|
Brony Car posted:I have no idea how polarized things are in the Pennsylvania state legislature. If you're bringing up the fact that they need every single vote in the Senate, I take it that the Pennsylvania GOP is not very united? impeachment requires a 2/3 majority and they have 34/50 seats so they can't afford to lose a single vote, assuming no dems vote to impeach for some reason
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 05:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
Brony Car posted:I have no idea how polarized things are in the Pennsylvania state legislature. If you're bringing up the fact that they need every single vote in the Senate, I take it that the Pennsylvania GOP is not very united? I don't think it matters how united they are with something this blatantly and inherently controversial. It's never going to be a lock for everyone to be on board.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Trip report! I attended my precinct Democratic Iowa caucus tonight after a pretty severe and unexpected snowstorm that dumped about 5 inches of snow on the city. My wife and daughter both decided to stay home due to the road conditions so I went alone. I am not sure how much the weather depressed turnout but I'd estimate 80% of the (grade school auditorium) seats were filled. First off were speeches for specific candidates, including one by one of the actual gubernatorial candidate himself, then passing of the envelope for the county and state party, and finally separating out by city. My precinct was one of the larger ones with 15 attendees and 4 delegates to select. Some of the other precincts had almost as many delegates as attendees. One young man in our precinct motioned for our precinct to form priority groups around gubernatorial candidates which was passed. If I remember correctly, the breakdown was 3 for Boulton, 4 for Glasson, 1 for Hubbard, and the rest of us in the undecided group. This resulted in the Hubbard group being non-viable and joining our undecided group. We then selected our delegates purely based on the stated desire to be a delegate ... The Hubbard supporter and a party veteran from our undecided group, and one person each from the Boulton and Glasson preference groups. No votes were conducted because there were no more volunteers for delegates than openings. Then they asked for volunteers for alternate delegates for the county (Polk) caucus at which point I volunteered and was told that I was basically assured of a seat because all alternates that show up get seated. Finally they asked if any party platform proposals wanted to be debated. I amongst others asked about the process and grabbed a form to fill out in support of securing digital infrastructure security while other filled out health care and network neutrality ones. We then voted to pass them all up to the next level. This was the first time I've been involved in the political process outside of the general elections. I was pretty shocked about how white it was. Gender-wise it was definitely majority female in attendance, leadership, and speakers, but only one speaker was non-white. Ginger Beer Belly fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Feb 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:I was more focused on the impeachment threat. Impeachment seems to be within the GOP’s power if they have enough nerve. Ah, right. Well the question there is what do they impeach them for? It would be blatantly political and they'd have to prove some "misbehavior" in office. Of course the PA supreme court vote was along party lines (surprise surprise) but really, the gerrymandering is so blatantly partisan it would just be making it more obvious that the GOP is the threat to democracy not the Democrats. The GOP is inching closer and closer to just outright going authoritarian. The question is if they'll cross that Rubicon or not. They'll probably try if they think they can get away with it but it's a risky play no matter what. In the era of President Trump accusing Democrats of treason for not applauding who knows what they'll do. They may or may not go that far but they'd have to have a reason to do it and the process would probably take too long to get rid of the decision.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 06:09
|
|
|
Ginger Beer Belly posted:Trip report! That's pretty cool, I always regretted never taking part in the caucus process when I lived in Iowa. I wish everywhere had a process that let common people have this much say into party politics. Just voting doesn't have the same impact. Polk County Iowa is 88% white, so I'm not sure why you were so shocked by how white it was. Especially since the caucus process is going to make things even harder for poorer people to attend, and minorities tend to be poorer than white people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
