Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know there are people running but I can't keep any of them straight. I know the lady who just got Emily's List (forget her name) is like the only one who actually lives in the district. Everybody else is just Bethesda people who couldn't beat Raskin.

And in the long game, it doesn't matter who they are, as long as one of them gets the seat and it doesn't go to the Rs. Because numbers are what matters, and Maryland shouldn't be responsible for costing the party a seat. We're a solid blue state, and we need to do anything we can do to keep it that way. Otherwise you'll have all the rednecks and racists from Frederick all the way to Deep Creek voting for some junior nazi. We MUST ensure that we keep or add more D votes in that district to keep them in check. They have to be disenfranchised, period. It's the only option

Amazingly, something like 40% of the state votes Republican, but has 12% (1/8) representation in the House. If you honestly think that all Republicans are racist Nazis, you are incredibly ignorant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

I'm basically fine with gerrymandering as long as we get to do it. It helps us keep the state Blue, every part of it, even in the places where it's probably more red. It's not like republicans don't disenfranchise people in other states, so turnabout is fair play inmy book

Unfortunately, the Rs took gerrymandering to the next level in 2010 which explains how they are able to maintain a lock on the House. R districts are much more badly gerrymandered than D districts. This also carries to state house legislative chambers. If you're really interested, check out the Brennan Center, which has done reports on the subject. There is also a Supreme Court case pending now that may hold that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

I'm basically fine with gerrymandering as long as we get to do it. It helps us keep the state Blue, every part of it, even in the places where it's probably more red. It's not like republicans don't disenfranchise people in other states, so turnabout is fair play inmy book

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know there are people running but I can't keep any of them straight. I know the lady who just got Emily's List (forget her name) is like the only one who actually lives in the district. Everybody else is just Bethesda people who couldn't beat Raskin.

And in the long game, it doesn't matter who they are, as long as one of them gets the seat and it doesn't go to the Rs. Because numbers are what matters, and Maryland shouldn't be responsible for costing the party a seat. We're a solid blue state, and we need to do anything we can do to keep it that way. Otherwise you'll have all the rednecks and racists from Frederick all the way to Deep Creek voting for some junior nazi. We MUST ensure that we keep or add more D votes in that district to keep them in check. They have to be disenfranchised, period. It's the only option

Anonymous wrote:California has some of the most competitive House districts in the coubtry. It is definitely not gerrymandered.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

I'm basically fine with gerrymandering as long as we get to do it. It helps us keep the state Blue, every part of it, even in the places where it's probably more red. It's not like republicans don't disenfranchise people in other states, so turnabout is fair play inmy book

Unfortunately, the Rs took gerrymandering to the next level in 2010 which explains how they are able to maintain a lock on the House. R districts are much more badly gerrymandered than D districts. This also carries to state house legislative chambers. If you're really interested, check out the Brennan Center, which has done reports on the subject. There is also a Supreme Court case pending now that may hold that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

I'm basically fine with gerrymandering as long as we get to do it. It helps us keep the state Blue, every part of it, even in the places where it's probably more red. It's not like republicans don't disenfranchise people in other states, so turnabout is fair play inmy book

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

I'm basically fine with gerrymandering as long as we get to do it. It helps us keep the state Blue, every part of it, even in the places where it's probably more red. It's not like republicans don't disenfranchise people in other states, so turnabout is fair play inmy book

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.

What in the worldnare you talking about?

Maryland is a horribly gerrymandered state...by democrats and run by democarats.

If they are so stupid as to redraw the gerrymandered boudaries to a logical, fair, rational voting map then they probably deserve to lose their seats.

Republicans have zero to do with Maryland's effed up gerrymandered boundaries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Dems will hold the seat. I don't think the candidates have fully shook out. I'd probably be happy with anyone except Trone.

I don't think it should have been gerrymandered and I wish we would get laws/court decisions precluding gerrymandering on a national basis. It's even possible that more fairly drawn districts would make the 1st and the 6th both competitive for Dems, at least for 2018.

On the other hand, when you look at the worst gerrymandered states it's probably the top 4 were gerrymandered by R's and then there's MD so I can't say I think MD Dems should be ashamed of what they did.

Umm...hello? California.

Anonymous wrote:I think Dems will hold the seat. I don't think the candidates have fully shook out. I'd probably be happy with anyone except Trone.

I don't think it should have been gerrymandered and I wish we would get laws/court decisions precluding gerrymandering on a national basis. It's even possible that more fairly drawn districts would make the 1st and the 6th both competitive for Dems, at least for 2018.

On the other hand, when you look at the worst gerrymandered states it's probably the top 4 were gerrymandered by R's and then there's MD so I can't say I think MD Dems should be ashamed of what they did.

Anonymous wrote:As long as they don't redraw the boundaries and leave it like it is, it's a safe seat.

If they start monkeying around with it to cut out all the democrat strongholds in montgomery, it might be in jeopardy. This is why redistricting is so dangerous. It allows republicans to basically steal elections.