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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listening to Va SC now. It sounds like arguments to go against Referendum vote is stronger on the law.

Going against the expressly stated will of the people is dangerous business. I’d argue it needs to be stronger than 51% if this court wants to retain any shred of its credibility.

Yes totally illegal they didn't even try to make it look reasonable it was either a way to draw attention to unfair maps or to actually try to push through removing the votes of their political opponents.

The law indicates that the election was illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listening to Va SC now. It sounds like arguments to go against Referendum vote is stronger on the law.

Going against the expressly stated will of the people is dangerous business. I’d argue it needs to be stronger than 51% if this court wants to retain any shred of its credibility.

Yes totally illegal they didn't even try to make it look reasonable it was either a way to draw attention to unfair maps or to actually try to push through removing the votes of their political opponents.

The law indicates that the election was illegal.

Apparently yours is not a universally held legal sentiment

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5850643-virginia-congressional-map-ruling/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listening to Va SC now. It sounds like arguments to go against Referendum vote is stronger on the law.

Going against the expressly stated will of the people is dangerous business. I’d argue it needs to be stronger than 51% if this court wants to retain any shred of its credibility.

Yes totally illegal they didn't even try to make it look reasonable it was either a way to draw attention to unfair maps or to actually try to push through removing the votes of their political opponents.

The law indicates that the election was illegal.

Apparently yours is not a universally held legal sentiment

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5850643-virginia-congressional-map-ruling/

DP. It appears that this court found that gerrymandering is fine, even if democratically unfair. It didn't comment on the procedural aspect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listening to Va SC now. It sounds like arguments to go against Referendum vote is stronger on the law.

Going against the expressly stated will of the people is dangerous business. I’d argue it needs to be stronger than 51% if this court wants to retain any shred of its credibility.

And yet, MAGA demands fealty to Trump, who didn’t even win 50%.

[Anonymous]

The only way to overturn the vote is if there was some sort of procedural violation by the Democrats in the amendment to the Virginia constitution.

Last year, the Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering is not a violation of the US Constitution.

Last Tuesday, the voters approved amending Virginia's constitution to allow a mid-decade reapportionment.

Can someone find me a procedural violation? Or violations of the Virginia or US constitutions? The voters literally just amended the VA Constitution to allow this to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listening to Va SC now. It sounds like arguments to go against Referendum vote is stronger on the law.

Going against the expressly stated will of the people is dangerous business. I’d argue it needs to be stronger than 51% if this court wants to retain any shred of its credibility.

Yes totally illegal they didn't even try to make it look reasonable it was either a way to draw attention to unfair maps or to actually try to push through removing the votes of their political opponents.

What is illegal about that? MAGA SCOTUS says it’s fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only way to overturn the vote is if there was some sort of procedural violation by the Democrats in the amendment to the Virginia constitution.

Last year, the Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering is not a violation of the US Constitution.

Last Tuesday, the voters approved amending Virginia's constitution to allow a mid-decade reapportionment.

Can someone find me a procedural violation? Or violations of the Virginia or US constitutions? The voters literally just amended the VA Constitution to allow this to happen.

The General Assembly was not authorized to introduce the amendment during a special session that was limited to budgetary matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only way to overturn the vote is if there was some sort of procedural violation by the Democrats in the amendment to the Virginia constitution.

Last year, the Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering is not a violation of the US Constitution.

Last Tuesday, the voters approved amending Virginia's constitution to allow a mid-decade reapportionment.

Can someone find me a procedural violation? Or violations of the Virginia or US constitutions? The voters literally just amended the VA Constitution to allow this to happen.

The General Assembly was not authorized to introduce the amendment during a special session that was limited to budgetary matters.

DP. You're not doing this nonsense proper justice. That special session was called in May of 2024 and they resolved the budget issue in 2 days. The Dems refused to gavel out to close it so it was technically left open for almost 18 months. In October 2025, a week before election day, the Dems used that special session to pass the resolution for the gerrymandering, and then passed it a few days later. Meanwhile, early voting had been happening for over a month, with an estimated 1 million votes cast.

The procedural violations were a double whammy - improperly using the special session (that hadn't been touched in a year and a half) and ignoring the intervening election rule (since voting already began). They took a process that was supposed to take 2 years not about ten weeks.