Any district designs that give less weight to population than they do to geography are going to benefit Republicans.
American Politics thread: No Nazis Allowed
-
-
About lying maps who lie: https://xkcd.com/1939/
-
Any district designs that give less weight to population than they do to geography are going to benefit Republicans.
See especially Texas. Where all the big cities with most of the population are democrat blue, but the giant swathes of wide open space with populations of a dozen people are all red. So when the final results come out it looks like the map is 90-10 red, even though the numbers are closer to 55-45.
[hide]area
population
Most of those counties in the bottom corner have a population of a few thousand, the smallest only a few hundred. Meanwhile San Antonio, Dallas and Austin have populations of 1.5 million. [/hide] -
A big problem with Pennsylvania is that the Pittsburgh is getting redder. This isn't even a new thing; I think pretty much every Democrat candidate starting with Bill has done worse than the previous one.
-
Any district designs that give less weight to population than they do to geography are going to benefit Republicans.
I mean that's definitely not what's happening with any part of gerrymandering. The whole point of redistricting as mandated by the Constitution is to keep the number of people in each district relatively equal.
Cities are usually overwhelmingly Democratic. Any system that, rather logically, attempts to group people by shared interests will group those heavily Democratic constituents in a few counties. Unless you're specifically gerrymandering for competitive elections, that Republican advantage is unavoidable as long as Democrats self-segregate. It's got nothing to do with prioritizing geography.
Using county borders is usually a non-issue. It's a pre-existing organizational boundary that makes it easier for people to know where to vote. And in most cases east of the Rockies, counties are tiny squares that can be easily combined to form population-balanced districts.
-
Not including the "March For Our Lives," this must be the dumbest collection of news articles on this page. This administration has nearly lost the nuclear football, while haphazardly giving out classified information while a bunch of idiots ask Trump to abuse his pardon authority (moreso then he has already). Meanwhile, Trump seems to think that that the FBI doesn't have the manpower to do more then two things.
Trump really is the trailer trash President.
The nuclear football thing actually sounds like a minor, quickly handled incident. More like a security guy either didn't get a memo or messed with us delegates anyway.
-
I mean that's definitely not what's happening with any part of gerrymandering. The whole point of redistricting as mandated by the Constitution is to keep the number of people in each district relatively equal.
except it doesn't work out that way BECAUSE the cities are the population centers.
Again, look at Texas. Population of 27 million. Houston alone is 2.5 million. Add in San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, Houston, El Paso and Fort Worth and they make up 8.5 million of the population.
7 cities are a full third of Texas' large population. And yet you look at the representative maps which are decided by land mass rather than population, and they only make up a super tiny portion of it. Out of 36 district, 7 go blue and 29 don't. Even though it's 1/3 of the population it's only getting 1/4 representation. (A couple other districts DID go blue, but it doesn't change the populated ones being less represeted.)
Going off landmass is flawed, the same problem as the electoral college in general which gives far to much weight to unpopulated center states, giving individual voters 4-5 times more weight than someone in a populated state.
Unless you're specifically gerrymandering for competitive elections, that Republican advantage is unavoidable as long as Democrats self-segregate.
"Self-segregate?" Yes, how dare people live in cities, with their jobs and their technology and their starbucks and avacodo toast.
The problem is weighing by land area and not population.
-
I mean that's definitely not what's happening with any part of gerrymandering. The whole point of redistricting as mandated by the Constitution is to keep the number of people in each district relatively equal.
But that isn't remotely happening; if that were the case, the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh metropolitan areas would account for two-thirds of the Congressional delegation for Pennsylvania rather than around half which is the situation even with the new map.
-
But that isn't remotely happening; if that were the case, the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh metropolitan areas would account for two-thirds of the Congressional delegation for Pennsylvania rather than around half which is the situation even with the new map.
Not exactly. I'm assuming you're going by greater metropolitan area statistics to get those ratios since the combined populations of the official cities of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia is 2 million and the population of Philadelphia is 12 million. The GMAs do total up to 8 million, but there are a few problems with comparing those totals to the map:
-
The Philadelphia greater metropolitan area spills into both Delaware and New Jersey- the people in those two portions make up a quarter of the GMA population. So that's 4.5 million in southeastern Pennsylvania comprising approximately seven districts in the new map (all blue). 4.5/12= 0.375. 7/18= 0.389. That's pretty close.
