If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   On Tuesday night, Democrats swept the Presidential and Senate elections, but despite more total votes for Democratic candidates, the solid Republican house majority was saved by the heroic actions of one man, Mr. Gerry Mander   (slate.com) divider line 132
    More: Hero, Democrats, Senate, Republican, democratic  
•       •       •

2780 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Nov 2012 at 9:31 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



132 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-09 10:58:37 AM

organizm: I think the Canadian model is the correct model to use here.

Question though: Are Canadian cities as segregated as American ones?


Difficult to answer. There are fewer minorities in Canada, on average, so they tend to have no choice but blend with others. The major cities such as Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver will have defined chinatowns, little italies, etc... But overall, you tend to have "whiter" areas and more "multi-ethnic" areas. For example, the neighborhood of Parc-Extension in Montreal has people from over 400 different ethnicities. Middle-class neighborhoods will also be mostly color blind: For example, while the majority of my neighborhood is French-Canadian,my immediate neighbors are: Haitians on the left side, French-Canadians or the right, across the street it's Italians, Romanians, and Italian/French-Canadian. In the back I have: French-Canadians, Egyptian/Peruvian, and Lebanese. There are Armenians and Chinese folks a bit further down the street as well.
 
2012-11-09 10:59:58 AM

BMulligan: CPennypacker: BMulligan: wxboy: CPennypacker: I can also think of a scenario where everyone in the city votes for the same people and the top 3 candidates get 50% of the votes. The rest of the state gets disproportionally represented.

It's not ideal but its better than the way it is now.

This whole idea does work if you only get to vote for one person instead of 12. I was thinking of a situation where each person can vote for 12.

It's still a problem, though. Look at my state, Washington. Right now I think we have 4 Republicans and 6 Democrats in our congressional delegation (I'd have to check to be sure, but that's close). If we had at-large voting, we'd have probably 9 Democrats and 1 Republican (Dave Reichert would survive a statewide vote, I think). Virtually all of our representatives would come from the I-5 Corridor, and none would come from the eastern half of the state. Outside of Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, and Bellevue, no one in Washington State would be represented in Washington, D.C.

Why does someone need to live next to you to represent your interests in congress?

Well, again to use my state as an example, the Puget Sound corridor is heavily liberal, has an economy based on tech and international trade, is ethnically diverse (aside from an under-representation of African Americans), and is generally irreligious, anti-gun, and pro-union. The remainder of the state is strongly conservative, relies mostly on agriculture and other extractive industries, is ethnically homogeneous (aside from Hispanic agricultural workers), and is al about God, guns, and union-busting. There's no way that my congressman, "Baghdad" Jim McDermott, could possibly represent the interests of voters in Omak, Poulsbo, or Walla Walla.


But if you can only vote for 1 or two people, then a local guy campaigning locally could feasibly get enough local votes. He's not going to get the most votes, but he could feasibly get enough to get the second to last or last seat. Just because the whole state votes doesn't mean you have to run a statewide campaign. And the liberal outliers in a rural area can add to the vote totals for the liberal guys winning all the city votes.
 
2012-11-09 11:02:50 AM

super_grass: "Republicans gerrymander for their own benefit."

"Quit being smug, democrats pulls that stunt all the time."

"HURR, CLEARLY YOU THINK THE GOP IS BETTER THEN, WHY DO YOU NOT WANT TO FIX THE PROBLEM"

It's like the politics derp never left.




Yeah..... no. Everyone admits both parties do it, and its a constant problem. In fact, I'd say it is the MAJOR problem in American politics. Its the root of the partisan gridlock (because in a really red district you worry about getting primaried on the right, not losing to the Democrat. Vice versa in a blue district).
 
2012-11-09 11:04:23 AM

thornhill: The makeup of Congress should be reflective of the nation.


Agreed. But why do you think splitting districts along county lines would prevent Texas, Arizona and New Mexico from electing latinos or Lincoln county, NV from electing a martian?
 
2012-11-09 11:04:50 AM

organizm: Question though: Are Canadian cities as segregated as American ones


Segregated? Canadians are all whiter than white and all talk like the McKenzie brothers.
 
2012-11-09 11:06:26 AM

Triumph: What democratic gerrymandering might look like

Simple solution - follow the Iowa model. Pass a national law that counties cannot be broken up by a number greater than the number of districts. 8 districts = 8 counties can be divided.


