NationStates

San Lumen wrote:

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Not if the previous candidate for their party only got 28%.

You're aware that sometimes primaries are uncontested, or there isn't even one entrant?

I was rather shocked to discover that some districts in the US house have no candidate from one or other major party (usually Dems). OK, sometimes the candidate died. Sometimes the party chose not to contest because they thought a Libertarian would make a better showing. But mostly it's because getting slaughtered in a deep color district is a job no bastard wants!

I am well aware that primaries are sometimes uncontested. Even in a deep color district someone who won a general with that little percent is going to get a primary challenger. Its almost guaranteed.

San Lumen wrote:

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:
Not if the previous candidate for their party only got 28%.

You're aware that sometimes primaries are uncontested, or there isn't even one entrant?

I was rather shocked to discover that some districts in the US house have no candidate from one or other major party (usually Dems). OK, sometimes the candidate died. Sometimes the party chose not to contest because they thought a Libertarian would make a better showing. But mostly it's because getting slaughtered in a deep color district is a job no bastard wants!

I am well aware that primaries are sometimes uncontested. Even in a deep color district someone who won a general with that little percent is going to get a primary challenger. Its almost guaranteed.

Thermodolia wrote:

San Lumen wrote:I am well aware that primaries are sometimes uncontested. Even in a deep color district someone who won a general with that little percent is going to get a primary challenger. Its almost guaranteed.

Or they are extremely popular within the party but not with the general public. It’s entirely possible to get only 38% in the general but majorities in the primaries

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:

San Lumen wrote:someone who gets only 38 percent of the vote is likely getting a primary challenger no matter what they do.

Not if the previous candidate for their party only got 28%.

You're aware that sometimes primaries are uncontested, or there isn't even one entrant?

I was rather shocked to discover that some districts in the US house have no candidate from one or other major party (usually Dems). OK, sometimes the candidate died. Sometimes the party chose not to contest because they thought a Libertarian would make a better showing. But mostly it's because getting slaughtered in a deep color district is a job no bastard wants!

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:

San Lumen wrote:I am well aware that primaries are sometimes uncontested. Even in a deep color district someone who won a general with that little percent is going to get a primary challenger. Its almost guaranteed.

You mean lost, with 38% ?

District 1 US House Colorado is deep blue. The Republican Casper Stockham got 31% in 2018 ... and was uncontested in Republican Primaries.

Casper's no quitter tho. In 2016 he got 28% ... also uncontested in Republican Primaries.

I'll admit that what annoys me most about uncontested districts, is they make it impossible to accurately calculate the popular vote for the House. You just know there would be some red or blue voters who just didn't have anyone to vote for, but you can only estimate how many.

Australian rePublic wrote:Are we talking about the United States of America? Because if so, approx. 13.4% of the population of the USA is black, therefore 10% black legislators doesn't seem too disproportional

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:

Australian rePublic wrote:Are we talking about the United States of America? Because if so, approx. 13.4% of the population of the USA is black, therefore 10% black legislators doesn't seem too disproportional

72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Benuty wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Benuty wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Benuty wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:I thought New Hampshire is pretty liberal? I assumed it was one of the few rural areas I could travel to without being run out of town.

Outer Acharet wrote:

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:I thought New Hampshire is pretty liberal? I assumed it was one of the few rural areas I could travel to without being run out of town.

It is in many places, it's just kind of culturally and demographically homogeneous

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:

Benuty wrote:Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

I thought New Hampshire is pretty liberal? I assumed it was one of the few rural areas I could travel to without being run out of town.

San Lumen wrote:

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:
I thought New Hampshire is pretty liberal? I assumed it was one of the few rural areas I could travel to without being run out of town.

Its not as liberal as some think it is. The state leans libertarian and its state legislature swings with the slightest breeze. Its the largest in the country. In recent years whichever party has won control of the House in midterm or a presidential election has won the national election

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:

San Lumen wrote:
Its not as liberal as some think it is. The state leans libertarian and its state legislature swings with the slightest breeze. Its the largest in the country. In recent years whichever party has won control of the House in midterm or a presidential election has won the national election

Liberterian doesn't mean right wing or racist necessarily though. Usually it means we leave people alone and don't go around trying to dominate everyone.

Benuty wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Australian rePublic wrote:

Benuty wrote:Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Encourage more diversity? What was she going to do? Kidnap black people from the south, kidnap Hispanic people from the former Mexican states, and force them to live in New Hampshire?

Australian rePublic wrote:

Benuty wrote:Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

Encourage more diversity? What was she going to do? Kidnap black people from the south, kidnap Hispanic people from the former Mexican states, and force them to live in New Hampshire?

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:

Australian rePublic wrote:Are we talking about the United States of America? Because if so, approx. 13.4% of the population of the USA is black, therefore 10% black legislators doesn't seem too disproportional

72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Australian rePublic wrote:

Unstoppable Empire of Doom wrote:72% is white compared with 81% of legislators.

4% is asian/Pacific islander compared with 2%.

I mean could there be more diversity? Yes. However this is such a first world issue. There are active genocides going on in africa, asia, and south america. Of course none of those get a thread on here, instead we will get this because nobody wants to discuss black people being banned from chinese hotels. Much easier to discuss "America Bad XXVII: not enough sikh police in northern idaho".

Assuming more black people/Asians want to be legislators. If not, then this is really a non-issue. I would simply ask the question- what makes you sure that non-whites want to be legislators as much as whites do?

San Lumen wrote:Latinx

-Ra- wrote:Who cares what race they are. Are they good at their jobs?

-Ra- wrote:Who cares what race they are. Are they good at their jobs?

San Lumen wrote:Latinx

This is not a word.

Borderlands of Rojava wrote:

Benuty wrote:Reminds of the time that lady who spoke Spanish was whinging about the lack of diversity in New Hampshire. A state that is 94% white, and her solution rather unremarkable was to encourage more diversity. Suffice to say demographic shifting in a rural state with a lot of guns is asking for some nice racism soup to form.

I thought New Hampshire is pretty liberal? I assumed it was one of the few rural areas I could travel to without being run out of town.