US Midterm Election 2018 Megathread- It's Kavanaugh

[Insaeldor]

The courts aren’t the only branch of government. They can’t order the legislature around

Gah. No respect for free and open elections. You must support the gerrymandering, least you would be on my side and the Courts.

>if you're not with me you are against me

Because, like, nuanced opinions are for people who hate democracy right?

Nice job misrepresenting the argument being made here and or failing to understand what others are saying in favor of hysterics.

[Thermodolia]

The courts aren’t the only branch of government. They can’t order the legislature around

Gah. No respect for free and open elections. You must support the gerrymandering, least you would be on my side and the Courts.

Are you ok?

And you do know that you are talking to the guy who supports a PR voting system like STV or single district PR.

[The Flutterlands]

Gah. No respect for free and open elections. You must support the gerrymandering, least you would be on my side and the Courts.

>if you're not with me you are against me

Because, like, nuanced opinions are for people who hate democracy right?

Nice job misrepresenting the argument being made here and or failing to understand what others are saying in favor of hysterics.

Any allowance for the continuation of gerrymandering of the scale in Wisconsin NC and Penn before the 2018 election is in a way for it.

[Dahon]

An informed electorate will make the choice

If you're talking about the midterm elections depriving the PA GOP of its majority: if the PA districts are really gerrymandered, then no amount of info on the issue in this hyperpartisan era will be able to give PA Dems the electoral majority they may deserve. Unless by "informed electorate" you mean something else.

Gah. No respect for free and open elections. You must support the gerrymandering, least you would be on my side and the Courts.

For a wannabe lawyer you sure have a really weak sense of legality and adhering to laws and precedents whether or not you agree with them, yeah?

[The Flutterlands]

Gah. No respect for free and open elections. You must support the gerrymandering, least you would be on my side and the Courts.

For a wannabe lawyer you sure have a really weak sense of legality and adhering to laws and precedents whether or not you agree with them, yeah?

What if the law is morally and democratically repugnant?

[Dahon]

What if the law is morally and democratically repugnant?

Address your problems with the law through the courts, peacefully protest, whatever, but for the love of all that is democratic and non-violent 1) know why the law is not on your side. beyond "we're immoral fucks, and we're dicking it in", which seems to be your go-to whenever something irks you; and 2) don't speak of overthrowing the government just because your jimmies were rustled, Flutter, for the umpteenth fucking time, Flutter.

[Thermodolia]

For a wannabe lawyer you sure have a really weak sense of legality and adhering to laws and precedents whether or not you agree with them, yeah?

What if the law is morally and democratically repugnant?

Then try to change it?

Also you and San Lumen keep attacking the symptoms instead of the root cause; which is the voting system. The voting system needs to be changed and once it’s changed then gerrymandering becomes a thing of the past.

[The Flutterlands]

What if the law is morally and democratically repugnant?

Then try to change it?

Also you and San Lumen keep attacking the symptoms instead of the root cause; which is the voting system. The voting system needs to be changed and once it’s changed then gerrymandering becomes a thing of the past.

That I can agree on...

[Insaeldor]

>if you're not with me you are against me

Because, like, nuanced opinions are for people who hate democracy right?

Nice job misrepresenting the argument being made here and or failing to understand what others are saying in favor of hysterics.

Any allowance for the continuation of gerrymandering of the scale in Wisconsin NC and Penn before the 2018 election is in a way for it.

So pointing out that the court doesn't have intimate authority over the legislature is tantamount to supporting gerrymandering even though we've spoken out against it?

So a democrat who isn't a 110% ideologue is a dino, anyone that tries to be nuanced on issues in a way that doesn't align with your ideas 100% is the enemy, and doing so in a hysterical and intensely partisan way. reminds me of someone else I know. This "if you aren't as partisan as me your the enemy" bullshit is nonsense and does nothing but makes your arguments week. Attacking people who are obstensivly on your side simply because they have the audacity to take a nuanced and understanding approach that actually looks at facts does not help you or your cause.

An informed electorate will make the choice

If you're talking about the midterm elections depriving the PA GOP of its majority: if the PA districts are really gerrymandered, then no amount of info on the issue in this hyperpartisan era will be able to give PA Dems the electoral majority they may deserve. Unless by "informed electorate" you mean something else.

Luckily state wide offices can't be gerrymandered from either party. Also gerrymandering doesn't mean that one party has a clear voting by the numbers atvantage all the time but rather a statistical advantage on average. Most things like getting your base out to vote, low opposition turn out, and encouraging swing voters all help out here and can win you a fair amount of seats. There is still opertunity for change in the legislature but at the very worst the legislature can come into opposition against the executive and courts as entities pushing for change.

[San Lumen]

Ignoring the Courts to respect Democracy is rational?

