Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2018 American Political Scene

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    z,



    it is, but 1.) i don't mind the trade if it gets rid of this pervasive abuse, 2.) it's a trade that hurts the GOP relatively worse. Dem voters are naturally concentrated in high-density cities already whereas GOP voters are diffuse. that makes Dems much more vulnerable to getting gerrymandered.
    Who gets helped, who gets hurt will depend on 2020. If the GOP holds the House, the Dems lose, if the Dems take the House the GOP loses as districts get redrawn every 10 years based on the census.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by zraver View Post
      Who gets helped, who gets hurt will depend on 2020. If the GOP holds the House, the Dems lose, if the Dems take the House the GOP loses as districts get redrawn every 10 years based on the census.
      The states draw their own districts. Not the US HOR. It comes down to the state legislative elections, not the federal one.
      "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
        The states draw their own districts. Not the US HOR. It comes down to the state legislative elections, not the federal one.
        If SCOTUS throws out gerrymandering and makes districts a federal issue it will be Congress who draws up the new law.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by zraver View Post
          If SCOTUS throws out gerrymandering and makes districts a federal issue it will be Congress who draws up the new law.
          Don't forget the other ifs, such as if a new law were passed by Congress, and if the President would sign it. Without those, the matter of who wins the US HOR is irrelevant to redistricting in 2020. The Supreme Court ruling will be, but that does not automatically mean whoever takes the House in the mid-terms gets to have a say in the matter.
          "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

          Comment


          • #65
            The Democrat neighbor that allegedly assaulted Senator Rand Paul has been charged Federally.
            https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdin/pr...ber-congress-0

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by zraver View Post
              Thats a double edged sword, both parties use gerrymadering and its primary use is to preserve minority-magority districts. The SC's decsion could well end these racial feifdoms so critical to leftist politics.
              I googled “do both parties (ab)use gerrymandering?” and here’s what I found (YRMV):

              “As correctly pointed out by Nate Silver, members of Congress are increasingly insulated by the increasing polarization of their districts. Ever-larger victory margins reflect ever-safer re-election races.
              However, Silver has also restated a common belief. He states that partisan gerrymandering is a symmetric problem, i.e. both Democrats and Republicans do it. Although both sides are potentially motivated, only one side has taken redistricting to extremes
              .”

              Among the science-based premises that support the author’s conclusions are gems like this: “A minimum condition for a “representative” outcome is that within a Congressional delegation, the party receiving more votes should end up with more Congressional seats.”

              This is followed by an idiot-proof description of what happened in the 2016 House elections:

              _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D % vote _ R % vote _ _ D seats _ R seats
              Entire House _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.4% _ _ _ 49.6% _ _ _ _201 _ _ 234
              Arizona _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 45.6% _ _ _ 54.4% _ _ _ _ _5 _ _ _ _4
              Michigan _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 52.7% _ _ _ 47.3% _ _ _ _ 5 _ _ _ _ _9
              North Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.9% _ _ _ 49.1% _ _ _ _4 _ _ _ _ 9
              Pennsylvania _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.7% _ _ _ 49.3% _ _ _ _ _ 5 _ _ _13
              Wisconsin _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.8% _ _ _ 49.2% _ _ _ _ _3 _ _ _ _5

              —Sam Wong, Princeton Election Consortium, Dec 30, 2012; updated Sept 4, 2017: http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...es-do-it-myth/
              Further examples of the same table, but for the 2012 House races, are here: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...r-republicans/

              For those needing remedial work, the Brennan Center for Justice offers a test of your gerrymandering awareness skills: https://www.brennancenter.org/analys...ts-cover-alone

              More of that nasty scientific thinking here, at Scientific American (Carrie Arnold, June 7, 2017): https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ave-democracy/
              Trust me?
              I'm an economist!

              Comment


              • #67
                Amazingly the WWII Memorial on the Mall is not barricaded! How can this be? This is not how things were handled during the last Government shutdown.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Curiously enough, there is nothing in the Constitution that requires districting at all, it only addresses apportionment.

                  Theoretically, districting could be abolished altogether, and other methods could be used. Proportional representation being one of them, i.e. the number of representatives sent from each state to Congress is based on their party's proportion of the vote in a statewide election. Which would incidentally also make third parties viable.

                  Highly unlikely, of course, as it's doubtful members of Congress would ever pass a law so contrary to their individual political self-interests.
                  "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by DOR View Post
                    I googled “do both parties (ab)use gerrymandering?” and here’s what I found (YRMV):

                    “As correctly pointed out by Nate Silver, members of Congress are increasingly insulated by the increasing polarization of their districts. Ever-larger victory margins reflect ever-safer re-election races.
                    However, Silver has also restated a common belief. He states that partisan gerrymandering is a symmetric problem, i.e. both Democrats and Republicans do it. Although both sides are potentially motivated, only one side has taken redistricting to extremes
                    .”