VA will have medical marijuana as soon as the Governor signs the bill. Passed the House and Senate unanimously yesterday. http://www.richmond.com/news/virgin...1eb3bcd668.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Polk County Iowa is 88% white, so I'm not sure why you were so shocked by how white it was. Especially since the caucus process is going to make things even harder for poorer people to attend, and minorities tend to be poorer than white people. Shocked is probably over-selling it. I would guess that it was around 95+% white and a lot older than I had imagined. Two of the speakers mentioned that they had been to caucuses before but this was the first one in which they were of age to participate, so my takeaway is that participation in the process has a lot to do with whether or not it's something you were raised to do. I grew up with the concept that politics was a dirty business that you shouldn't sully yourself with, and instead, just go to the general election and make your secret selection (which would then be revealed in whispers as the Republican candidate). I feel glad that I got involved but also really regret not doing so before now ... in my 40s. e: 95+% white, not non-white Register's article about the events. I wasn't at the Roosevelt High School one, but the story is very representative of what I experienced. https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2018/02/05/caucus-turnout-strong-des-moines-but-snowstorms-statewide-effect-unclear/308815002/ Ginger Beer Belly fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Feb 6, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 17:52
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Ah, right. Well the question there is what do they impeach them for? It would be blatantly political and they'd have to prove some "misbehavior" in office.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DKElections/status/960969126423474176
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 21:18
|
|
|
axeil posted:VA will have medical marijuana as soon as the Governor signs the bill. Passed the House and Senate unanimously yesterday. Oh wow, especially the Senate version is way more permissive than I was expecting. It lets doctors prescribe thca or CBD oil for literally any condition, anything. Corns! Insomnia! Ulcers! Who cares, have some weed oil! Also, much has been made over how THC-A oil isn't psychoactive, but... Doesn't it turn into THC when you heat it? Like by mixing it with hot butter, or smoking it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 22:26
|
|
|
ian millhiser possibly reading a little too much into scotus not expediting the partisan congressional gerrymandering case in nc https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/960972145210863616
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
The Muppets On PCP posted:ian millhiser possibly reading a little too much into scotus not expediting the partisan congressional gerrymandering case in nc quote:Unfortunately for opponents of gerrymandering, the order handed down by the Supreme Court on Tuesday denied this request to expedite the case. As a practical matter, this means that the case is likely to be heard next term — too late to prevent North Carolina’s gerrymandered maps from being used in the 2018 midterms. That's very intriguing and a good bit of tea leaf reading. Hopeful though!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
axeil posted:VA will have medical marijuana as soon as the Governor signs the bill. Passed the House and Senate unanimously yesterday. im glad my state decided to take a weirdly liberal turn after i moved out of it lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/hellofasandwich/status/961066905439055872
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Yawn, only 3%. Everything's hosed, burn it all down. (I'm not being serious, in case anyone was wondering...this is a huge victory and it's good to see Democrats still overperforming like crazy)
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 04:06
|
|
|
e... Thought I was in USPOL.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 04:18
|
|
|
Going from 33-> 53 is every state but Wyoming goes blue in November territory for the Senate, which is unthinkable. 54+2 D in the Senate. Plus like 325+ seats in the house.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 05:09
|
|
|
Lote posted:Going from 33-> 53 is every state but Wyoming goes blue in November territory for the Senate, which is unthinkable. 54+2 D in the Senate. Plus like 325+ seats in the house. There are simply way too many months to go and too much bullshit that could happen between now and November to know for sure. If you care about Democrats beating Republicans, get out there and get to work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
Found out that my ballot chances on purely statistical lines may be coin flip chances by the end of this week. 3 positions available, 2 incumbents and currently 2 challengers and 2 that could file by the deadline on Friday at noon. Very nervous now but gonna need to do some door knocking and crap as soon as I know what’s what. The incumbent not rerunning apparently wants to talk with the new blood before she leaves so that will hopefully be enlightening. Also trying to convince my buddy who lives in olive township to run... NO ONE HAS FILED ON THE BALLOT THERE FROM EITHER PARTY! That’s freaking nuts
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 05:57
|
|
|
paperwind posted:There are simply way too many months to go and too much bullshit that could happen between now and November to know for sure. If you care about Democrats beating Republicans, get out there and get to work. You're not wrong, but this is a pretty strong indicator that the current polling shift isn't affecting the thing that matters - elections.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
