>The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked a lower court’s order for North Carolina to rework its congressional map because Republicans violated the Constitution by drawing electoral districts intended to maximize their party’s chances of winning.
>Two liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, objected to the high court’s action.
>The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the order reduces the chance that the current district lines will be altered ahead of the November mid-term congressional elections. The court offered no reason for its decision.
http://archive.is/0CCjL
/mlpol/ - My Little Politics
Archived thread
File (): 1424CF0831AA67C14FEE984624FA57EE-308636.jpg (301.4 KB, 2304x1536, AAc7kgP.jpg)
>>107795
I wonder how loud the Democrats will bitch and moan over the SC ruling, and then bitch and moan if someone points out any of their changes to electoral districts. I guess it is part of the game, but the Democrats can't take the high road when changing districts with this move.
>wonder how the districts today compares to the original districts (if there ever was any original districts)
I wonder how loud the Democrats will bitch and moan over the SC ruling, and then bitch and moan if someone points out any of their changes to electoral districts. I guess it is part of the game, but the Democrats can't take the high road when changing districts with this move.
>wonder how the districts today compares to the original districts (if there ever was any original districts)
File (): 0AE239EAACBD2E4793DF44608F4B83BC-23411.png (22.9 KB, 768x614, How_to_Steal_an_Election_-….png)
>>107796
The original districts would be divided up constantly it was added to the constitution later once it became a problem known today as Gerrymandering in which districts were formed for the sole purpose of providing the most votes for the ruling party. once this problem became a big enough issue for both parties to see it became law that they couldn't be made if it was obviously designed to win for a certain group.
this image is a good example, the way voting areas are decided as being "Won" are by these areas votes coming in. so a technically blue state that gets the electoral collage votes that are supposed to follow the states ruling should vote blue, but if divided up in a certain way, the outcome can be changed. giving the other side the win
The original districts would be divided up constantly it was added to the constitution later once it became a problem known today as Gerrymandering in which districts were formed for the sole purpose of providing the most votes for the ruling party. once this problem became a big enough issue for both parties to see it became law that they couldn't be made if it was obviously designed to win for a certain group.
this image is a good example, the way voting areas are decided as being "Won" are by these areas votes coming in. so a technically blue state that gets the electoral collage votes that are supposed to follow the states ruling should vote blue, but if divided up in a certain way, the outcome can be changed. giving the other side the win
>>107798
If the Republicans offered the Democrats a change that made it so that delegates are awarded based on % of total votes (so in your example it became 60% blue and 40% red delegates)… But in exchange Voter ID and proof of citizenship became mandatory. Would this be an beneficial outcome?
>still think it is best to let Democrats reee and get Commifornia to succeed form the Union
If the Republicans offered the Democrats a change that made it so that delegates are awarded based on % of total votes (so in your example it became 60% blue and 40% red delegates)… But in exchange Voter ID and proof of citizenship became mandatory. Would this be an beneficial outcome?
>still think it is best to let Democrats reee and get Commifornia to succeed form the Union
>>107803
the thing is those last two are. they just aren't enforced in "liberal" voting areas. and the funding to provide security and ID checks would be rather large.
Where I voted we had elderly people recording the votes and checking ID's, now Im not saying they would make a mistake based solely on age, but when you look at ID's all day for several days you're not going to remember them all… or even know a fake one if you start to slack off.
the thing is those last two are. they just aren't enforced in "liberal" voting areas. and the funding to provide security and ID checks would be rather large.
Where I voted we had elderly people recording the votes and checking ID's, now Im not saying they would make a mistake based solely on age, but when you look at ID's all day for several days you're not going to remember them all… or even know a fake one if you start to slack off.
>>107806
> recording the votes
recording the voters* machines/boxes did the recording, but the issue is still there. at least in my own slice of the burger patty
> recording the votes
recording the voters* machines/boxes did the recording, but the issue is still there. at least in my own slice of the burger patty
>>107806
>>107807
True fake ID can be a problem. But if you have a limited set of legal ID (Driver licence or Passport) those who check will be familiar whit those few ID cards and lover the risk of an fake getting through. Also if you do as in Norway where you are assigned a votingplace based on area you live in your name will only be listed in that one voting place. You are not allowed to vote anywhere else.