Ohio tried that this time. The ballot initiative wording took up two columns (for reference, the seven presidential candidates took up one column). It went down to defeat. We'll still have a district that contains Toledo and Cleveland, a district that contains both Springfield (20 miles NE of Dayton) and Oregon (a suburb of Toledo), and a district that's nothing but Columbus.
 
2012-11-09 11:07:23 AM

Saiga410: organizm: Question though: Are Canadian cities as segregated as American ones

Segregated? Canadians are all whiter than white and all talk like the McKenzie brothers.


You should see our Ukrainian or Irish ghettos, eh!
 
2012-11-09 11:14:14 AM
A simple way of dividing a City/State into districts like a clock/pie would be columns. If a State has 1,000,000 people and you need 5 districts, start in the west and move east until you cover 200K people and draw a vertical line repeat 3 times. Any district grows or shrinks by 100% compared to and other district, redistrict the city again.

You should only be able to pick from certain standardized shape models. Pie. Rows, Columns. Honeycomb. etc. etc....
 
2012-11-09 11:17:02 AM
If you don't like your US Congress representative or district, then MOVE. It's a free country. And after you've moved, we'll redistrict your ass right back where you started.
 
2012-11-09 11:17:26 AM

mrshowrules: A simple way of dividing a City/State into districts like a clock/pie would be columns. If a State has 1,000,000 people and you need 5 districts, start in the west and move east until you cover 200K people and draw a vertical line repeat 3 times. Any district grows or shrinks by 100% compared to and other district, redistrict the city again.

You should only be able to pick from certain standardized shape models. Pie. Rows, Columns. Honeycomb. etc. etc....


Pink hearts. Yellow moons,. Orange stars. Green clovers.
 
2012-11-09 11:25:04 AM
Its simple. Pass a law saying the districts can only be divided by straight lines, natural bodies of water, or state lines. Also the shape that makes up each district may only have 4 sides, and it can't be more than 25% taller than it is wide, and vice versa
 
2012-11-09 11:35:24 AM

Wellon Dowd: mrshowrules: A simple way of dividing a City/State into districts like a clock/pie would be columns. If a State has 1,000,000 people and you need 5 districts, start in the west and move east until you cover 200K people and draw a vertical line repeat 3 times. Any district grows or shrinks by 100% compared to and other district, redistrict the city again.

You should only be able to pick from certain standardized shape models. Pie. Rows, Columns. Honeycomb. etc. etc....

Pink hearts. Yellow moons,. Orange stars. Green clovers.


Those would also be magically delicious.
 
2012-11-09 11:39:05 AM
You could just mandate that a district have a perimeter-area ratio below a certain threshold, and have a national board to adjudicate rare situations where that was impossible for some reason.

You could further complicate this by allowing ring-shaped districts, but requiring the ring to have at least a given width-radius ratio.
 
2012-11-09 11:42:10 AM

thornhill: Flab: thornhill: that bosnian sniper: Proportionally-elected statewide Congressional delegations.

That's all I have to say about it.

That's really the only solutions given how partisan mapping has become and will likely always remain.

There's plenty of evidence out there that non-partisan mapping commissions are influenced by partisans on both sides.

And leaving it to the computer simply doesn't work because you'd still have to decide on what criteria the algorithm should use in drawing districts. For instance, how far should it go with contorting district boundaries to ensure the a minority population has enough representation in a district to be able to elect a congressmen of their choice? Or in other words, I think it makes sense to sometimes draw funky looking districts in areas where there is a very large minority population but it is not geographically compactly consolidated to ensure that there can be a minority member of congress.

Allow me to play the dumb Canadian, here for a minute...

Canadian ridings are, for the most part, roughly square (or follow a natural boundary, such as a provincial border, or river) and are based solely on the number of residents, yet we have no problem electing whites, latinos, blacks, asians, indians, straights, gays, and probably even a martian or two.

Why do you feel the need to make special rules for minorities?

The makeup of Congress should be reflective of the nation.

Since the birth of the Republic gerrymandering has been used to dilute minority voting power within Congressional districts. This is what's currently going on in Texas. Arbitrarily drawn lines could result in the same problem.


Well, to be fair, Democrats and anybody else with common sense called bullshiat on those maps and the courts threw them out. right now we actually using the old districts until new ones can be made
 
2012-11-09 11:43:05 AM

odinsposse: BMulligan: Gulper Eel: Wellon Dowd: If the per-capita number of members of the House was the same now as in the first Congress there would be over 8000 Representatives. Smaller districts, by the very nature, would be more homogenous and more clearly represent the interests of the populace of that district. It would also allow regular people to run for Congress.