Presumably the amount of shift between 2016 and 2018 will be a bell curve with the mean at roughly the national generic ballot but even if a shift of +20 is a standard deviation or two away that still says good things about the mean
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Of the 5 Dem senators from red states that have to win in November, I thought Heitkamp and McCaskill losing was almost a sure thing. After seeing these results I'm definitely reconsidering. https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/961084460883202048
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Of the 5 Dem senators from red states that have to win in November, I thought Heitkamp and McCaskill losing was almost a sure thing. After seeing these results I'm definitely reconsidering. McCaskill is lucking out with another batshit insane misogynist, so there's that too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 06:36
|
|
|
Since moving to Arizona's 4th District, which Wikipedia describes as the most Republican district in the entirety of the Mountain States since the 2010 Census, I've gotten to experience just what a dirtbag Paul Gossar is, so today I checked out the campaign website for Ana Maria Perez, who is currently the only one listed on Ballotpedia as competing for his seat. I checked out her platform page, and she seems to impressively left on a lot of issues for where she's running. I expected a full blown Blue Dog. Any AZ goons know anything about her?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
Lote posted:Going from 33-> 53 is every state but Wyoming goes blue in November territory for the Senate, which is unthinkable. 54+2 D in the Senate. Plus like 325+ seats in the house. I can't even think of what it would take to even increase the Wyoming state senate's Democratic population by one. God himself could tell everyone in the state that coal is not worth mining anymore and they'd call it fake news. This isn't the first time in the state's history that coal has taken a dive, but the only way it will ever recover is if natural gas is made illegal to use. It sucks so much trying to win over anyone on anything remotely left wing in this state because anyone on the outside that could help just chuckles and tells you that your state doesn't matter and not to bother.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 09:11
|
|
|
Ego-bot posted:Of the 5 Dem senators from red states that have to win in November, I thought Heitkamp and McCaskill losing was almost a sure thing. After seeing these results I'm definitely reconsidering. Fear COURTLAND SYKES.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 14:26
|
|
|
VA looks like it's going to kill gerrymandering before SCOTUS does. http://www.richmond.com/news/virgin...b665f84376.html quote:Breaking logjam, Virginia House panel advances bill to establish redistricting criteria
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Since moving to Arizona's 4th District, which Wikipedia describes as the most Republican district in the entirety of the Mountain States since the 2010 Census, I've gotten to experience just what a dirtbag Paul Gossar is, so today I checked out the campaign website for Ana Maria Perez, who is currently the only one listed on Ballotpedia as competing for his seat. I checked out her platform page, and she seems to impressively left on a lot of issues for where she's running. I expected a full blown Blue Dog. Any AZ goons know anything about her? I talked to Mikel Weisser, the guy who ran last time and executive director of NORML Arizona. I think he's working on Ana Maria Perez's campaign and he obviously had nice things to say about her. At the same time, he seemed to suggest that David Brill was a highly viable candidate. Not sure why he's not on Ballotopedia yet. http://www.brillforcongress.com/
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
axeil posted:VA looks like it's going to kill gerrymandering before SCOTUS does. As a follow-up this would mean VA's map goes from this:  To this:  Or this if they're really aggressive about it: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
axeil posted:VA looks like it's going to kill gerrymandering before SCOTUS does. This is nice in theory but ultimately pretty meaningless. As North Carolina showed, you can have a very aggressive gerrymander that doesn't look like one. What will limit gerrymandering in VA is the fact that Northam can veto a gerrymander.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This is nice in theory but ultimately pretty meaningless. As North Carolina showed, you can have a very aggressive gerrymander that doesn't look like one. That's also the motivation behind Republicans supporting even tepid gerrymandering restrictions. They can read the changing tide and want to close some doors behind them while endeavoring to look moderate and responsive after the historic shellacking they took and will take in the GA elections. It's hilarious, has already resulted in a few extremely moderate QOL improvements like this and medical cannabinoid oil, and will do absolutely nothing to save them in '19 given that Donald Trump absolutely cannot resist nationalizing every election.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
