***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[Mark Antony]

Trump really going to show how amazing he's doing after his Presidential million dollar treatments while his close friends are dying.

 

[KHUFU]

I will never forgive Ernie Johnson for that BS he went on about.. I can’t even look or watch dude like that any more

i just gotta look at people funny who are now coming to some grand realization about trump

Outside of Kenny Smith, all of them can kiss my ***.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Dodge: check
Handwave: check
Pivot: check

You’d think I asked about packing the Supreme Court with the way you didn’t answer that question.

I have made my stance known on gerrymandering known, that I am against the practice all together. And I am happy the National Democratic Party wants to ban the practice, even though the Maryland Democratic party engages in the practice. I would happily live in a world where our democracy in strengthen. Where Dems in MD lose their supermajority, the House Dems again 25 more seats, and state Democratic parties gain 12 dozens more.

The only way as a Dem voter I would support gerrymandering is if I were to vote Dem in Maryland statehouse races. Since I don't do that, then my ballot doesn't support any Dem efforts to gerrymander (even still, from my understanding the state party is willing to have an independent commision, of Republicans commit to it nationally as well for their districts) . I vote Dem in national elections, which brings us closer to gerrymandering ending. You vote Republican in national elections, which put people in power that support the practice.

My ballot doesn't support gerrymandering, your's does.

 

[rexanglorum]

The centerpiece of the GOP’s plan for permanent minority rule is having very conservative Federal courts. That whole scheme relies on Democrats respecting norms, chiefly, keeping the number of judges the same despite legislative power to change that number. Moreover the whole notion that the court’s orders must be obeyed is all just a norm.

Call it packing, call it rebalancing, call it whatever you want. If Dems have a Federal trifecta it means they will have had a mandate. To overcome the EC, Gerrymandering and malapportioned Senate. When 55%-60% of the country wants something and that something can be undone by 5 or 6 six conservative lawyers, it’ll be time for a change in the rules.

 

[blastercombo]

The senate chairs are arguably more important than who is president. Same with the Supreme Court.

 

[dwalk31]

I have made my stance known on gerrymandering known, that I am against the practice all together. And I am happy the National Democratic Party wants to ban the practice, even though the Maryland Democratic party engages in the practice. I would happily live in a world where our democracy in strengthen. Where Dems in MD lose their supermajority, the House Dems again 25 more seats, and state Democratic parties gain 12 dozens more.

The only way as a Dem voter I would support gerrymandering is if I were to vote Dem in Maryland statehouse races. Since I don't do that, then my ballot doesn't support any Dem efforts to gerrymander (even still, from my understanding the state party is willing to have an independent commision, of Republicans commit to it nationally as well for their districts) . I vote Dem in national elections, which brings us closer to gerrymandering ending. You vote Republican in national elections, which put people in power that support the practice.

My ballot doesn't support gerrymandering, your's does.

Props on your attempt to distinguish your support for a party that participates in gerrymandering.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't gerrymandering necessarily done at the state level?

So unless I vote for someone who supports it in my state, then I can make the same argument that you are making--right?

 

[IATT]

 

[DLF]

This is why I mess with Trump

Heat by 11

 

[RustyShackleford]

Props on your attempt to distinguish your support for a party that participates in gerrymandering.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't gerrymandering necessarily done at the state level?

So unless I vote for someone who supports it in my state, then I can make the same argument that you are making--right?

States draw districts but gerrymandering planning is a national thing. Consultants that work with the RNC work with individual states to draw their districts. After a wave election in 2010 gave the GOP more redistricting power than they previous had in many states, it was a national effort in the GOP to redraw districts all over American in a way that locks out Dems it was called REDMAP. The Democratic Party had no similar infrastructure to gerrymander.

You can read this book that breaks it down...

Ratf**ked

With Barack Obama’s historic election in 2008, pundits proclaimed the Republicans as dead as the Whigs of yesteryear. Yet even as Democra...

www.goodreads.com

The House passed a bill that bans the practice outright. The bill was applauded by voting rights activist and political scientist. Mitch McConnell called it a power grab (because pro democracy legislation benefits the Democratic Party, funny how that works). And Trump criticized the bill too. Liberal justices on the Supreme Court wanted to strike partisan gerrymandering down in a recent case, but the conservatives on the court ruled the it is not the Supreme Court's place to determine redistricting. They said voters could do it themselves through ballot measures, then they have undermined those efforts too.

The fact of the matter is that is the Democratic Party as veto proof power in Congress and the White House, gerrymandering goes away. If the GOP has power , it stays.

So gerrymandering is a national issue, and you support it at the ballot with your vote for President, US Senate, and US House races

BTW, yes, Tennessee's maps are gerrymandered too. So you vote for gerrymanders on in your state races too.

 

[IATT]

 

[RustyShackleford]

BTW, Delk, the way the GOP gerrymanders is by focusing on diluting the power of black voters. Gerrymander on reason of race is illegal, but since black americans vote Dem at such high rates, the GOP claims they are targeting them not because they are black, but because they are Democrats.

The Voting Rights Act banned voter suppression laws for such behavior, but there is no protection for redsitricting.

BTW, conservatives justices on the Supreme Court will strike down those protection soon. So black people will be subjected to more oppressive racist laws, and it will be deemed legal because they vote Democrat.

