law.
If I had the inclination to visit candidate fora in the fall (since any primaries won't be until late August), I'd probably ask two questions: (i) what motivated you to run for a temporary district that will not exist in two years? and (ii) what specific processes will you be following to make sure that you can adequately represent the disenfranchised citizens of Texas?
In all seriousness though, the next steps:
1. There are two court cases pending (actually three, but two theories) before the Virginia supreme court, which basically put them on hold until after a vote was held, in a remarkable act of political courage (but only after the equally remarkable act of political courage by the intermediate appellate court that just punted them upstairs immediately without even considering them). In both cases, the 'no' proponents won in the self-selected trial court. The first relates to some odd timing issues, where a proposed amendment referendum has to be out there for a specified interval of time between two elections, and the long and short of the argument is that it wasn't because the second election for purposes of measurement started with the early voting for the initiative. Interesting argument, and while fundamentally an issue of state rather than federal law, it might be interesting to see whether the scotus case on "election day" might come into play. The second relates to state requirements that proposed amendments have to be worded neutrally, and takes aim at the "restore fairness" language. I don't know that either of these dogs will hunt.
2. Then, there's the potential 'other shoe'. While I tend to think that the R's are unlikely to overcome broader headwinds in the fall no matter what they do, Florida unfortunately waits in the wings. Not only that, but they might be waiting in the wings (i) with certain handcuffs taken off and (ii) accompanied by some other southern states, perhaps as early as this morning. If Scotus does something dramatic in Louisiana v Callais relating to race-based districts (and they well might), you could easily see even more aggressive moves. I take no joy or even hope for schadenfreude in that prospect. Is there dilution risk to that for R's? Absolutely, and maybe significant dilution risk.
All politics is now national.
Edit: there's actually another theory I'd forgotten which is that the special session that authorized the referendum was called for an entirely different purpose relating to budget reconciliation, which may or may not be appropriate under VA law.
Last edited:
No unilateral disarmament. If Republicans want to end partisan gerrymandering then Democrats will support them. Democrats want to end it but Republicans don't. The GOP constantly overrides when the voters say they don't want partisan gerrymandering or when the courts tell them no. Not so fun when the rabbit has the gun is it?
Let's not be dishonest here. This is a bilateral phenomenon. While everybody likes to pick the starting point that suits them, the 'fair one' is the decennial cycle. And in 2021, there was plenty of the "modern" version of partisan gerrymandering going on in both red and blue states.
Not so fun when the rabbit has the gun is it? When are you guys going to realize that tens of millions of Americans are proud Democrats and they're pissed off and going to fight fire with fire
Those "garbage dumps" subsidize states like South Carolina. Why don't you welfare queens pull your own weight for once?
The dummymander is a huge risk for the GOP and looks like it might bite them in the *** in November. *A lot* of congressional Rs are going to get nothing but a firm handshake and a "good luck" from the NRCC, especially since the senate is now in jeopardy for them. There is only so much money to go around, you have to spread it around more, and no one wants to back a loser. Any congressional R in a Trump+5 or worse district might be toast and anyone in a district worse than Trump+10 is going to be sweating bullets
Republicans have always balked at supporting ending partisan gerrymandering. The modern GOP is structured on diluting the voting power of black Americans
As I said, both parties practice it, and regularly. As much as I dislike it, I actually think that Scotus got it right inasmuch as there's no discernable principle to judge 'how much is too much?' I also think there is a very limited place for dabbling around the edges once you get the 'basic' lines drawn (eg, maintaining coherence of geographies that share similar economic or social things in common, giving a little protection to senior reps who may be in a position to defend state interests at the federal level, etc. There is a reason the power to draw the lines was given to state legislative bodies. But the modern forms we're seeing are not that.
He thinks Obama speaks for all of us at all times because Trump speaks for all of them at all times.
And this is the part I hate the most. A governor is supposed to take care of the state. This retaliatory action to protect democratic interests at the national level just took the voices away from nearly half of Virginia’s population. Those mouthpieces from other states, who were cheering on Virginians to vote yes for a 10-1 redistricting have no interest in the Commonwealth. They are trying to preserve their power. I loved the balance we had at 6-5. The maps were drawn by a non-partisan committee. Now NOVA (basically DC) will strong arm the state and the sad reality is that most are transplants.
They tricked us with their words and meanings and sorcery
What do you mean by "ruthlessly govern?"
Trump really likes to start fights he can't win, with Iran, with the Pope, with America. He's an all time loser.
Trump won North Carolina 49.93% to 48.59% in 2020 and 51% to 49% in 2024. The state GOP redrew their map so Rs have 10 of the 13 congressional districts. I don't think any of the conservatives in here were complaining then
No, that's different because ?? reasons.
The Republicans got Elon Musk to illegally fire tens of thousands of Virginians who work for the federal government and they 1) don't think that is "ruthlessly governing" and 2) don't realize that pissed off those Virginians?They tricked us with their words and meanings and sorcery
What do you mean by "ruthlessly govern?"
A constant with conservatives is no matter how many times they get what they want they are never happy. They are always mad at elected Rs for "not doing enough." They're way happier when the Democrats are in power
"It's different in North Carolina because it's been a Purple state for a long time and it SHOULDN'T be a purple state, you know? It's different in Texas too, and they didn't even put it to a vote because OBVIOUSLY Texas is completely red and no one would vote against the redistricting anyway." MAGA, probably.
The Florida GOP has some smart people (shocker, I know) with a long term view of things who know that this would be a terrible idea
Yeah, from what i've seen it only looks like Desantis is pushing for this
It’s obvious why you’re unemployed and divorced. Quite the combo!
According to Axios he is begging the Trump administration for a job once his time as governor is up in January
Why do you hate those states so much?
Do you live in South Carolina? SC receives $1.67 from the federal government for every $1 sent to the federal government. It is one of the most federally dependent states in the country.
Oh I'm employed now. I got a job at my dad's company walking around with a hard hat and clipboard.
What does SC getting money have to do with me. I get nothing. Oh I get to drive on the roads yay. I’m sick of paying for everyone else’s stuff. Idgaf what SC gets. I pay more in federal income taxes than a lot of people make. And I’m tired of it. And those states are a big reason why things are outrageously expensive. Primarily their insistence on allowing unproductive people into the country and putting them on welfare among other things.
For all the idiot Maga losers calling this illegal or unconstitutional, you're definitely wrong, but i want to be perfectly clear where I stand.
I don't care what we have to do to stop Trump/Maga, legal, constitutional, or otherwise, without qualification.
I don't care what we have to do to stop Trump/Maga, legal, constitutional, or otherwise, without qualification.
I am an "extraordinarily brilliant person!"
How much do you want to bet that all the board magats will believe this?
You have no idea how any of this stuff works. Do you live in South Carolina? If so, your taxes would go up without states like California, New York, or Illinois. SC is able to charge low taxes because the state is a welfare queen state that takes from the federal government. Those other states give more to the feds than they receive.
No, those states aren't why things are expensive. They don't allow in "unproductive people" and put them on welfare. That doesn't happen. Not only are immigrants incredibly productive, they also don't go on welfare. Industries like agriculture, construction, and restaurants collapse without immigrant labor. Rural/southern whites are the biggest group of welfare leeches in the country.
You sound like an incredibly selfish individual for all your talk of "me, me, me."
He stays mad, doesn't matter what the topic, he's pissed off. He is a perfect example of the Rage Bait internet tactics working really well.
Dude would do so much better if he just took a breath, read what people were saying and then reacted. You literally just told him that these states he is mad at and blaming for expenses aren't the issue, but it won't matter.