Virginia referendum - if you hate MAGA, vote YES (even if your mailing says to vote 'No')

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

I don't think saying the ballot language was unclear is a substantive argument. I am not young and I've voted on many many ballot initiatives in many elections. They are a sentence or two and always have to simplify a complex issue. Most voters that bother to vote on ballot initiatives know the what and why of their vote before they even see the ballot.

+1

The only confusing aspect of the referendum was the MAGA propaganda. And that was international.

We need Jones to go after these groups trying to illegally interfere with elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember, the GOP requested that maps be posted. They refused. Why?

I'm finding no references to this. Link?

Or are you referring to the Tazewell District Court's ruling that proponents violated the timing requirement for voting on the ballot initiative that the SCOVA decisively rebuked?

Saying they would allow the referendum to go forward and rule after the election is "decisively rebuked?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Wow. What a condescending, arrogant post.

I’m bookmarking this to come back after the arguments on Monday at SCOVA. So many constitutional issues with this process. I don’t see how the Supreme Court can’t overturn this vote.

Arrogant, perhaps.

But not wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember, the GOP requested that maps be posted. They refused. Why?

I'm finding no references to this. Link?

Or are you referring to the Tazewell District Court's ruling that proponents violated the timing requirement for voting on the ballot initiative that the SCOVA decisively rebuked?

Saying they would allow the referendum to go forward and rule after the election is "decisively rebuked?"

If SCOVA thought the plaintiffs were likely to win on the merits, they would have enjoined the election. But they are smart to wait. A smart court considers the public sentiment when ruling. Our current SCOTUS has been so blinded by partisanship and religious dogma they forgot, and now they have no credibility whatsoever and may not even have jobs in a decade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember, the GOP requested that maps be posted. They refused. Why?

I'm finding no references to this. Link?

Or are you referring to the Tazewell District Court's ruling that proponents violated the timing requirement for voting on the ballot initiative that the SCOVA decisively rebuked?

Saying they would allow the referendum to go forward and rule after the election is "decisively rebuked?"

If SCOVA thought the plaintiffs were likely to win on the merits, they would have enjoined the election. But they are smart to wait. A smart court considers the public sentiment when ruling. Our current SCOTUS has been so blinded by partisanship and religious dogma they forgot, and now they have no credibility whatsoever and may not even have jobs in a decade.

They waited to rule until after the election because that was precedent. Do some research. It has nothing to do with public sentiment. They rule on law not on feelings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

All the name calling and swearing and partisan chest thumping is curiously Trump-esque, and makes you seem immature and kinda dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

I don't think saying the ballot language was unclear is a substantive argument. I am not young and I've voted on many many ballot initiatives in many elections. They are a sentence or two and always have to simplify a complex issue. Most voters that bother to vote on ballot initiatives know the what and why of their vote before they even see the ballot.

+1

The only confusing aspect of the referendum was the MAGA propaganda. And that was international.

We need Jones to go after these groups trying to illegally interfere with elections.

"Restore fairness" is an opinion, therefore it introduces bias into the question that could mislead a voter because who doesn't want to be fair. But many people don't actually consider the proposed maps to be fair. Of course they weren't displayed at polling locations otherwise voters would have more easily caught on to the dishonesty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

All the name calling and swearing and partisan chest thumping is curiously Trump-esque, and makes you seem immature and kinda dumb.

And yet, I’m still smarter than you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

All the name calling and swearing and partisan chest thumping is curiously Trump-esque, and makes you seem immature and kinda dumb.

And yet, I’m still smarter than you.

You and Trump. Super smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember, the GOP requested that maps be posted. They refused. Why?

I'm finding no references to this. Link?

Or are you referring to the Tazewell District Court's ruling that proponents violated the timing requirement for voting on the ballot initiative that the SCOVA decisively rebuked?

NP to this discussion but not to the thread. I remember hearing this a while back. Daily Wire so shaker of salt necessary, but apparently the state elections board was asked if maps could be displayed at each polling place and refused.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-admits-to-unfair-map-while-keeping-voters-in-the-dark

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

I don't think saying the ballot language was unclear is a substantive argument. I am not young and I've voted on many many ballot initiatives in many elections. They are a sentence or two and always have to simplify a complex issue. Most voters that bother to vote on ballot initiatives know the what and why of their vote before they even see the ballot.

+1

The only confusing aspect of the referendum was the MAGA propaganda. And that was international.

We need Jones to go after these groups trying to illegally interfere with elections.

"Restore fairness" is an opinion, therefore it introduces bias into the question that could mislead a voter because who doesn't want to be fair. But many people don't actually consider the proposed maps to be fair. Of course they weren't displayed at polling locations otherwise voters would have more easily caught on to the dishonesty.

Still whining with this same lame argument? We all know what “fairness” is in this context and it has nothing to do with the VA map.