-
The Pittsburgh GMA is broken up over a couple different districts, but the main differentiator from the Philadelphia GMA is that only the Pittsburgh core is blue. The two other districts that are primarily in the Pittsburgh area are both red, with other (red) portions being part of a fourth and fifth district. The comparison is less clean, but 2.5/12= 0.208 and 3.5/18= 0.1944. Also pretty close proportions.
So realistically, the new state Supreme Court map does a pretty decent job of representing those areas.
-
-
The whole point of redistricting as mandated by the Constitution is to keep the number of people in each district relatively equal.
Cities are usually overwhelmingly Democratic.
that Republican advantage is unavoidable as long as Democrats self-segregate.
This logic isn't following at all.
Using county borders is usually a non-issue.
This is total nonsense.
It's a pre-existing organizational boundary that makes it easier for people to know where to vote.
People vote in large public buildings (usually schools) in their town, so in what regard do counties enter the picture here?
And in most cases east of the Rockies, counties are tiny squares that can be easily combined to form population-balanced districts.
Yeah sure dude. Let's take the four western CT counties and make a district, and four eastern CT countries and make a district.
So now we have one representative for 700,000 people, and one for almost 3 million. Because them squares are clearly distributed to reflect the populations. -
except it doesn't work out that way BECAUSE the cities are the population centers.
Again, look at Texas. Population of 27 million. Houston alone is 2.5 million. Add in San Antonio, Austin, Dallas, Houston, El Paso and Fort Worth and they make up 8.5 million of the population.
7 cities are a full third of Texas' large population. And yet you look at the representative maps which are decided by land mass rather than population, and they only make up a super tiny portion of it. Out of 36 district, 7 go blue and 29 don't. Even though it's 1/3 of the population it's only getting 1/4 representation. (A couple other districts DID go blue, but it doesn't change the populated ones being less represeted.)
Going off landmass is flawed, the same problem as the electoral college in general which gives far to much weight to unpopulated center states, giving individual voters 4-5 times more weight than someone in a populated state.
You're certainly more qualified to speak about Texas's demographics than I am so I'm not going to argue too much. Given Texas's total number of Democratic votes in 2016, it should absolutely have more Democrats as representatives. And a quick look at some of the state's congressional districts makes it pretty easy to confirm that there's some serious gerrymandering going on in places. Complaining about land masses and representation doesn't really work when the people drawing the maps aren't playing fair.
"Self-segregate?" Yes, how dare people live in cities, with their jobs and their technology and their starbucks and avacodo toast.
The problem is weighing by land area and not population.
I'm not knocking the decision to move to/live in cities. Cities are cool. I'm merely pointing out that from a purely vote-getting perspective, liberals congregating in cities is a suboptimal strategy. A population that heavily leans towards on political party 'wastes' votes by running up a big margin. It's the equivalent of people saying they should move to Ohio so their votes in presidential election actually matter.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Monkey:
This is total nonsense.
People vote in large public buildings (usually schools) in their town, so in what regard do counties enter the picture here?
It's a simple rubric to avoid splitting things up beyond what's necessary. A classic gerrymandering example is that the representative will be the only person on his street in his district while everyone else on the street votes in an adjacent one. It keeps people from getting as confused- if you're in County A, you vote in District N. Like I said, placing district lines along long-standing county lines where possible keeps things simple.
Yeah sure dude. Let's take the four western CT counties and make a district, and four eastern CT countries and make a district.
So now we have one representative for 700,000 people, and one for almost 3 million. Because them squares are clearly distributed to reflect the populations.This is a willful misinterpretation since I specifically said population-balanced. But sure, let me try again.
Most little square districts don't have many people. To use the earlier Pennsylvania example, a lot of the rural counties have a population of under 100,000. It's not too difficult to add eight of those adjacent counties to get close to the target ~650,000 people per congressional district. Other disticts of course have more. Maybe two adjacent ~250,000 counties and a ~100,000 county make up another district. And then there's Philadelphia County, with 1.5 million. That county needs to be split in half and potentially even mixed with another adjacent county to get closer to the target population.
To say that small counties make convenient building blocks doesn't mean that they're all equal. It means that it makes it easier to combine a bunch of the rural ones to equal the population of a few plural ones, particularly because most of those little counties have small populations.
