US Midterm Elections Megathread III: Hitting The Wall

[San Lumen]

The districts in California are not oddly drawn. Take a look at North Carolina, Michigan or Wisconsin at the state and federal level and you will see gerrymandering

Yes they are.

And what about the packing of deep blue districts in PA, that's gerrymandering.

How? I just looked at a map and they look perfectly fine to me.

That packing is because of gerrymandering.

[Freezic Vast]

Yes they are.

And what about the packing of deep blue districts in PA, that's gerrymandering.

How? I just looked at a map and they look perfectly fine to me.

That packing is because of gerrymandering.

To you, because you're a partisan hack.

No, the packing itself is gerrymandering.

[Telconi]

Yes they are.

And what about the packing of deep blue districts in PA, that's gerrymandering.

How? I just looked at a map and they look perfectly fine to me.

That packing is because of gerrymandering.

Of course thy did...

[San Lumen]

How? I just looked at a map and they look perfectly fine to me.

That packing is because of gerrymandering.

To you, because you're a partisan hack.

No, the packing itself is gerrymandering.

What is wrong with the district lines in California?

Yes districts are packed to dilute the votes of certain areas and to get more Republicans elected. That is gerrymandering

[Telconi]

To you, because you're a partisan hack.

No, the packing itself is gerrymandering.

What is wrong with the district lines in California?

Yes districts are packed to dilute the votes of certain areas and to get more Republicans elected. That is gerrymandering

They're gerrymandered.

[San Lumen]

What is wrong with the district lines in California?

Yes districts are packed to dilute the votes of certain areas and to get more Republicans elected. That is gerrymandering

They're gerrymandered.

No they aren't. They are drawn as fairly as they can be for the state. You just dont like that Democrats hold more seats than Republicans in the State legislature and Congress.

[Freezic Vast]

To you, because you're a partisan hack.

No, the packing itself is gerrymandering.

What is wrong with the district lines in California?

Yes districts are packed to dilute the votes of certain areas and to get more Republicans elected. That is gerrymandering

One, it's heavily concentrated in big urban cities and counties, and two look at this map and tell me this is right

So is diluting votes to get more Dems elected. Look at PA's 8th, it does not need to encompass much of the north east like Wayne and Pike counties. You also don't need 6 districts in the Southeast alone.

[Telconi]

They're gerrymandered.

No they aren't. They are drawn as fairly as they can be for the state. You just dont like that Democrats hold more seats than Republicans in the State legislature and Congress.

Yes they are. You don't get districts drawn that easy if you only look at number of people, those districts are drawn with motives to group people. You just don't want to admit that you're a proponent of something you've lambasted.

I don't like that the current Democrat party exists. So this is obvious, but irrelevant.

[San Lumen]

What is wrong with the district lines in California?

Yes districts are packed to dilute the votes of certain areas and to get more Republicans elected. That is gerrymandering

One, it's heavily concentrated in big urban cities and counties, and two look at this map and tell me this is right

So is diluting votes to get more Dems elected. Look at PA's 8th, it does not need to encompass much of the north east like Wayne and Pike counties. You also don't need 6 districts in the Southeast alone.

No it’s not diluting votes. Districts have to be roughly equal in population and urban counties get more representation because they are more populated

[Freezic Vast]

One, it's heavily concentrated in big urban cities and counties, and two look at this map and tell me this is right

So is diluting votes to get more Dems elected. Look at PA's 8th, it does not need to encompass much of the north east like Wayne and Pike counties. You also don't need 6 districts in the Southeast alone.

No it’s not diluting votes. Districts have to be roughly equal in population and urban counties get more representation because they are more populated

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

[Frievolk]

No it’s not diluting votes. Districts have to be roughly equal in population and urban counties get more representation because they are more populated

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

Alternative option: Fuck that. The cities are more populated, they get more of a say. If the non-urban voter wants a larger say, they can make living in the non-urban districts more appealing. The logical conclusion of "there are more people in the urban centers, and districts are drawn as according to population" shouldn't be ignored because you don't like it.

[Kowani]

No it’s not diluting votes. Districts have to be roughly equal in population and urban counties get more representation because they are more populated

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

Less people in a democracy will get you less power. This is a basic principle of democracy. I’m not sure what your problem is.