You support gerrymandering. That’s all we need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remember, the GOP requested that maps be posted. They refused. Why?

I'm finding no references to this. Link?

Or are you referring to the Tazewell District Court's ruling that proponents violated the timing requirement for voting on the ballot initiative that the SCOVA decisively rebuked?

Saying they would allow the referendum to go forward and rule after the election is "decisively rebuked?"

...yes? SCOVA found Hurley's injunction baseless on the merits, that its conclusions were not supported by constitutional text, and that its ruling was based "on a series of atextual interpretations" of the Constitution of Virginia. In other words, it wasn't decided by interpreting law, it was decided by a partisan hack who had already made up his mind and came up with some flimsy post hoc justifications. No wonder you like it so much!

Still waiting on the evidence for refusing to post maps, by the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

All the name calling and swearing and partisan chest thumping is curiously Trump-esque, and makes you seem immature and kinda dumb.

And yet, I’m still smarter than you.

You and Trump. Super smart.

You think even Trump is smarter than you? That’s a low bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else think the Republican whining is a bit…unseemly? I can’t help but thinking about the little pipsqeak on the playground who bullies the big kid for years, then cries bloody murder when the big kid punches him back once and knocks him flat on his back.

AOC said it best when she said, “Wah wah wah.” I can’t help but see children every time I see Republican white men whining about injustice.

This is going to result in Democrats winning 10 of Virginia's 11 House districts. Reminder: Virginia is purple state. That's completely ridiculous. Why don't you just ban Republicans from voting altogether?

If 48.5% of Virginians vote repuplican but maps reduce them to just 1 of 11 seats (9.1%), then nearly half the state has been compressed into only 9% representation.

That means they lost about 81% of their political voice when seats are allocated.

Maybe if Republicans has conducted themselves differently in the past few years, more than 48.5% would have voted against this measure.

+1. The voters have spoken. That is how we are supposed to settle things here.

Is that a joke? People didn't even understand what they were voting for. It was just "if you hate Trump vote this way." That's what ballot initiatives always do. They do something sleazy and then they sell it to the public by saying "vote yes if you love puppies."

https://www.npr.org/2026/04/20/nx-s1-5790809/virginia-redistricting-election-trump-gerrymandering

https://www.axios.com/local/richmond/2026/04/21/virginia-redistricting-election-voter-confusion

https://wtop.com/virginia/2026/04/why-some-virginia-voters-find-redistricting-ballot-question-confusing/

https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/virginia-congressional-map-ballot-measure-b12f9b2a

Are you saying Republicans were too stupid to understand the language on the initiative? Hilarious self-own.

You sound like a bratty teenager. Maybe you should listen to the adults who say this is obviously going to be struck down by the courts because the language used on the ballot was plainly deceptive. If there's one thing you absolutely cannot do with these things, it's use misleading language on the ballot. You have to be extremely clear about what is being proposed.

Bub, I'm going to clue you in to something, because clearly nobody else in your life is. It's obvious from your posts that you get your news from Fox News, Drudge, Newsmax, and the Washington Times. You are being hoodwinked. Taken for a fool. Deluded because you lack the sophistication to spot obvious distortions, half-truths, or outright lies.

Those of us living in the real world - consuming news from a wide variety of sources, produced by actual journalists and not partisan hacks pretending to be - know that Republicans are incredibly unlikely to prevail.

Weird because you sound like what politicos euphemistically refer to a "low-information voter."

Every Republican accusation is a confession. I hope you escape from your echo chamber someday.

You sound very Trump-y, the way you ignore substantive arguments and just call people names and repeat moronic bumper sticker slogans you read somewhere.

You have a very interesting idea of what constitutes a “substantive” argument.

Ok, well, there's going to be a big court fight about this, and that's the legal argument they're going to use to kill this thing. They're going to say the language used was slanted and deceptive ("Restore fairness"? What does that even mean? And who exactly opposes that?). And then they're going to point to the long history of courts saying you can't use misleading descriptions of proposals.

Sure if you stopped reading at “restore fairness” and didn’t finish the sentence “to upcoming elections” then yes I understand why you were confused. Again, you can do a lot of self-improvement before you need to go back to the polls— I repeat my suggestion to read Toni Morrison but if reading a sentence in full is the problem, maybe something a little easier…

You seem a little preoccupied with me. I'm not the issue. I understand all the issues. I'm telling you where this debate is going, and where the big legal vulnerability here is. You can pretend it doesn't exist, but it is real. This is simply not going to fly with the courts.

DP. You are uninformed and totally full of shit. As expected.

All the name calling and swearing and partisan chest thumping is curiously Trump-esque, and makes you seem immature and kinda dumb.

This is an excellent object lesson, since you’ll notice it was the Republicans calling names until they were shown to be foolish, and now they’re the ones weeping about name coloring. In the words of AOC, WAH WAH WAH.