|
Duckbag posted:How the hell would you even go about making districts for women? The vast majority of communities have very close gender parity. Your example is terrible. Or you could read the next loving sentence where one of the other examples is a Hispanic district, something that does exist.
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Quotas go against the principles of America. Except when we're using them to keep out dirty immigrants, of course.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Except when we're using them to keep out dirty immigrants, of course. Assigning numerical values to nonwhites is deeply ingrained in American culture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Bobby Digital posted:Assigning numerical values to nonwhites is deeply ingrained in American culture. Those aren't quotas, that's accounting
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
notthegoatseguy posted:Or you could read the next loving sentence where one of the other examples is a Hispanic district, something that does exist. Of course those districts exist. Gerrymandering around ethnic lines is relatively easy, especially in areas with long histories of housing segregation. Doesn't make your idea of a congressional district for her any less asinine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
This is also easily fixable with party list voting, as all you have to do is mandate the parties keep a certain percentage of minorities on their candidate lists instead of essentially rigging elections in dozens of single seat constituencies
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 09:08
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Quotas go against the principles of America. Also Sweden apparently.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 09:13
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Quotas go against the principles of America. "What principles are those, MIGF?" he asked.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 09:14
|
|
|
Goals and targets are ok, but not quotas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
baw posted:Goals and targets are ok, but not quotas. God forbid we do anything to meet the goals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:Of course those districts exist. Gerrymandering around ethnic lines is relatively easy, especially in areas with long histories of housing segregation. Doesn't make your idea of a congressional district for her any less asinine. Part of the problem of districting around ethnic lines is that I feel like there's no bright line between "creating a minority-majority district" and "totally packing a seat with all the minorities to make other seats non-competitive". That's the subject of an ongoing dispute in Virginia right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:This is also easily fixable with party list voting, as all you have to do is mandate the parties keep a certain percentage of minorities on their candidate lists instead of essentially rigging elections in dozens of single seat constituencies Parties are allowed to define their precincts and wards. So, what you'd do is design 600 wards of one person, stuff 'em with all the nation's minorities, and then keep doing business as usual while everyone laughs at West Virginia for being so wacky on those race relations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
The best the D's in Ohio can do is Ted Strickland?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The best the D's in Ohio can do is Ted Strickland? The answer is literally yes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
The former congressman from a region which looks like it'll never vote D again (southeast Ohio)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
oh the part that touches kentucky and west virginia?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
IM STUNNED
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Ted Strickland was a fine and briefly popular governor if this were Reconstruction I would come cast a fake vote for him
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Villarigosa's not running, so say hello to Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA).
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
Russ Feingold's hinting at a rematch against Ron Johnson!
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Villarigosa's not running, so say hello to Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA). 
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
FMguru posted:She'll be great, but I really wanted Governor Kamala Harris Look at it this way: as Governor, you only get her for two terms. As Senator, you've got her til she gets bored or drops dead on the Senate floor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
FMguru posted:She'll be great, but I really wanted Governor Kamala Harris Newsom would probably be better as a governor as noted above, you only get two terms and there's no way he's not going to use both of them to strengthen dems here even more. Although this has the downside of possibly giving Newsom a path to the presidency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
Newsom is too Patrick Bateman to get elected president.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 03:13
|
|
|
Party list voting is currently banned due to an anti-voter suppression law so you'd have to fix that first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 03:25
|
|
Duckbag posted:In other words, it has "bipartisanship" baked into it in a way that is utterly undemocratic. The fact that the two parties get equal representation even though Democrats nearly double the Republicans in voter registration is absurd on its face, and the requirement that the parties, and these mysterious "non-affiliated" commissioners have to work together to approve things has the potential to force all sorts of ridiculous compromises. That said, I still voted for it. Lol. So you're pro gerrymandering then....
