Gerrymandering... it just is now.

[Jimmy Higgins]

The main reason we even have the secret ballot is to stop vote buying, and vote buying thrives because we’ve allowed high-poverty, low-trust environments to fester. The other big reason is intimidation, which secrecy also blocks. If people were economically secure, trusted the system, and didn’t feel pressured by bosses, neighbors, or party operatives, we could ditch the secret ballot entirely and move to more complex, transparent voting systems. But we’re dealing with humans here, so that’s not on the table.

When it comes to gerrymandering, the Constitution ultimately puts the power in the people’s hands. In states where citizens can pass ballot measures, truly independent redistricting commissions have been created and gerrymandering has been reduced. Where that hasn’t happened, it’s because voters either supported it, tolerated it, or didn’t mobilize to change it. And in states without that process, it’s because we’ve allowed political systems to remain in place that keep the power out of our hands.

We had a couple goes at it in Ohio. Pretty much what happens is, we get independent or bipartisan redistricting on the ballot, and then there are $50 million in ads with some farmer in the field, with a person talking about how life will implode if Issue 3 passes. They don't actually say a word about what Issue 3 actually is. And then it fails because they electorate fell for it again.

Like it or not, the maps we have today, and the politicians who benefit from them, exist because “we the people” either chose them, accepted them, or allowed the rules to be written so we couldn’t change them. \

It isn't that simple. Obamacare is the reason the maps exist. The 2010 bloodbath gave the GOP absurd majorities in State Legislatures because of death panels and other boogiemen things in the ACA. Then the GOP changed voting maps, a lot. You think Ohio's mapping is bad for the US House, you should see the State Legislature map, going from 3 to 2 -> 2 to 1 past 2010. And it is effectively impossible to really grab the power back now.

 

[Gospel]

We had a couple goes at it in Ohio. Pretty much what happens is, we get independent or bipartisan redistricting on the ballot, and then there are $50 million in ads with some farmer in the field, with a person talking about how life will implode if Issue 3 passes. They don't actually say a word about what Issue 3 actually is. And then it fails because they electorate fell for it again.

A $50 million ad blitz only works if voters allow themselves to be swayed by emotional manipulation instead of actually looking into what Issue 3 is about. This is a problem the Founding Fathers didn’t anticipate when they put ultimate power in the hands of we the dumb ass people.

It isn't that simple. Obamacare is the reason the maps exist. The 2010 bloodbath gave the GOP absurd majorities in State Legislatures because of death panels and other boogiemen things in the ACA. Then the GOP changed voting maps, a lot. You think Ohio's mapping is bad for the US House, you should see the State Legislature map, going from 3 to 2 -> 2 to 1 past 2010. And it is effectively impossible to really grab the power back now.

The “death panels” myth was effective because a huge portion of the electorate didn’t fact-check it and voted on fear instead of policy reality. That’s not only an example of mass gullibility being exploited, but proof that "we the people" are gullible. It also shows how a misinformed or easily manipulated electorate ends up creating and preserving the very systems they'll later bitch about. Case in point: Republican-leaning voters in Ohio started complaining about the lack of competition and choice, without realizing the system was a direct result of their own 2010 votes.

Every time I hear foreigners say Americans are stupid, I just nod in agreement and keep it moving.

Edit: I don’t go around injecting racism into every conversation, but when it looks like I am, it’s usually because the topic already has it baked in. For example, I mentioned “fear” above and deliberately didn’t expand on what that fear is, because I guess “we the people” don’t want to look in the mirror. Like always, “we the people” would rather blame someone else for the mess "we the people" created for themselves.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

We had a couple goes at it in Ohio. Pretty much what happens is, we get independent or bipartisan redistricting on the ballot, and then there are $50 million in ads with some farmer in the field, with a person talking about how life will implode if Issue 3 passes. They don't actually say a word about what Issue 3 actually is. And then it fails because they electorate fell for it again.

A $50 million ad blitz only works if voters allow themselves to be swayed by emotional manipulation instead of actually looking into what Issue 3 is about. This is a problem the Founding Fathers didn’t anticipate when they put ultimate power in the hands of we the dumb ass people.

It is manipulation, but gerrymandering is political and the general public usually interprets this stuff as tit for tat. Also, people can be swayed with psychological wording very easily. "Unelected outsiders". Yes, the people should be more involved, but they aren't up to the task.

Additionally, the Founding Fathers most certainly did anticipate that power. That is when the Electoral College exists and the people (white males) could only directly vote for Federal House Reps.

It isn't that simple. Obamacare is the reason the maps exist. The 2010 bloodbath gave the GOP absurd majorities in State Legislatures because of death panels and other boogiemen things in the ACA. Then the GOP changed voting maps, a lot. You think Ohio's mapping is bad for the US House, you should see the State Legislature map, going from 3 to 2 -> 2 to 1 past 2010. And it is effectively impossible to really grab the power back now.