-
Today's What The Fuck Just Happened Today dump: https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/2018/02/20/day-397/
Robert Mueller charged an attorney with making a false statement to federal authorities as part of the probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Prosecutors charged Alex Van Der Zwaan with lying to the FBI and Mueller's office about conversations he had with Rick Gates, the former Trump campaign aide who is cooperating in the Mueller probe, about work done in Ukraine six years ago. Van Der Zwaan was charged by criminal information, which typically precedes a guilty plea because it can only be filed with a defendant's permission and usually indicates the person is cooperating with investigators.
Trump endorsed Mitt Romney's run for a U.S. Senate seat in Utah. Romney accepted the endorsement despite his frequent criticism of Trump and his policies.
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to California's 10-day waiting period for firearms purchases, which is intended to prevent impulsive violence and suicides. The gun rights groups who challenged the waiting period argued that it violated their right to keep and bear arms under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.
poll/ 62% of Americans blame Trump and Congress for not doing enough to prevent mass shootings. 77% say they think more effective mental health screening and treatment could have prevented the Parkland, FL shooting.
poll/ The Presidential Greatness Survey ranked Trump as the worst president ever. He came in first as the most polarizing president.
Scott Pruitt's EPA is facing legal challenges to his rollback of Obama-era environmental protections and laws. The court challenges and legal delays have slowed rule rollbacks on everything from preventing dentists from washing excess mercury down the drain to curbing methane gas emissions.
Pennsylvania's new congressional district map will give Democrats a better chance of winning back the House this fall. Early estimates of the new map, drawn by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, suggest that the number of Trump seats available has dropped from around 13 down to 10 – which could bring the Democrats a few steps closer to securing a majority in the House.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/19/pennsylvania-redistrict-democrats-midterms-354432
Fox News is launching a new subscription-based streaming service for Fox super fans. It's called "Fox Nation." The stand-alone subscription service will focus on right-leaning commentary and feature original shows and appearances by right-wing personalities, like Sean Hannity. Fox Nation is expected to launch by the end of the year.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/19/business/media/fox-news-streaming.html
-
The Donald hasn't dragged us into a hellish Forever War or materially ensure that a Civil War happens so he has that going for him.
-
Not yet at any rate.
-
Give him some time, he's tryin' his best here, dammit
-
Yep. Three years is still a lot of time to completely fuck everything up.
-
We might not deserve Robert Mueller but he's the hero we need right now.
-
Justice Department forms cyber task force to probe election meddling
A new story, with few details. As with everything in this administration, even when it sounds like a good idea only time will tell if they're taking this seriously.
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/19/business/economy/tax-overhaul-survey.html
Americans are dumb
-
Well thats because they've stopped saying "It's stealing 1.5 trillion from your kids to give to billionaires" and instead turned into "well it passed, I guess no point in talking about it anymore."
-
For what it's worth, it still has an abysmal approval rating for being essentially a tax cut bill.
-
I imagine it's being helped by all that media coverage about CORPORATE BONUSES THANKS TO THE GOP TAX BILL which leave out that a lot of companies that are giving out CORPORATE BONUSES THANKS TO THE GOP TAX BILL are downsizing thousands of employees so that they can pay those bonuses to curry political favor but then cut payroll so they can redirect those tax breaks to shareholders.
Wal-Mart, for instance, is laying off thousands of mid-level store managers and replacing them with people who will be paid less and have less hours.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Anyway, in special election news, a GOP seat in Kentucky went Democratic. Linda Belcher had held the seat before but narrowly lost in 2016; this time she won 68-32 (a nineteen point swing in her favor from 2016) in a district Il Douche won by fifty points. This swing is pretty consistent with the improvement other Democratic candidates have shown lately.
-
-
Treat for Metal Gear fans:
-
@TLC:
Whelp
Yeah that was the weird forgotten optimistic thing from the 2016 election, while the world was falling part and the Moron Apocalypse began…. as I recall the Texas results were a heck of a lot more ...purpley than in the past. Still red as heck, but like.... the same red degree that Ohio and Iowa went.
Georgia was also like that. Much more center than the past.It's why actually we shouldn't bash so much on the South for Trump, the Midwest was the big fuck up that delivered him.