                    Among the science-based premises that support the author’s conclusions are gems like this: “A minimum condition for a “representative” outcome is that within a Congressional delegation, the party receiving more votes should end up with more Congressional seats.”

                    This is followed by an idiot-proof description of what happened in the 2016 House elections:

                    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ D % vote _ R % vote _ _ D seats _ R seats
                    Entire House _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.4% _ _ _ 49.6% _ _ _ _201 _ _ 234
                    Arizona _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 45.6% _ _ _ 54.4% _ _ _ _ _5 _ _ _ _4
                    Michigan _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 52.7% _ _ _ 47.3% _ _ _ _ 5 _ _ _ _ _9
                    North Carolina _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.9% _ _ _ 49.1% _ _ _ _4 _ _ _ _ 9
                    Pennsylvania _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.7% _ _ _ 49.3% _ _ _ _ _ 5 _ _ _13
                    Wisconsin _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 50.8% _ _ _ 49.2% _ _ _ _ _3 _ _ _ _5

                    —Sam Wong, Princeton Election Consortium, Dec 30, 2012; updated Sept 4, 2017: http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...es-do-it-myth/
                    Further examples of the same table, but for the 2012 House races, are here: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dru...r-republicans/

                    For those needing remedial work, the Brennan Center for Justice offers a test of your gerrymandering awareness skills: https://www.brennancenter.org/analys...ts-cover-alone

                    More of that nasty scientific thinking here, at Scientific American (Carrie Arnold, June 7, 2017): https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ave-democracy/
                    Hrmmm.... so if Dems live overwhelmingly in concentrated urban districts they may cream the GOP in urban races but lose more seats in rural races. That seems to be what is happening. A truly representative government will weight rural voters slightly heavier than urban votes as a measure to protect what is often a distinct culture that has different priorities than urban voters. Urban voters love to give themselves things like public transit that require an entire state to pay for but only benefit urban dwellers. Rural dwellers are more concerned with land use regulations than toll roads the two competing sets of priorities need to be balanced.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                      Curiously enough, there is nothing in the Constitution that requires districting at all, it only addresses apportionment.

                      Theoretically, districting could be abolished altogether, and other methods could be used. Proportional representation being one of them, i.e. the number of representatives sent from each state to Congress is based on their party's proportion of the vote in a statewide election. Which would incidentally also make third parties viable.

                      Highly unlikely, of course, as it's doubtful members of Congress would ever pass a law so contrary to their individual political self-interests.
                      Proportional representation, virtual congress and repealing the 17th Amendment would fix a lot of these issues. It would diffuse power away from Washington. Have a general election to decide proportions, then do primaries to decide who from each winning party goes. It would simply reverse the current order of voting. Then have those representatives spending 70% of their time in their home state away from Washington. Have them go to DC on a rotating basis except for certain periods like the SotU. The House could keep roughly 100 members in Washington to run committees at all times. Having senators answerable to the states would absolutely break K Street.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        More on classified Clinton emails and how Hillary has been faking her technology ignorance.
                        https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...linton-emails/

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          Proportional representation, virtual congress and repealing the 17th Amendment would fix a lot of these issues. It would diffuse power away from Washington. Have a general election to decide proportions, then do primaries to decide who from each winning party goes. It would simply reverse the current order of voting. Then have those representatives spending 70% of their time in their home state away from Washington. Have them go to DC on a rotating basis except for certain periods like the SotU. The House could keep roughly 100 members in Washington to run committees at all times. Having senators answerable to the states would absolutely break K Street.
                          Generally the way proportional representation system works is that there's a list of candidates, selected by a mechanism beforehand. There's no reason voters couldn't rank candidates preferentially in a primary before moving on to the general election.

                          The 17th Amendment was enacted because the old way of doing things failed. Failed badly. It wasn't working the way it was intended and it made state politics toxic.
                          Last edited by Ironduke; 21 Jan 18,, 21:30.
                          "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            It looks like Australia is starting to deal with USA type issues.
                            http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-42643834

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              More FBI texts released.
                              http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...n-advance.html

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                                Generally the way proportional representation system works is that there's a list of candidates, selected by a mechanism beforehand. There's no reason voters couldn't rank candidates preferentially in a primary before moving on to the general election.

                                The 17th Amendment was enacted because the old way of doing things failed. Failed badly. It wasn't working the way it was intended and it made state politics toxic.
                                I disagree it didn't work. What the 17th did more than any other single thing in American history is concentrate power in DC and break the power of the states to have a means of reigning in federal regulations. Popular vote elections of senators made them the least representative part of government.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X