>>107807
True fake ID can be a problem. But if you have a limited set of legal ID (Driver licence or Passport) those who check will be familiar whit those few ID cards and lover the risk of an fake getting through. Also if you do as in Norway where you are assigned a votingplace based on area you live in your name will only be listed in that one voting place. You are not allowed to vote anywhere else.
>>107806
You don’t need expensive security though. Just have a barcode scanner on the voting machine and maybe one person to check ids at the door. Old lady checks your Id to make sure the picture matches, you go inside, scan your barcode, the machine records that you voted and will reject anyone who tries to scan that barcode again. It could still plausibly be circumvented I’m sure, but it would be difficult enough that the average nigger wouldn’t consider it worth the trouble, and just requiring ids to begin with would scare off most illegals.
You don’t need expensive security though. Just have a barcode scanner on the voting machine and maybe one person to check ids at the door. Old lady checks your Id to make sure the picture matches, you go inside, scan your barcode, the machine records that you voted and will reject anyone who tries to scan that barcode again. It could still plausibly be circumvented I’m sure, but it would be difficult enough that the average nigger wouldn’t consider it worth the trouble, and just requiring ids to begin with would scare off most illegals.
>>107809
my apologies I may have made this a bit confusing, but the districts are where you are allowed to vote based on your residency. and the best way I can explain it would be with a real example
I'm sure you know of NYC, The big apple. if we did laws based solely on population NYC would dominate the entire state of New York which in state law making it does. Takes in NYC spread throughout the rest of the state and most of it is Rural area Politicians in NY cater to NYC because they hold almost the entire population of the state making a state elections more of a pseudo-democracy since rural New Yorkers voices are completely smashed by those in NYC in sheer volume.
Gun laws, Taxes, local Healthcare, food and drink regulations, etc etc are made in New York with New York City in mind. not the rest of the state. and with the way out government works now its nearly impossible to make areas of an existing state into another one. Especially because it requires a vote for it to happen one that involves the entire state getting a say. Meaning New York might want to become a state without NYC in it, but NYC might say "no" and since they have popular vote they stay as one state.
But this is a (hopefully) simplified way of explaining it. there are quite a few rules that I cannot claim to know about making states out of old ones
my apologies I may have made this a bit confusing, but the districts are where you are allowed to vote based on your residency. and the best way I can explain it would be with a real example
I'm sure you know of NYC, The big apple. if we did laws based solely on population NYC would dominate the entire state of New York which in state law making it does. Takes in NYC spread throughout the rest of the state and most of it is Rural area Politicians in NY cater to NYC because they hold almost the entire population of the state making a state elections more of a pseudo-democracy since rural New Yorkers voices are completely smashed by those in NYC in sheer volume.
Gun laws, Taxes, local Healthcare, food and drink regulations, etc etc are made in New York with New York City in mind. not the rest of the state. and with the way out government works now its nearly impossible to make areas of an existing state into another one. Especially because it requires a vote for it to happen one that involves the entire state getting a say. Meaning New York might want to become a state without NYC in it, but NYC might say "no" and since they have popular vote they stay as one state.
But this is a (hopefully) simplified way of explaining it. there are quite a few rules that I cannot claim to know about making states out of old ones
>>107796
This site has a neat map of the evolution of congressional districts in the US.
http://cdmaps.polisci.ucla.edu/
This site has a neat map of the evolution of congressional districts in the US.
http://cdmaps.polisci.ucla.edu/
File (): 4C17E2E963DA5D9ED948A586FCE6E606-81604.jpg (79.7 KB, 422x585, gerrymandering.JPG)
>>107814
I see there is good and bad with the system, but no system is perfect. And me comparing the whole of US to Norway (with a combined population of a "small" city in the US) might not be the best choice I made. But I see that making cities into a separate district is a good thing. So I might as well just enjoy the autistic screeching from the left and laugh in Republican and still demand Voter ID because every other nation on earth that is worth anything has it.