-
Louisiana and Indiana being listed as toss-ups is much more surprising looking at 2016 results.
-
If it weren't for Michigan being labeled as Lean Democrat, I'd say Gallup was just casting the net wise so they don't overlook any states.
-
Billy Graham, the man who blessed America with Evangelists who vote in large droves in hopes of creating a theocracy, is dead.
-
Today's https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/2018/02/21/day-398/ Update
Trump challenged Jeff Sessions to investigate the Obama administration for not doing enough to stop Russian interference in the 2016 election. "If all of the Russian meddling took place during the Obama Administration, right up to January 20th, why aren’t they the subject of the investigation?" Trump tweeted. "Why didn't Obama do something about the meddling? Why aren't Dem crimes under investigation? Ask Jeff Sessions!" Trump has singled out his own attorney general several times for not doing enough to protect him from the Russia probe. In July, Trump tweeted that Sessions "has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes." A few hours later, Trump called Sessions "beleaguered."
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/21/politics/donald-trump-jeff-sessions-obama-russia/index.html
Jared Kushner is pushing back against attempts to revoke his access to highly classified information, setting up an internal struggle with White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Last week, Kelly issued a five-page memo outlining that the White House will no longer allow some employees with interim security clearances to access to top secret information if their background investigation has been pending since before last June. Kushner's security clearance has been pending for more than 13 months. The White House, meanwhile, insists that Kushner can continue in his role as a senior adviser even without a security clearance.
Alex van der Zwaan pleads guilty in Robert Mueller's probe. The son-in-law of a Russia-based billionaire admitted to lying to investigators about his communications with Rick Gates, the former Trump campaign aide. Van der Zwaan also admitted that he deleted records of emails that prosecutors had requested. It's the fourth guilty plea Mueller has secured, but van der Zwaan is the first not to enter into a cooperation agreement with the special counsel's office.
Mueller's decision to charge van der Zwaan puts additional pressure on Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, both of whom worked with van der Zwaan on a report supporting the legitimacy of the criminal prosecution of a former Ukrainian prime minister. Prosecutors have also accused Manafort and Gates of laundering millions of dollars and concealing their lobbying efforts in Ukraine.
The White House has given David Skulkin permission to purge "subversion" at the Department of Veterans Affairs. The cabinet head said that those who have defied his authority "won’t be working in my operation" and "those who crossed the line in the past are going to have to be accountable for those decisions." The move comes after a recent inspector general report found that Shulkin pressured the VA's third-most-senior official to alter an email to make it appear that he was receiving an award from the Danish government in order to have the VA pay for his wife's airfare. The IG investigation also found that Shulkin had improperly accepted Wimbledon tickets from a friend. Shulkin's foes have been using the report in their push to oust the Veterans Affairs secretary.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/20/shulkin-veterans-agency-purge-417896
Democrats flipped a Kentucky state legislature seat in a district that Trump won by 49 points in 2016. Linda Belcher won the special election in Kentucky's House District 49 by a 68-32 margin. Trump carried the district by a 72-23 margin in 2016, which also went 66-33 for Mitt Romney in 2012.
https://www.vox.com/2018/2/20/17034262/kentucky-special-election-linda-belcher
poll/ 51% of voters say they have not noticed an increase in their paycheck under the new tax law. 25% say they have.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/21/paychecks-tax-law-poll-417884
-
"I did not know Russian bots were promoting my campaign. … The "real question to be asked is" why the Clinton campaign didn't do something."
Bernie being Bernie.
-
"I did not know Russian bots were promoting my campaign. … The "real question to be asked is" why the Clinton campaign didn't do something."
Bernie being Bernie.
Yeah. He gets really defensive when it comes to Russians clearly using his campaign as a weapon against Hillary. No point in it either. There's no harm in saying that they wanted the most anti-Russia candidate gone and used everyone/everything they could to get rid of them. It's not something that should have stopped him from running, but it should be acknowledged.
-
"I did not know Russian bots were promoting my campaign. … The "real question to be asked is" why the Clinton campaign didn't do something."
Bernie being Bernie.
To borrow another post on this subject:
Let it be known and remembered that Bernie Sanders discovered that the Russians were helping to promote him as a preferred candidate and had three options before him:
Offer to see if there were any warning signs he may have missed which could help us understand what happened with the other preferred Russian pick, Trump.