I could go for this.

My god, what a farking awful idea. If you think Congress is an unworkable mess now, just wait until it's sixteen times bigger.

Agreed. But it would make sense to redistribute representation based on population. You could tweak it so that our least populous state, Wyoming, gets 1 representative and everyone else gets reps based on how much bigger they are then Wyoming. That would mean California, with the biggest population, would have 66 reps. It would result in a bigger and more representative Congress but not one with an unmanageable number of reps.


It's called The Wyoming Rule and it works basically like you explained. Since Wyoming is the least populous state and has one district, all other district populations should be in line with that population. Right now it would require 547 reps instead of 435. More equal representation, but not as crazy as 8,000 districts.
 
2012-11-09 11:52:35 AM

Triumph: [fishbowl.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 402x226]

What democratic gerrymandering might look like

Simple solution - follow the Iowa model. Pass a national law that counties cannot be broken up by a number greater than the number of districts. 8 districts = 8 counties can be divided.


That would require an Amendment to the US Constitution. There's no other "national law" that would be able to make such a sweeping change to state politics.
 
2012-11-09 11:53:20 AM

mrshowrules: Chimperror2: I woke Wednesday and it looked a lot like Tuesday.

The roving rape gangs and rampant cannibalism won't start in earnest for a few more weeks. The economy still has some upward momentum left over from the Bush recovery.


Obviously you haven't been to the Rockaways (neither has FEMA so you're not alone).
 
2012-11-09 11:56:06 AM

theknuckler_33: Liberals should really give up this whining about gerrymandering because liberals do exactly the same thing every time they get the chance. Doesn't make it right by any stretch of the imagination, but clutching at pearls and hand wringing about the Republicans doing it is pretty hypocritical.


If you'd RTFA: "To be perfectly fair, Democrats played the same game in Illinois and Maryland, squeezing out suburban Republicans by packing just enough of Cook County and Montgomery County, respectively, into their districts."

So no, it's not "pretty hypocritical." What IS hypocritical is you whining about "liberals whining" and calling it hypocritical.
 
2012-11-09 11:56:16 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: Interesting that subby thinks that Gerry is a male.

Continuing with the war on women. Sad.


You finally wiped enough tears out of your eyes to see well enough to make a post. Welcome back.
 
2012-11-09 12:00:05 PM

Chimperror2: mrshowrules: Chimperror2: I woke Wednesday and it looked a lot like Tuesday.

The roving rape gangs and rampant cannibalism won't start in earnest for a few more weeks. The economy still has some upward momentum left over from the Bush recovery.

Obviously you haven't been to the Rockaways (neither has FEMA so you're not alone).


Link

Are you guys ever right about anything? Honestly? Here are your options.

1) this image wasn't recently taken in the Rockaways

2) the ladies toque says "FEMALE" not "FEMA" because you can't see the whole thing.
 
2012-11-09 12:00:44 PM

mrshowrules: Chimperror2: mrshowrules: Chimperror2: I woke Wednesday and it looked a lot like Tuesday.

The roving rape gangs and rampant cannibalism won't start in earnest for a few more weeks. The economy still has some upward momentum left over from the Bush recovery.

Obviously you haven't been to the Rockaways (neither has FEMA so you're not alone).

Link

Are you guys ever right about anything? Honestly? Here are your options.

1) this image wasn't recently taken in the Rockaways

2) the ladies toque says "FEMALE" not "FEMA" because you can't see the whole thing.


Try that again.

d1.static.dvidshub.net
 
2012-11-09 12:09:15 PM

thurstonxhowell: theknuckler_33: Liberals should really give up this whining about gerrymandering because liberals do exactly the same thing every time they get the chance. Doesn't make it right by any stretch of the imagination, but clutching at pearls and hand wringing about the Republicans doing it is pretty hypocritical.

You're right. Both sides do it so we should never fix it ever.


That isn't even remotely close to what I said and you know it.
 
2012-11-09 12:11:15 PM

pseudoscience: theknuckler_33: Liberals should really give up this whining about gerrymandering because liberals do exactly the same thing every time they get the chance. Doesn't make it right by any stretch of the imagination, but clutching at pearls and hand wringing about the Republicans doing it is pretty hypocritical.