>>107818
Good that that district is separated from the rest (should be walled in too).
>small question… how is the total Ethnicity calculated because I get 171.7% total
I see there is good and bad with the system, but no system is perfect. And me comparing the whole of US to Norway (with a combined population of a "small" city in the US) might not be the best choice I made. But I see that making cities into a separate district is a good thing. So I might as well just enjoy the autistic screeching from the left and laugh in Republican and still demand Voter ID because every other nation on earth that is worth anything has it.
>>107818
Good that that district is separated from the rest (should be walled in too).
>small question… how is the total Ethnicity calculated because I get 171.7% total
File (): 5688A6C5A387EE3305E158D61405A3A3-250917.png (245.0 KB, 1162x1046, Screenshot (569).png)
>>107824
Scary if it the population is nearly 50% illegals in one area.
>>107825
Hard to tell, but since "Hispanic or Latino and Race" is listed by it self in the census it wouldn't surprise me.
https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=17&cd=04
Scary if it the population is nearly 50% illegals in one area.
>>107825
Hard to tell, but since "Hispanic or Latino and Race" is listed by it self in the census it wouldn't surprise me.
https://www.census.gov/mycd/?st=17&cd=04
>>107821
>how is the total Ethnicity calculated because I get 171.7% total
You aren't supposed to verify the numbers. Everyone knows that voter fraud is a CONSPIRACY. Only DENIERS think otherwise :^)
-Democrats
>how is the total Ethnicity calculated because I get 171.7% total
You aren't supposed to verify the numbers. Everyone knows that voter fraud is a CONSPIRACY. Only DENIERS think otherwise :^)
-Democrats
>>107828
Did some calcualtions
If 100% of the "White" is Hispanic we still have 102.239 unaccounted
Lets take those from the "Some other race"
We are left with 133.267 "Some other Race" that isn't Hispanic or Latino.
Add in the Black, Indians, Asians, and Hawaiians to that number and you end up with 207.715
So all the "White" and 102.239 of the "Some other race" are in face "Hispanic or Latino" on that district. There is no White people there at all.
Did some calcualtions
If 100% of the "White" is Hispanic we still have 102.239 unaccounted
Lets take those from the "Some other race"
We are left with 133.267 "Some other Race" that isn't Hispanic or Latino.
Add in the Black, Indians, Asians, and Hawaiians to that number and you end up with 207.715
So all the "White" and 102.239 of the "Some other race" are in face "Hispanic or Latino" on that district. There is no White people there at all.
>>107830
When you take the census test they first ask you "are you hispanic or latino" and then they ask you to identify a race. Every single hispanic is also counted as a white person or an "other race" or black or some ethnicity, since Hispanic is not an ethnicity on the census but an entirely separate categorization.
When you take the census test they first ask you "are you hispanic or latino" and then they ask you to identify a race. Every single hispanic is also counted as a white person or an "other race" or black or some ethnicity, since Hispanic is not an ethnicity on the census but an entirely separate categorization.
>>107831
They really should change that and make Hispanic and Latino a race. But leftist might not like what it tells them.
>also the "White are the majority" would not hold up I think
They really should change that and make Hispanic and Latino a race. But leftist might not like what it tells them.
>also the "White are the majority" would not hold up I think
>>107832
What we need is "Mestizo" listed as a selectable race. As it is now half of hispanics answer "other" and half answer "white" when "Mestizo" would be most appropriate
What we need is "Mestizo" listed as a selectable race. As it is now half of hispanics answer "other" and half answer "white" when "Mestizo" would be most appropriate
>>107821
>>107826
I'm not sure but I got it from here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois%27s_4th_congressional_district
>>107826
I'm not sure but I got it from here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois%27s_4th_congressional_district
26 replies | 4 files | 1 UUIDs | Archived