[Freezic Vast]

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

Alternative option: Fuck that. The cities are more populated, they get more of a say. If the non-urban voter wants a larger say, they can make living in the non-urban districts more appealing. The logical conclusion of "there are more people in the urban centers, and districts are drawn as according to population" shouldn't be ignored because you don't like it.

No, it should be changed otherwise it alienates anyone not living in an urban district.

[Freezic Vast]

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

Less people in a democracy will get you less power. This is a basic principle of democracy. I’m not sure what your problem is.

Our democratic system is shit, it needs to be changed.

[Frievolk]

Alternative option: Fuck that. The cities are more populated, they get more of a say. If the non-urban voter wants a larger say, they can make living in the non-urban districts more appealing. The logical conclusion of "there are more people in the urban centers, and districts are drawn as according to population" shouldn't be ignored because you don't like it.

No, it should be changed otherwise it alienates anyone not living in an urban district.

And why does that matter exactly? Clearly, most people would rather live in the urban areas. Why should their voice be silenced because the minority feels bad about not getting its way?

[Freezic Vast]

No, it should be changed otherwise it alienates anyone not living in an urban district.

And why does that matter exactly? Clearly, most people would rather live in the urban areas. Why should their voice be silenced because the minority feels bad about not getting its way?

Because it's not fair at all, it completely favors one side, while ignoring the other, it's not balanced at all.

[Frievolk]

Less people in a democracy will get you less power. This is a basic principle of democracy. I’m not sure what your problem is.

Our democratic system is shit, it needs to be changed.

That's... that's a basic principle of democracy. It's not unique to the American system. You know that, right?

[Frievolk]

And why does that matter exactly? Clearly, most people would rather live in the urban areas. Why should their voice be silenced because the minority feels bad about not getting its way?

Because it's not fair at all, it completely favors one side, while ignoring the other, it's not balanced at all.

It's not supposed to be. The Majority gets its way, because it has a larger voting base. Shutting the majority up so the minority can get its way is what's unbalanced.

[Freezic Vast]

Because it's not fair at all, it completely favors one side, while ignoring the other, it's not balanced at all.

It's not supposed to be. The Majority gets its way, because it has a larger voting base. Shutting the majority up so the minority can get its way is what's unbalanced.

Okay? Do I care though? It doesn't make it much better.

[Corrian]

How Tester turned a Clinton beating 56-36 into a 50-47 narrow win, we sure got a talented lineup of candidates, incredible.

(Image)

(Image)

Just not when it counts, like, you know, 2016.

Or in Florida, or Missouri, or Indiana, or North Dakota.

[Telconi]

Because it's not fair at all, it completely favors one side, while ignoring the other, it's not balanced at all.

It's not supposed to be. The Majority gets its way, because it has a larger voting base. Shutting the majority up so the minority can get its way is what's unbalanced.

It's almost like a compromise is possible, perhaps a great one?

[Frievolk]

It's not supposed to be. The Majority gets its way, because it has a larger voting base. Shutting the majority up so the minority can get its way is what's unbalanced.

Okay? Do I care though? It doesn't make it much better.

Unless you're against the institute of democracy in and of itself simply because California is democrat (and that's a trend, larger urban areas tend to be more progressive on average) then you have no point here.

[Freezic Vast]

Okay? Do I care though? It doesn't make it much better.

Unless you're against the institute of democracy in and of itself simply because California is democrat (and that's a trend, larger urban areas tend to be more progressive on average) then you have no point here.

It's not just because I hate California, I don't like the democratic system at all, and I would support a military coup in a heartbeat just to do away with the insane system and the two parties.

[Telconi]

Okay? Do I care though? It doesn't make it much better.

Unless you're against the institute of democracy in and of itself simply because California is democrat (and that's a trend, larger urban areas tend to be more progressive on average) then you have no point here.

I'm against the idea of Democracy as implemented because I don't believe 60% of the population should be permitted to dictate the beliefs of the other 40%.

[Corrian]

No it’s not diluting votes. Districts have to be roughly equal in population and urban counties get more representation because they are more populated

Yes it is.

Well they shouldn't because otherwise it means they wield more power and non urban districts are left to hang dry with no power whatsoever.

They don't wield more power, though. If anything California needs way more districts.