Texas Republicans unveil congressional map that could gift them five seats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It was Democrats that seceded. We sometimes hear call from Democrats today for secession every time they lose an election.

You understand, that after the VRA and Civil Rights Act were signed by LBJ in 1964, that the parties switched, and the GOP adopted the racists white southern democrats - called the Southern Strategy. So when you are saying the "democrats seceded" you are referring to modern republicans, not modern democrats.

I get it that it is confusing, but please try to be historically accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

: In a loss for Democrats, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled the congressional map voters approved last month to counter GOP gerrymanders cannot go into effect.

The decision overturns the will of voters for technical reasons and gives Republicans a leg up for the 2026 midterms.

So the MAGAs are allowed to gerrymander without public input but democrats are not allowed to, despite an entire statewide referendum.

We are in for some very dark times.

Yep.

Though since DeSantis is ignoring his constitution substantively, Spanberger should ignore ours. they didn't strike the substance. Only the procedure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

: In a loss for Democrats, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled the congressional map voters approved last month to counter GOP gerrymanders cannot go into effect.

The decision overturns the will of voters for technical reasons and gives Republicans a leg up for the 2026 midterms.

So the MAGAs are allowed to gerrymander without public input but democrats are not allowed to, despite an entire statewide referendum.

We are in for some very dark times.

Yep.

Though since DeSantis is ignoring his constitution substantively, Spanberger should ignore ours. they didn't strike the substance. Only the procedure.

+1

[Anonymous]

Is there a point that Independents and traditional conservatives see this for what it is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a point that Independents and traditional conservatives see this for what it is?

Not at all. They are fine if it's done by fiat but don't show up to vote for it when D's adhere to democracy and put it up for a vote.

[Anonymous]

The virginia supreme court has set a precedent that it is ok to cancel an election after it has taken place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New England never should have given Trump the idea. There isn't a Democrat strategy Trump won't steal. Lawfare, redistricting ... Now he's testing the courts to see if his FBI director can say 86 Obama. I expect him to test the courts this year to find out if he can legally manufacture intelligence, wiretap democrat campaigns, indict comeys lawyers, raid obama and Biden houses, arrest Biden, charge Clinton for rape in arkansas...

He's got to do that stuff just to get even .. but he will go further to win.

Except it was an indepedent DOJ that obtained legal warrants.
It was a FISA court with sufficient evidence that people in Trump's orbit were conspiring with foreign actors

It wasn't don't by fiat with a corrupt and rogue government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

: In a loss for Democrats, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled the congressional map voters approved last month to counter GOP gerrymanders cannot go into effect.

The decision overturns the will of voters for technical reasons and gives Republicans a leg up for the 2026 midterms.

So the MAGAs are allowed to gerrymander without public input but democrats are not allowed to, despite an entire statewide referendum.

We are in for some very dark times.

Yep, it's total Calvinball.

[Anonymous]

Meanwhile, in Ohio...

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/ohio-republicans-ignoring-state-supreme-court-gerrymandering-redistricting-rulings-constitutional-amendment-federal-court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New England never should have given Trump the idea. There isn't a Democrat strategy Trump won't steal. Lawfare, redistricting ... Now he's testing the courts to see if his FBI director can say 86 Obama. I expect him to test the courts this year to find out if he can legally manufacture intelligence, wiretap democrat campaigns, indict comeys lawyers, raid obama and Biden houses, arrest Biden, charge Clinton for rape in arkansas...

He's got to do that stuff just to get even .. but he will go further to win.

New England?

I mean, have you seen Ohio or Wisconsin? Or just about any southern state that has disperate gerrymandering prior to this year? It isn't a new thing, but this mid-decade rush to change the rules is new, and that is all on the GOP and Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It was Democrats that seceded. We sometimes hear call from Democrats today for secession every time they lose an election.

You understand, that after the VRA and Civil Rights Act were signed by LBJ in 1964, that the parties switched, and the GOP adopted the racists white southern democrats - called the Southern Strategy. So when you are saying the "democrats seceded" you are referring to modern republicans, not modern democrats.

I get it that it is confusing, but please try to be historically accurate.

No, these states were Democrat well into the 90s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

: In a loss for Democrats, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled the congressional map voters approved last month to counter GOP gerrymanders cannot go into effect.

The decision overturns the will of voters for technical reasons and gives Republicans a leg up for the 2026 midterms.

So the MAGAs are allowed to gerrymander without public input but democrats are not allowed to, despite an entire statewide referendum.

We are in for some very dark times.

Yep.

Though since DeSantis is ignoring his constitution substantively, Spanberger should ignore ours. they didn't strike the substance. Only the procedure.

Will they pass it again so they could have it in place for 2028?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The virginia supreme court has set a precedent that it is ok to cancel an election after it has taken place.

The Supreme Court did not cancel the referendum beforehand because under the constitution, the referendum is part of the legislative process, and the court will not step into the middle of that.
Once the legislative process was completed with the referendum, the court said you didn't follow the constitution in passing these new maps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New England never should have given Trump the idea. There isn't a Democrat strategy Trump won't steal. Lawfare, redistricting ... Now he's testing the courts to see if his FBI director can say 86 Obama. I expect him to test the courts this year to find out if he can legally manufacture intelligence, wiretap democrat campaigns, indict comeys lawyers, raid obama and Biden houses, arrest Biden, charge Clinton for rape in arkansas...

He's got to do that stuff just to get even .. but he will go further to win.

Except it was an indepedent DOJ that obtained legal warrants.
It was a FISA court with sufficient evidence that people in Trump's orbit were conspiring with foreign actors

It wasn't don't by fiat with a corrupt and rogue government.

The DOJ figured out Steele's source and interviewed him. The source told the FBI it was just rumors, he had no idea if it was true.
They then went to the FISA court, and did not say that the source said all this evidence is bogus. No, they told the court we interviewed the source and found him credible.

[Anonymous]

It's total BS. Whey they stopped at 5 I'll never understand...