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:
To be fair voter registration numbers are effectively meaningless. My county has a 3-to-1 Democratic edge in registration but votes Republican by roughly the opposite margin. It's that way in large swathes of the South. Yeah in places like California most of the registered Ds actually vote D but you probably shouldn't lean on registration to tell you about anything in general.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 08:08
|
|
|
If it's a legitimate Senate race, Todd Akin can shut that whole thing down.quote:Former Rep. Todd Akin, a conservative who lost to Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., in 2012, after he made controversial comments about rape that became national news, told the Post-Dispatch this week that he is still exploring his future and that he has not ruled out challenging Blunt in a primary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:So will the awful Wisconsin electorate elect tea bagging moron Ron Johnson over Russ Finegold again? Looks like they will have another chance. This state has put Scott Walker in office 3 times, so they will collectively always choose the worst possible option.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Joementum posted:If it's a legitimate Senate race, Todd Akin can shut that whole thing down. Boy, the worst thing I can say about Roy Blunt is that there's a man who don't know the hunt, I tell you what.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Can we get a stronger phrase than "controversial comments about rape"? Maybe "blatant lies", "double-take inducing", "unbelievably ignorant", "national embarassment", somewhere in that region?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
Kellsterik posted:Can we get a stronger phrase than "controversial comments about rape"? Maybe "blatant lies", "double-take inducing", "unbelievably ignorant", "national embarassment", somewhere in that region? I'm not sure what "uncontroversial remarks about rape" worth noting would be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm not sure what "uncontroversial remarks about rape" worth noting would be. "Rape is bad. People shouldn't do it."
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
Chadderbox posted:"Rape is bad. People shouldn't do it." Yeah, if a Republican confined themselves to just that it would be pretty worth noting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
Chadderbox posted:"Rape is bad. People shouldn't do it." But then how could they tell women to stop being such whores?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
Majorian posted:But then how could they tell women to stop being such whores? Pay washed up actresses to say it for them?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
Chadderbox posted:"Rape is bad. People shouldn't do it." lead of tomorrow's trib: 'RAPE IS BAD', DECLARES JOE WALSH KIRK HAS NOT COMMENTED Where's the sensationalism in that? How many copies will that sell?
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:lead of tomorrow's trib: 'RAPE IS BAD', DECLARES JOE WALSH Are you implying that they say that sort of thing all the time and only the "legitimate rape" type comments get play? I can see why the papers run with one type of comment and not the other, but I don't imagine that the guys saying that kind of thing with a camera in their face are saving their reasonable statements for the family dinner table discussions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Chadderbox posted:Pay washed up actresses to say it for them? Boom! But yeah, I think we're seeing Republican lockstep messaging hitting its limits. The leadership realizes that their people can't say incredibly stupid poo poo like that anymore, but their other elected officials just aren't getting the message. Which is fine with me. I never want this flaming tailspin to end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 18:26 |
|
|
eternalname posted:Lol. So you're pro gerrymandering then.... Are you implying that California wasn't horribly gerrymandered before the Commission got set up? We had a situation where legislators had carte blanche to pick their own loving districts, or try to pick them for their opponents. There was no sense of consistency or continuity to it. At one point, my home town was shunted between senate districts in back to back redistricting. This meant that not only did we wind up in the district of someone we never voted for, but since the two districts had elections in different years, when they switched us back we missed our chance to vote in that district either. We went like six years without being able to vote for Senate. At least those districts have kept the same general shape though, even if the borders keep shifting. That's more than can be said for the Assembly districts. Each cycle they seemed to be completely different. Strong candidates have had to abandon campaigns because their districts get ripped apart at just the wrong times. People kept moving to get more promising districts. One year, three Republican legislators found themselves squeezed into the same North San Diego district. That must have been awkward. The whole system of backroom deals, electoral sabotage, and naked power-brokering was just nasty. It fed off of and reinforced the very worst tendencies of our factionalized legislature, added a whole new point of contention to an already dysfunctional body, and was cheating the ordinary citizens of their right to participate in an orderly and cohesive political process. There were a great many of us who were desperate to end the madness by any means necessary and the Redistricting Commission, flawed though it was, seemed like a step in the right direction. I had reservations to be sure, but I don't regret supporting it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2015 09:46
|
|