Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not a Trumper here. I agree that Gerrymandering is bad and ideally would not happen. Clearly it's a problem with both parties.
Honestly, I don't buy the voter suppression and "democracy at stake" hyperbole. Anyone that wants to vote can vote, right? Yes, it might be inconvenient for some based on their work schedule, but that's always been the case. And In most places you can already vote by mail.
When I hear that democracy is at stake, I tune out because it's a huge exaggeration in my mind.
I'm open to argument, though. Can you change my mind?
OP, please read this whole twitter thread. It has ALL of the answers you are looking for.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not a Trumper here. I agree that Gerrymandering is bad and ideally would not happen. Clearly it's a problem with both parties.
Honestly, I don't buy the voter suppression and "democracy at stake" hyperbole. Anyone that wants to vote can vote, right? Yes, it might be inconvenient for some based on their work schedule, but that's always been the case. And In most places you can already vote by mail.
When I hear that democracy is at stake, I tune out because it's a huge exaggeration in my mind.
I'm open to argument, though. Can you change my mind?
OP, please read this whole twitter thread. It has ALL of the answers you are looking for.
Anonymous wrote:Not a Trumper here. I agree that Gerrymandering is bad and ideally would not happen. Clearly it's a problem with both parties.
Honestly, I don't buy the voter suppression and "democracy at stake" hyperbole. Anyone that wants to vote can vote, right? Yes, it might be inconvenient for some based on their work schedule, but that's always been the case. And In most places you can already vote by mail.
When I hear that democracy is at stake, I tune out because it's a huge exaggeration in my mind.
I'm open to argument, though. Can you change my mind?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dems gerrymander, too. The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it---and, if you think this bill would fix it, you are sadly mistaken. There will always be a way around it unless they set up a grid. And, remember, they also have to ensure that some districts in some states are primarily minority.
There are several mostly blue states that have commissions. That is how you fix it. Take politics out of drawing cohesive lines.
Why should the Dems not gerrymander in MD and CA when the GOP does it to greater extremes in 23 other states?
WTF kind of false information is always on those GD message board. There is no gerrymandering in CA. They had a non-partisan board draw districts. Just like every state should do. That’s right - the biggest and most important state in this country - which also happens to be dem controlled did it right.
F*ing done w/ the lies all over this place.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dems gerrymander, too. The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it---and, if you think this bill would fix it, you are sadly mistaken. There will always be a way around it unless they set up a grid. And, remember, they also have to ensure that some districts in some states are primarily minority.
There are several mostly blue states that have commissions. That is how you fix it. Take politics out of drawing cohesive lines.
Why should the Dems not gerrymander in MD and CA when the GOP does it to greater extremes in 23 other states?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dems gerrymander, too. The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it---and, if you think this bill would fix it, you are sadly mistaken. There will always be a way around it unless they set up a grid. And, remember, they also have to ensure that some districts in some states are primarily minority.
There are several mostly blue states that have commissions. That is how you fix it. Take politics out of drawing cohesive lines.
Why should the Dems not gerrymander in MD and CA when the GOP does it to greater extremes in 23 other states?
Anonymous wrote:Dems gerrymander, too. The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it---and, if you think this bill would fix it, you are sadly mistaken. There will always be a way around it unless they set up a grid. And, remember, they also have to ensure that some districts in some states are primarily minority.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Dems gerrymander, too. The problem is that no one really knows how to fix it---and, if you think this bill would fix it, you are sadly mistaken. There will always be a way around it unless they set up a grid. And, remember, they also have to ensure that some districts in some states are primarily minority.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Has there been a single rational conservative on this thread?
It means “I am just a selfish asshole, not a fascist.”
More like, “yeah, I mean the policies I support are fascist, but, like, cuddly fascist! We’re not going to start anything ugly in the streets. Yet. We’re the good kind of fascists.”
Yeah. I think you all are doing a bang up job of convincing OP that voting rights legislation is needed.
Conservatives just love it when you trot out the "fascist" moniker aimed at anonymous people you don't know a lick about. And, they also love being indirectly called 'irrational." And, most of all... they love being referred to as "assholes."
Yep. This type of discourse goes a long way at convincing others of your position!!! Keep convincing her, people!!!
Read the whole thread, please.