GOP Gerrymandering coming to an end?

The BIASED Roberts Supreme Court did itself no favors by allowing the states to gerrymander their districts. Roberts LEGACY is going to a sad one that will live in INFAMY.

Of the THREE GOP gerrymandered states that were used in IMPOSE the BLOTUS on the Oval office against the will of We the People we have already seen Pennsylvania roll back their districts. That is 20 EC votes that the BLOTUS can no longer count on for a 40 count SWING if PA goes blue in 2020.

Then we have Michigan where the 2018 electorate passed a state Constitutional Amendment to place the drawing of districts on a 13 member panel where each major party only has 4 seats. The other 5 are allocated to Independents. The GOP is so OUTRAGED that it is SUING based upon losing their "right" to "bribe" members of the Commission.

https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Proposal_2,_Independent_Redistricting_Commission_Initiative_(2018)

That is just a DELAYING TACTIC but it is clear that a MAJORITY of the citizens of MI do NOT want gerrymandered districts and they will push hard to get this done BEFORE 2020 which would put another 16 votes out of reach of the BLOTUS for another potential 32 vote swing.

That still leaves Wisconsin gerrymandering in place but the fight against GOP gerrymandering has not just been happening in those three states.

Judges in North Carolina have now outlawed their gerrymandered districts and since the NC courts have Dem majorities it won't be possible for the GOP to stop the redistricting in time for 2020. NC has 15 EC votes which would negate the 10 in WI still going to the BLOTUS.

Gerrymandering is the ONLY hope the GOP has of holding on to the Executive Branch in 2020.

Where else are they going to find the EC votes they need?

 

Do you think democrat gerrymandering will come to an end?

 

It only exists in two states and yes, it too will end.

 

How will it come to an end? What is the 'correct' formula for setting districts?

 

Whataboutism in first reply = automatic fail.

In any case, do you like being disenfranchised as a voter? Because that's what gerrymandering is doing. It is basically locking in districts for one party, so the individual vote counts less, as well as the quality of the candidate, since the district always votes the same way. Personally, I like my vote to count, ideally with the same weight as any other vote, although I realize that the US system is set up against such a simple principle.

 

We need to eliminate the EC and as more and more states pass laws to make their EC votes align with the national popular vote it will become redundant.

Now it is only a matter of time until the Boomers are replaced by the Millennials for that to happen.

 

Protesting to cover up criminal acts is common to regressives. Just as the slave owners project their abject provable racism on the GOP, they project their criminal gerrymandering on the GOP:

How Maryland Democrats pulled off their aggressive gerrymander

The U.S. Supreme Court this week is hearing arguments in a challenge to Maryland's congressional map, which is often held up as a textbook example of partisan gerrymandering.


For a sense of the extent of the Democrat-drawn gerrymander, consider this: In 2016, Republican candidates won 37 percent of the statewide two-party vote for U.S. House seats. But because of the way Democrats drew district boundaries after the 2010 Census, that translated to just one of the state's eight House seats.

To understand how Democrats pulled this off, we need to take a close look at the map. Here's what Maryland's congressional districts look like. I've used a high-contrast color scheme to help distinguish the serpentine boundaries clustered in the middle of the state.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rats-pulled-off-their-aggressive-gerrymander/

Look how proud Democrats at WaPo are that they have managed to deny representation to we the people.

 

Since much of the gerrymandering in the past was done to increase black representation in Congress, are you willing to reduce that?

 

PAYWALL PF Rule VIOLATION ignored for obvious reasons.

 

How does gerrymandering impact a Presidential election....?

 

Is whataboutism what dems now say when their hypocrisy is exposed? Funny.

 

Your BLOTUS would have LOST in 2016 if it wasn't for GOP gerrymandering and voter suppression.

 

Gerrymandering should come to an end. Neither party should be able to benefit from it.

 

I am having difficulty interpreting this poorly worded paragraph. Are you trying to imply that "gerrymandering" impacts which presidential candidate wins the state's electoral votes?

 

Nope!

I am stating it as proven fact!

Look up gerrymandering for yourself and you will learn how it alters the outcome of elections.

 

You are confused. "Gerrymandering" impacts the house. It has absolutely NOT ONE THING TO DO with a presidential candidate winning the electoral votes in a state. Electoral votes in Pennsylvania are awarded to whomever wins the popular vote in that state. How the districts are divided has not one iota of impact as to who wins the popular vote in the state.

Do not just reflexively disagree with me. You are 100% wrong. <Rule 3>

 

I can see the benefits in revising the districts to reflect a more geographical area and not a demographic based one. But I don't see what benefits it has to the electoral college. Certainly house races but in these all or nothing states it is the vote total of the voters in that state which determine it reps to the electoral college.

 

What does gerrymandering have to do with presidential elections and what voter suppression? Please do tell

 

Yes, you are correct for the most part!

However you are ignoring the GOP's latest attempt at gerrymandering which is to assign EC votes based upon who wins the district as opposed to the popular vote in the state.

https://www.makingeveryvotecount.co...-district-or-proportionally-is-not-the-answer

But thank you for bringing this up because the GOP gerrymandering is a serious impediment to We the People being able to choose our own representatives as opposed to the current nefarious system of representatives choosing their voters.

Gerrymandering should be outlawed nationwide. The Roberts SCOTUS had the opportunity to do so but chose instead to vote for the current FAILED system of gerrymandering which harms We the People.

 

I am 100% correct. There isnt one shred of "for the most part" involved.

Just because you posted some obscure suggestion from some obscure blog in North Carolina has no bearing whatsoever on the system currently in place which is what is being discussed.

 

You are partially correct because only 48 states award EC votes based entirely upon the popular vote.

https://www.270towin.com/content/split-electoral-votes-maine-and-nebraska/

FTR I failed to proof read my OP properly and as such I take responsibility for the mistake. Mea culpa!

 

Court Finds NC Partisan Gerrymander A Violation Of State Constitution
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/north-carolina-partisan-gerrymandering-state-court-decision

Extreme partisan gerrymanders can violate North Carolina’s constitution, a state court found Tuesday, in a decision striking down the state legislative maps the GOP statehouse adopted in 2017.

 

Gerrymandering????

See California Democrats.

 

Gerrymandering is a problem.

But what is your solution? Who gets to decide when redistricting is done 'properly' and when its 'gerrymandering'?

Breaking the nation up into same-size hexagons that shall remain for all time would alleviate gerrymandering, but likely introduce a slough of other problems.

Do you have an alternative proposal?

 

One of the best alternative proposals I ever encountered was provided by @Statistikhengst.

What it boils down to is to change the number of seats in the House to 1000. Then the entire national population is evenly divided into groups of 0.1% (one tenth of one percent) of the population irrespective of state boundaries. (States are represented in the Senate instead.) With this method everyone's vote is exactly equal. There can be no gerrymandering because you are assigned to your 1/10th of a percent group on a national basis using the Census.