If you'd RTFA: "To be perfectly fair, Democrats played the same game in Illinois and Maryland, squeezing out suburban Republicans by packing just enough of Cook County and Montgomery County, respectively, into their districts."

So no, it's not "pretty hypocritical." What IS hypocritical is you whining about "liberals whining" and calling it hypocritical.


I DRTFA. My comment was basically a response to the headline. But it is nice to know TFA acknowledges that.
 
2012-11-09 01:01:41 PM

gameshowhost: ITT: "Libs do it a little bit too so pay no attention to how much more the GOP does it."


You're adorable.
 
2012-11-09 01:16:15 PM

theknuckler_33: pseudoscience: theknuckler_33: Liberals should really give up this whining about gerrymandering because liberals do exactly the same thing every time they get the chance. Doesn't make it right by any stretch of the imagination, but clutching at pearls and hand wringing about the Republicans doing it is pretty hypocritical.

If you'd RTFA: "To be perfectly fair, Democrats played the same game in Illinois and Maryland, squeezing out suburban Republicans by packing just enough of Cook County and Montgomery County, respectively, into their districts."

So no, it's not "pretty hypocritical." What IS hypocritical is you whining about "liberals whining" and calling it hypocritical.

I DRTFA. My comment was basically a response to the headline. But it is nice to know TFA acknowledges that.


Fair enough.
 
2012-11-09 01:41:20 PM
If you REALLY want to be subversive, organize a movement. Call it Project Nomad or something. Recruit volunteers like truck drivers who live a fairly transient lifestyle anyway to move every ten years to targeted gerrymandered districts that protect the "other" party's incumbents.

Nothing extreme like moving to other states, merely considering the to apartment complex down the road in the district next door when the current lease is up.
 
2012-11-09 02:24:05 PM
Sorry "bof sidez r teh equallyz teh bad" folks. 50.3% of Americans voted for Democratic Congress Nominees vs. 47.7% Republican Congress Nominees. Yet, Republicans still managed to hold a 35 seat lead in the house.


No, not bof sidez r teh equallyz teh bad. Not even close.
 
2012-11-09 02:54:00 PM

theknuckler_33: thurstonxhowell: theknuckler_33: Liberals should really give up this whining about gerrymandering because liberals do exactly the same thing every time they get the chance. Doesn't make it right by any stretch of the imagination, but clutching at pearls and hand wringing about the Republicans doing it is pretty hypocritical.

You're right. Both sides do it so we should never fix it ever.

That isn't even remotely close to what I said and you know it.


It's not what you said, but it's the end of the line for that train of thought. If liberals don't like it... and conservatives don't like it... why is your go-to plan of action to tell liberals to STFU and stop whining? How about, instead of that, and I know this is crazy, but how about we actually try to fix it? Is that what you want, or do you want to hold on to this BSABS stop whining about it line of bullshiat? It can't be both.
 
2012-11-09 04:17:25 PM

mrshowrules: mrshowrules: Chimperror2: mrshowrules: Chimperror2: I woke Wednesday and it looked a lot like Tuesday.

The roving rape gangs and rampant cannibalism won't start in earnest for a few more weeks. The economy still has some upward momentum left over from the Bush recovery.

Obviously you haven't been to the Rockaways (neither has FEMA so you're not alone).

Link

Are you guys ever right about anything? Honestly? Here are your options.

1) this image wasn't recently taken in the Rockaways

2) the ladies toque says "FEMALE" not "FEMA" because you can't see the whole thing.

Try that again.

[d1.static.dvidshub.net image 450x298]


They are doing a heckuva job. Is that a FEMA camp?
 
2012-11-09 06:50:42 PM
I fail to see the problem here. the GOP got to redistrict, and now the House can serve as a necessary check on the excesses of the Executive
 
2012-11-09 08:05:12 PM

Triumph: [fishbowl.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com image 402x226]

What democratic gerrymandering might look like

Simple solution - follow the Iowa model. Pass a national law that counties cannot be broken up by a number greater than the number of districts. 8 districts = 8 counties can be divided.


That may help in the Eastern and Midwestern states where the counties are so small but out west counties are huge. California has 53 Congressional districts and 58 counties. In those states it wouldn't do much. You need to try to have some nonpartisan group and restrictions on how abnormal the shape of district can be (ie the district can't be more than 2x longer than its wide or something to that effect.)
 
2012-11-09 10:20:28 PM
upload.wikimedia.org

OM NOM NOM
 
Displayed 32 of 132 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report