This is the racism your ballot helps further.

 

[dwalk31]

States draw districts but gerrymandering planning is a national thing. Consultants that work with the RNC work with individual states to draw their districts. After a wave election in 20201 gave the GOP more redistricting power than they previous had in many states, it was a national effort in the GOP to redraw districts all over American in a way that locks out Dems it was called REDMAP. The Democratic Party had no similar infrastructure to gerrymander.

You can read this book that breaks it down...

Ratf**ked

With Barack Obama’s historic election in 2008, pundits proclaimed the Republicans as dead as the Whigs of yesteryear. Yet even as Democra...

www.goodreads.com

The House passed a bill that bans the practice outright. The bill was applauded by voting rights activist and political scientist. Mitch McConnell called it a power grab (because pro democracy legislation benefits the Democratic Party, funny how that works). And Trump criticized the bill too. Liberal justices on the Supreme Court wanted to strike partisan gerrymandering down in a recent case, but the conservatives on the court ruled the it is not the Supreme Court's place to determine redistricting. They said voters could do it themselves through ballot measures, then they have undermined those efforts too.

The fact of the matter is that is the Democratic Party as veto proof power in Congress and the White House, gerrymandering goes away. If the GOP has power , it stays.

So gerrymandering is a national issue, and you support it at the ballot with your vote for President, US Senate, and US House races

BTW, yes, Tennessee's maps are gerrymandered too.

A “national issue.” Thats rich.

You’ve entirely shifted the goalposts.

Perhaps you should start by examining the issues with Fair Maps Nevada and the allegations of pro-Democratic gerrymandering there.

 

[rexanglorum]

Gerrymandering does happen at the State level BUT, the federal government can stop it by passing new laws or having a judiciary that understands that partisan gerrymandering (which is legal) is almost one and the sane with racial gerrymandering (Which is illegal).

 

[dwalk31]

BTW, Delk, the way the GOP gerrymanders is by focusing on diluting the power of black voters. Gerrymander on reason of race is illegal, but since black americans vote Dem at such high rates, the GOP claims they are targeting them not because they are black, but because they are Democrats.

The voting rights ACT banned voter suppression laws for such behavior, but there is no protection for redsitricting.

BTW, conservatives justices on the Supreme Court will strike down those protection soon. So black people will be subjected to more oppressive racist laws, and it will be deemed legal because they vote Democrat.

This is the racism your ballot helps further.

As I’ve said, I’m against gerrymandering period. No matter who does it. I don’t need a lecture to agree the practice is wrong.

My stance hasn’t changed.

 

[dwalk31]

Gerrymandering does happen at the State level BUT, the federal government can stop it by passing new laws or having a judiciary that understands that partisan gerrymandering (which is legal) is almost one and the sane with racial gerrymandering (Which is illegal).

We are not disagreeing.

 

[had pants]

 

[storm2006]

This is why I mess with Trump

Heat by 11

LeBronald James Trump

 

[had pants]

 

[had pants]

 

[RustyShackleford]

Than the posters who are making seemingly racist posts and posting highly offensive memes and gifs?

I don’t do those things.

Also, RustyShackleford showed that one of them was white which makes the posts even more offensive. I’m black, so that’s another glaring difference.

I don’t mind agreeing to disagree with people or engaging in discourse. What those posters were doing was not even close to that (which is remarkable considering how much leeway is given normally in here). The one post about former First Lady Obama was the line, for me.

One of his racist arguments about welfare was an argument you routinely make.

You can dude are not as different as your would like to believe.

 

[had pants]

 

[gry60]

The centerpiece of the GOP’s plan for permanent minority rule is having very conservative Federal courts. That whole scheme relies on Democrats respecting norms, chiefly, keeping the number of judges the same despite legislative power to change that number. Moreover the whole notion that the court’s orders must be obeyed is all just a norm.

Call it packing, call it rebalancing, call it whatever you want. If Dems have a Federal trifecta it means they will have had a mandate. To overcome the EC, Gerrymandering and malapportioned Senate. When 55%-60% of the country wants something and that something can be undone by 5 or 6 six conservative lawyers, it’ll be time for a change in the rules.

The GOP-led Senate has appointed 300 judges since Trump's election at all levels of the judiciary. Many have been deemed below par by their peers, and the only reason they hold lifetime appointments is because of their ideological interpretation of the Law.

This is what the answer to the court packing question should be: "we are doing just what our peers across the aisle have been doing since 2008."

 

[dwalk31]

This is what the answer to the court packing question should be: "we are doing just what our peers across the aisle have been doing since 2008."

Wonder why they aren’t answering like that.

 

[gry60]

Wonder why they aren’t answering like that.

Because they know their audience.

 

[dwalk31]

One of his racist arguments about welfare was an argument you routinely make.

You can dude are not as different as your would like to believe.

People can want things for different reasons.

For instance, a racist can want a certain outcome because they are racist and view a certain group of people a certain way.

I can want a similar outcome because I care about my people and think that it will result in empowerment.

In your analysis intent is irrelevant, but that’s silly. If a racist wears pants, that doesn’t mean any person who wear pants is “like the racists” in any meaningful way.