The “death panels” myth was effective because a huge portion of the electorate didn’t fact-check it and voted on fear instead of policy reality. That’s not only an example of mass gullibility being exploited, but proof that "we the people" are gullible. It also shows how a misinformed or easily manipulated electorate ends up creating and preserving the very systems they'll later bitch about. Case in point: Republican-leaning voters in Ohio started complaining about the lack of competition and choice, without realizing the system was a direct result of their own 2010 votes.

McCain opened up Pandora's Box, released the Palin and this cancer hasn't looked back. It is effective in winning elections and now they are dismantling the Government. The people won't like the result. But it is too late for that now.

Every time I hear foreigners say Americans are stupid, I just nod in agreement and keep it moving.

Foreigners are stupid too. Europe is fighting off their own 2nd wave of fascism.

 

[jonatha]

I will repeat an earlier post on the topic and argue for a Constitutional Amendment containing an algorithm for drawing Federal voting maps based on simulated annealing.

Zero-knowledge techniques exist to allow anyone who cares to do so to participate in the generation of the random numbers required by such an algorithm to ensure they cannot be gamed.

 

[Gospel]

It is manipulation, but gerrymandering is political and the general public usually interprets this stuff as tit for tat. Also, people can be swayed with psychological wording very easily. "Unelected outsiders". Yes, the people should be more involved, but they aren't up to the task.

Additionally, the Founding Fathers most certainly did anticipate that power. That is when the Electoral College exists and the people (white males) could only directly vote for Federal House Reps.

Fair enough, the Founders did try to limit direct public power. But their system didn’t account for how quickly those limits could be captured by partisanship. Even when voting was restricted to white male property owners, those voters could still be whipped into partisan camps. State legislatures picked senators along party lines. The Senate confirmed judges along party lines. And the Electoral College rewarded state-level partisan dominance (a small group of elite white male property owners, plus the political class in state legislatures co-opted it almost immediately). The system was never immune to factional control.

Over time, the electorate expanded, which was a good thing. But with more power came more responsibility, and instead of rising to that challenge, Americans for the most part have handed it over to manipulation, misinformation, and party loyalty. That’s how you end up with gerrymandering locked in by the very voters it later disadvantages, and an Electoral College that’s produced five presidents who lost the popular vote which runs counter to democratic norms that prioritize equal voter influence. And both persist for the same reason: people tolerate them. America seems to cherish sabotaging itself, and in the end will succeed in doing so as long as “we the people” keep choosing to hurt others even when it means burning down their own house.

So far, they’ve poured gasoline in every room and are now aimlessly wandering the house looking for a match. A lighter's already sitting on the coffee table, it’s only a matter of time before someone notices and picks it up.

Then:

• Gasoline = decades of slavery debates, economic tensions, failed compromises
• Lighter = Lincoln’s election
• Fire = Secession + Fort Sumter

Now:

• Gasoline = decades of political polarization, gerrymandering, voter suppression, institutional erosion, and the public’s tolerance for misinformation and partisan loyalty over governance.
• Lighter = a disputed national election where one side refuses to accept the result, possibly combined with a Supreme Court ruling or state legislature action that overturns or nullifies certified votes.
• Fire = mass unrest, state–federal standoffs, and the breakdown of federal authority, with states openly defying federal law or recognizing alternate governments, leading to a de facto fragmentation of the United States.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Tigers!]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.
It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

 

[ZiprHead]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.
It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

The Dems tried to enact legislation to do just that, twice. The Republican blocked them both times.

 

[jonatha]

View attachment 51647

I live in Kentucky. That map cannot possibly be colored correctly. (Check out the boundaries of the current 1st district...)

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.

The right-wing be like:

It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

Yeah, it would.

Here is a great site that could be of interest to you. I mean, if you aren't just here to pretend to be some sort of Australian Norman Thomas regarding American politics.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

View attachment 51647

I live in Kentucky. That map cannot possibly be colored correctly. (Check out the boundaries of the current 1st district...)

It is dated 2022. The link to find that is in my post above (the Great Site link, not The Simpsons video clip).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Looking at the Illinois map, the GOP should have two or three more seats. Maryland, probably one more seat for the GOP. Oregon, another seat for the GOP. California, at best the GOP could gain 3 seats in fair redistricting. New Mexico, maybe one if they tried real hard to get a red district.

Texas alone is looking to steal 5 more, on top of the several gerrymandered districts already.

 

[Politesse]

This is turning democracy into a bit of a joke. While a thumb on the scale was always a risk for districting, there appears to be little care about the influential of partisan matters now, and instead of a thumb, they've just rigged the scale altogether. Our democracy has a cancer at it appears malignant.