The courts aren’t the only branch of government. They can’t order the legislature around

No they can and have done so many times in the past. so if the court strikes down a law the legislature should be able to say no we will enforce this law anyway?

[Insaeldor]

The courts aren’t the only branch of government. They can’t order the legislature around

No they can and have done so many times in the past.

Doing so in the past =/= being able to do so all the time

Usually in those cases it was a lot more then "yeah this is unconstitutional" ruling from the court anyways. Not to mention laws are inherently different then district bountries in how a court goes about affirming and disabling them and who has the authority to redraw them.

[The Flutterlands]

Any allowance for the continuation of gerrymandering of the scale in Wisconsin NC and Penn before the 2018 election is in a way for it.

So pointing out that the court doesn't have intimate authority over the legislature is tantamount to supporting gerrymandering even though we've spoken out against it?

So a democrat who isn't a 110% ideologue is a dino, anyone that tries to be nuanced on issues in a way that doesn't align with your ideas 100% is the enemy, and doing so in a hysterical and intensely partisan way. reminds me of someone else I know. This "if you aren't as partisan as me your the enemy" bullshit is nonsense and does nothing but makes your arguments week. Attacking people who are obstensivly on your side simply because they have the audacity to take a nuanced and understanding approach that actually looks at facts does not help you or your cause.

How can we be nuanced on gerrymandering? It is a pluage that must be purged no matter who's in charge.

[San Lumen]

Absolutely despicable for the PA state Senate Republicans to continue doing this in my state. This gerrymandering has to stop, we should have an independent, non-partisan commission to draw the boundaries based on population size/density, not base it on race, religion, ethnicity, etc. And it's not just Republicans (Although they do most of the gerrymandering anyway) no party in control should be able to draw up boundaries to favor their own party, especially when you have districts that are horribly constructed, like Illinois' 4th, Maryland's 3rd, North Carolina's 12th, 4th, and 1st, and my favorite Pennsylvania's 11th, which being my own district, stretches from as far north as Wyoming county, to as far south as Cumberland county and the outskirts of the state capital.

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wpsu/files/styles/x_large/public/201705/e99b5e_9af00fabc9cb4290886d0bd398a5b635_mv2_0.png

I hope the Senate State President get's tried for contempt in court, he deserves it for violating the state constitution and violating the rule of law that the courts ordered him to do and change the map. I guess this means three things for Republicans in PA then. A) they won't hold onto their majority in the state legislature for much longer, B) they won't be gaining the Democratic Senate seat here, and C) The chances of them knocking out Tom Wolf for governor might not happen.

He can and will be held in contempt of court because thats what this is plain and simple.

[Thermodolia]

The courts aren’t the only branch of government. They can’t order the legislature around

No they can and have done so many times in the past. so if the court strikes down a law the legislature should be able to say no we will enforce this law anyway?

Did you pay any attention to your government classes?

The legislature doesn’t enforce laws, the executive does that.

[San Lumen]

No they can and have done so many times in the past. so if the court strikes down a law the legislature should be able to say no we will enforce this law anyway?

Did you pay any attention to your government classes?

The legislature doesn’t enforce laws, the executive does that.

Yes I do. The State Senate President was ordered to do something by the court and is refusing to abide by that order. That is called contempt of court and can be subject to jail time like Kim Davis was.

[Insaeldor]

So pointing out that the court doesn't have intimate authority over the legislature is tantamount to supporting gerrymandering even though we've spoken out against it?

So a democrat who isn't a 110% ideologue is a dino, anyone that tries to be nuanced on issues in a way that doesn't align with your ideas 100% is the enemy, and doing so in a hysterical and intensely partisan way. reminds me of someone else I know. This "if you aren't as partisan as me your the enemy" bullshit is nonsense and does nothing but makes your arguments week. Attacking people who are obstensivly on your side simply because they have the audacity to take a nuanced and understanding approach that actually looks at facts does not help you or your cause.

How can we be nuanced on gerrymandering? It is a pluage that must be purged no matter who's in charge.

oh boy reminds me of someone else

Understanding that courts do not have ultimate authority over the legislature is not support for gerrymandering. We've explained this several times. Either you are being intentionally daft or do not want to recognize this simple truth and would rather paint anyone that doesn't agree with you whole heartedly as the enemy because that the intellectually easy thing to do.

[San Lumen]

Absolutely despicable for the PA state Senate Republicans to continue doing this in my state. This gerrymandering has to stop, we should have an independent, non-partisan commission to draw the boundaries based on population size/density, not base it on race, religion, ethnicity, etc. And it's not just Republicans (Although they do most of the gerrymandering anyway) no party in control should be able to draw up boundaries to favor their own party, especially when you have districts that are horribly constructed, like Illinois' 4th, Maryland's 3rd, North Carolina's 12th, 4th, and 1st, and my favorite Pennsylvania's 11th, which being my own district, stretches from as far north as Wyoming county, to as far south as Cumberland county and the outskirts of the state capital.