I also have a suspicion that laws about not splitting up cities and communities in redistricting are a trojan horse. Remember: cities are strongly Democratic, rural areas are (relative to cities) weakly Republican. Because of this 'natural gerrymandering' (democratic clustering in cities) you want neutral criteria that reduce or eliminate that effect rather than enhance it. Maps that concentrate city dwellers into as few districts as possible enhance natural gerrymandering. If I wanted to gerrymander VA, the first thing I would do is make a district that was as much of Alexandria/Arlington as possible and nothing else and I sort of read those criteria as doing that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 17:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This is nice in theory but ultimately pretty meaningless. As North Carolina showed, you can have a very aggressive gerrymander that doesn't look like one. evilweasel posted:I also have a suspicion that laws about not splitting up cities and communities in redistricting are a trojan horse. Remember: cities are strongly Democratic, rural areas are (relative to cities) weakly Republican. Because of this 'natural gerrymandering' (democratic clustering in cities) you want neutral criteria that reduce or eliminate that effect rather than enhance it. Maps that concentrate city dwellers into as few districts as possible enhance natural gerrymandering. yep. compare the old nc congressional map, with the infamous 12th district pulling from greensboro and charlotte, and at one point had a 7/6 r/d split  versus the current map where the 12th is contained entirely in charlotte, and all of durham is shoved into a largely rural but majority black district. and now greensboro, a minority-majority city, is split between two moderately safe republican districts and current house split is 10/3 r/d  in other news that i missed but maybe others didn't, the pa supreme court did in fact appoint a special master to redraw their congressional map and they're using the same dude the nc supreme court hired http://www.post-gazette.com/local/r...es/201801260170 The Muppets On PCP fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Feb 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I also have a suspicion that laws about not splitting up cities and communities in redistricting are a trojan horse. Remember: cities are strongly Democratic, rural areas are (relative to cities) weakly Republican. Because of this 'natural gerrymandering' (democratic clustering in cities) you want neutral criteria that reduce or eliminate that effect rather than enhance it. Maps that concentrate city dwellers into as few districts as possible enhance natural gerrymandering. How do you write legislation that bars partisan gerrymandering then? It seems like a requirement for compactness is the best way to do it but I'm with you on the potential for it to be abused since the GOP abuses everything it touches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
axeil posted:How do you write legislation that bars partisan gerrymandering then? Independent commission that isn't provided with political data is really the only way to go about it. Maybe a completely determination formula that gives no discretion to the legislature. At the end of the day, as long as it's being done by a state legislature with access to political data and discretion over how they draw the maps, even with restrictions you can find a way to gerrymander.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:35
|
|
|
Could you also cap the allowed efficiency gap (using data from the previous election)?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
The real solution is some form of proportional representation, though every version I'm aware of has its own can of worms and is extremely unconstitutional
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:02
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:The real solution is some form of proportional representation, though every version I'm aware of has its own can of worms and is extremely unconstitutional STV wouldn't be unconstitutional, but it is currently illegal since Congress outlawed multi-member districts. It could be instated by Congress, though, which is what the Fair Representation Act is pushing for. But yeah, without proportional representation, districts will be hard to really make representative.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Could you also cap the allowed efficiency gap (using data from the previous election)? Maybe? The 538 Gerrymandering Project made it seem like that's a way to diagnose gerrymandering but looking at their actual maps I'm not so sure as some of their very fair maps (like drawing for competitiveness) have really huge efficiency gaps
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 18:08 |
|
|
axeil posted:Maybe? The 538 Gerrymandering Project made it seem like that's a way to diagnose gerrymandering but looking at their actual maps I'm not so sure as some of their very fair maps (like drawing for competitiveness) have really huge efficiency gaps The way you maximize competitive districts in anything but a swing state is you pack the majority into 100% districts until you get 50% everywhere else. So you basically gerrymander against the party that should control the state, which is...well, an odd choice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2018 00:04
|
|