They've been doing this retributive gerrymandering pretty openly since the Clinton years, and yes, it is badly deteriorating the concept of representative democracy. Being represented by someone who the majority in your region wouldn't vote for is injurious, as is being represented by a fat-ass incumbent in an artificially "safe" district.

 

[ideologyhunter]

We are in a one-party system. It will be difficult for my side to claw back some power, let alone enough power to challenge the GOP as equals. It's not as simple as 'fine-tuning the Democrat message." The Repubs' rise to hegemony is awesome (in the sense of overwhelming and annhilating.) Somehow, the party that, since the mid-80s, brought us the s & l meltdown, the 2008/9 market meltdown, the extremes of the wealth gap, which continues to widen, the abandonment of sane conservation policy, and of course a President who fired up a mob to smash in the doors of the Capitol, which he then happily watched on TV for 186 fucking minutes -- somehow these folks have a hold on enough of the electorate and enough Cong. districts to stay in power. They have figured out how to gaslight the faithful and keep them enraged and focused on The Transgender Crisis, The Undocumented Immigrant Crisis, plus Jesus and the 2nd Amendment. The Dems can't fine-tune their message enough to counteract that, not to mention the fact that the other side has a generational lock on the judiciary. My guess is that it would take a combination of factors to bring a substantial number of swing or independent voters back over the line and to start winning key elections:
> Trump would have to seriously damage the economy over multiple quarters
> The Medicare/Medicaid cuts would have to kick in with sufficient force to rile up the electorate
> Trump would have to either withdraw his pledge to preserve Social Security or simply to go along with a GOP scale-back, under the mantra of 'controlling fraud and waste'
> The Dems would need to find, support, and unite behind a charismatic candidate who combined the skill and oratory of Obama and the common touch of Trump (it makes me throw up a little to say that last part)

Am I wrong? What did I overlook? I know I'm underemphasizing the narrow majorities the GOP has in Congress...so maybe next fall...

 

[Politesse]

If the Democrats put a bunch of alt-right curious doormats on the slate in order to "win back the middle", does it even matter if they suceed in winning back the House next year? A majority of seats is not necessarily a majority of votes.

 

[Jarhyn]

The Dems would need to find, support, and unite behind a charismatic candidate who combined the skill and oratory of Obama and the common touch of Trump

More, I think that the Dems need to find, support, and unite against candidates with solid values that do not shift with the weather.

That's the secret. The candidate has to have hills they stand on and fight for.

That's the entirety of the "common touch" that is necessary; people have respect for people with consistent values even if those values are abhorrent.

There is SOME issue here in that usually people don't build oratory skills when they don't find a need to circumvent reason regularly, so those with positive values tend to be weaker orators.

 

[ideologyhunter]

If the Democrats put a bunch of alt-right curious doormats on the slate in order to "win back the middle", does it even matter if they suceed in winning back the House next year? A majority of seats is not necessarily a majority of votes.

The Manchin Syndrome...yeah.

 

[Tigers!]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.
It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

The Dems tried to enact legislation to do just that, twice. The Republican blocked them both times.

That is unfortunate. But the Dems can try to grab the moral high ground.
Keep putting up the legislation reagrdless of what the Republicans do. Show them up.

 

[Tigers!]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.

The right-wing be like:

It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

Yeah, it would.

Here is a great site that could be of interest to you. I mean, if you aren't just here to pretend to be some sort of Australian Norman Thomas regarding American politics.

Thank you for that site. There are too many red coloured states. You have your work cut out for you.
If any of the red states are Democrat controlled then there is an ideal chance for the Dems to show their bona fides concerning the elimination of gerrymandering. I counted at least 5 marked as Democratic. That would reduce the number of reds. All voters/candidates will benefit in the long run.

To which Norman Thomas were you referring? I assume the one who stood as a candidate.

 

[ZiprHead]

I wonder if Illinois with have to redo its districts?

Funny, North Carolina and Pennsylvania were forced by courts to undo their gerrymandered maps. Florida, Texas, and Ohio are gerrymandered heavily but the GOP control all of the courts. Texas is also gerrymandering on top of the gerrymandering from 2003.

But we get to hear about Illinois... again and again and again. Why not Maryland too? They gerrymandered one or two seats.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If the dems do not want to be constantly reminded about Illinois then end that instance of gerrymandering and it will go away.
It would be better to stop gerrymandering all together though. Have fun with that.

The Dems tried to enact legislation to do just that, twice. The Republican blocked them both times.

That is unfortunate. But the Dems can try to grab the moral high ground.
Keep putting up the legislation reagrdless of what the Republicans do. Show them up.

These people pay absolutely no attention to morality.