Shit on Hillary Clinton some more to further reinforce the Russians' preferred narrative.
A simple, "Whoops. My bad."
And he chose the second one.
-
Reminder that Bernie is one of two senators (the other being Rand Paul) who voted against Russian sanctions for interfering with the election.
-
Reminder that Bernie is one of two senators (the other being Rand Paul) who voted against Russian sanctions for interfering with the election.
If I remember right, he at least said it was more because of the sanctions against Iran included.
-
Reminder that Bernie is one of two senators (the other being Rand Paul) who voted against Russian sanctions for interfering with the election.
Didnt he do it because it included sanctions on Iran and it came at the time of Isis terrorist attack in Tehran ?
-
If I remember right, he at least said it was more because of the sanctions against Iran included.
The optics are bad regardless. Well, the optics would be bad if he wasn't made of teflon.
-
I didn't watch Trump's "open discussion," but the impression I got was that he held a heavily screened audience with safe questions? Something that'd make him look good with no repercussions at all? Like, a bunch of kids died and he set up a stage show? Did someone seriously mention "give the teachers guns at one point?"
I feel like I'm in a loop constantly rediscovering that the President is a scumbag. I should really have learned a long time ago, but I keep getting my hopes up for some reason.
Edit: Oh hey I found a video. The first ten minutes featured many "thank yous" and compliments to Trump. Typical. :getlost:
-
Empathy cheat sheet:
-
So, with public opinion strongly in favor of better gun control, Trump comes out of the meeting publicly supporting an incredibly divisive and (at last check) extremely unpopular policy. Skills.
-
Can I also make fun of the "45" on his cuff or is that somehow normal
-
I didn't watch Trump's "open discussion," but the impression I got was that he held a heavily screened audience with safe questions?
Apparently that was what happened.
Edit: Oh hey I found a video. The first ten minutes featured many "thank yous" and compliments to Trump. Typical. :getlost:
You also have this guy
Methinks he'll die of sleep deprivation waiting for Trump and Republicans to actually do something on guns.
-
Apparently that was what happened.
You also have this guy
Methinks he'll die of sleep deprivation waiting for Trump and Republicans to actually do something on guns.
Thanks for the explanation, but I did actually go and watch the whole thing. It's everything I could have expected. Sad, pleading parents talking to a man who as always only spoke in generalizations that fit into any situation. Trump was the same Trump as any other day. One frustrating moment was his suggestion of "arming school staff." The camera on my feed didn't show the audience, but he asked what the crowd thought of it. He clearly got a larger response for "no" to that idea but he quickly dismissed the crowd stating "we'll look into those ideas." We're closer than every to the President supporting teachers with guns, and that's a little scary.
A related story, another GOP makes false claims about shooters, this time claiming "most mass shooters are Democrats." This one is in New York, so I only hope she's gone by mid-terms.
Edit: Oh, this is infuriating. Just as there's a Trump tweet for everything, there's sometimes a Trump action. Melania Trump's parents are getting citizenship through 'chain immigration.' I want to complain how stupid Trump's stance on this is in light of his statements, but I also completely believe that he had no idea about this.
-
Little Marco is getting fucking devastated at the CNN town hall
-
"Democrats controlled the House and Senate. Why didn't Harry Reid wave his magic wand and make Joe Lieberman be less of a raging asshole?"
-
@Cyan:
"Democrats controlled the House and Senate. Why didn't Harry Reid wave his magic wand and make Joe Lieberman be less of a raging asshole?"
Not remotely surprised that shitbird Jake "Fox News are our brothers in arms" Tapper asked that question.
-
If you haven't been watching the CNN thing with the Florida people putting Rubio and the NRA ghoul lady on the spot? You're missing the fuck out.
-
I'm somewhat baffled as to why Rubio and NRA stooges even agreed to this in the first place. Was it hubris or stupidity or both?
-
Spoiler-upon being asked multiple times he repeatedly refuses to say he won't take NRA money.
-
Yeah you guys weren't wrong about Rubio getting grilled:
https://www.newsandguts.com/student-sen-rubio-can-turn-future-nra-donations/Ah, the classic "I'll answer your question in this long and indirect way".
Long story short: He means no.
-Edit-
Robby beat me to it. Oh well. Watch again to see Rubio squirm.