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wpsu/files/styles/x_large/public/201705/e99b5e_9af00fabc9cb4290886d0bd398a5b635_mv2_0.png

I hope the Senate State President get's tried for contempt in court, he deserves it for violating the state constitution and violating the rule of law that the courts ordered him to do and change the map. I guess this means three things for Republicans in PA then. A) they won't hold onto their majority in the state legislature for much longer, B) they won't be gaining the Democratic Senate seat here, and C) The chances of them knocking out Tom Wolf for governor might not happen.

I agree completely. They will definitely lose seats in the legislature. Enough to lose their majority though we shall see.

[Corrian]

Honestly you would think someone working to be a lawyer would understand how things work.

[The Flutterlands]

How can we be nuanced on gerrymandering? It is a pluage that must be purged no matter who's in charge.

oh boy reminds me of someone else

Understanding that courts do not have ultimate authority over the legislature is not support for gerrymandering. We've explained this several times. Either you are being intentionally daft or do not want to recognize this simple truth and would rather paint anyone that doesn't agree with you whole heartedly as the enemy because that the intellectually easy thing to do.

Actually the Courts do. They interpret the law on whether it's unconstitutional. Turns out Penn's gerrymandering is against the state constitution, according to the Courts. So the legislature must try again.

[San Lumen]

Honestly you would think someone working to be a lawyer would understand how things work.

Its a case of contempt of court what's going on in Pennsylvania plain and simple.

[Insaeldor]

Did you pay any attention to your government classes?

The legislature doesn’t enforce laws, the executive does that.

Yes I do. The State Senate President was ordered to do something by the court and is refusing to abide by that order. That is called contempt of court and can be subject to jail time like Kim Davis was.

Not really, Kim Davis was found in centenpt but usually these sorts of issue aren't consitered or usually praised as contempt because of the wider political implication involved in doing so. Kim was found in contempt because she had one job and refused to do it and denied any compromise offered to her in order to abid by the law. The Senate President is arguing that the courts have overstep their boundaries and will most likely appeal to a higher court. Which usually means if you are appealing you are not going to be held in contempt. Conversely they may just wait to do anything else up until the Supreme Court makes its ruling on the very same issue later this year.

[San Lumen]

Yes I do. The State Senate President was ordered to do something by the court and is refusing to abide by that order. That is called contempt of court and can be subject to jail time like Kim Davis was.

Not really, Kim Davis was found in centenpt but usually these sorts of issue aren't consitered or usually praised as contempt because of the wider political implication involved in doing so. Kim was found in contempt because she had one job and refused to do it and denied any compromise offered to her in order to abid by the law. The Senate President is arguing that the courts have overstep their boundaries and will most likely appeal to a higher court. Which usually means if you are appealing you are not going to be held in contempt. Conversely they may just wait to do anything else up until the Supreme Court makes its ruling on the very same issue later this year.

Except this case was decided under the state constitution and its my understanding they cannot appeal to the Supreme Court here.

[The Flutterlands]

Maybe I don't care if the Courts overstepped their authority. Gerrymandering in total favor of a political party is toxic and repugnant to democracy. The gerrymandering must end at all costs no matter what.

[Insaeldor]

oh boy reminds me of someone else

Understanding that courts do not have ultimate authority over the legislature is not support for gerrymandering. We've explained this several times. Either you are being intentionally daft or do not want to recognize this simple truth and would rather paint anyone that doesn't agree with you whole heartedly as the enemy because that the intellectually easy thing to do.

Actually the Courts do. They interpret the law on whether it's unconstitutional. Turns out Penn's gerrymandering is against the state constitution, according to the Courts. So the legislature must try again.

This is an extremely watered down high school textbook diagram understand of the relationships between the branches of government. While yes the courts have the authority if judicial review it only works at an automatic basis on actual laws, district bountries are inharentlt different and take a different approach as a result. Not to mention that the legislature and president can always appeal the case as needed. The only court that has this sort of supreme authority is the Supreme Court because it is the high meat court in the country, a state court is only the highest authority in the state and thus can be appealed to higher courts to review.

[Telconi]

Maybe I don't care if the Courts overstepped their authority. Gerrymandering in total favor of a political party is toxic and repugnant to democracy. The gerrymandering must end at all costs no matter what.

Yeah, and disconnected moral paragons that are our courts dictating laws without any say of the actual people is even more toxic to democracy. Your solution is like drinking bleach because mommy put broccoli in your dinner and she already knows that you don't like broccoli!!!