If you can't win... cheat

[adrina]

So sayeth Wisconsin and Michigan.

The states were among four, including Kansas and New Hampshire, where voters broke Republican “trifectas,” in which one party holds the governorship and both houses of the state legislature.

Republicans defended the efforts.

“The No. 1 priority for us is to restore the balance of powers between the two co-equal branches of governments,” Robin Vos, speaker of the Wisconsin state assembly, said at a news conference on Monday.

You'd think having more democrats in power would be restoring the balance. Apparently that's not quite their logic.

It's like a political limbo... how low can they go.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

North Carolina was the model.

 

[butters]

it leaves me gobsmacked how this can even be legal, especially given the reason as stated by one of the outgoing reps - saying he was very scared about the changes the new guy would be making, some very 'lib'rul' changes

i mean, did this guy just not get the electoral boot and the one coming in got the majority of votes? politics is probably just as sleazy everywhere but at least it's not so blatant and in-your-face as this move is. shouldn't people should be up protesting very loudly over this?

 

[trysail]

Ñ'est-ce pas?



"...Maryland is considered to be one of the most gerrymandered states in the country..."

-Washington Post
​

America's Most Gerrymandered Congressional Districts



http://marylandreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/3rd-Congressional-district.jpg

http://marylandreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2nd-Congressional-District.jpg

http://marylandreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/6th-Congressional-District.jpg



​

 

[adrina]

There's a special level of dipshittery involved to bring up the evils of gerrymandering in a thread that has nothing to do with gerrymandering. Especially when republicans are ridiculously guilty of it to an extent that far outweighs a few districts in Maryland.

Idiocy.

it leaves me gobsmacked how this can even be legal, especially given the reason as stated by one of the outgoing reps - saying he was very scared about the changes the new guy would be making, some very 'lib'rul' changes

i mean, did this guy just not get the electoral boot and the one coming in got the majority of votes? politics is probably just as sleazy everywhere but at least it's not so blatant and in-your-face as this move is. shouldn't people should be up protesting very loudly over this?

Yes they should. And they should most definitely be paying attention.

 

[Aglaopheme]

People are protesting very loudly.

Live right now in Wisconsin they are trying to ram through all kinds of stuff and 80 some Walker appointees.

http://www.wiseye.org/Live

 

[trysail]

There's a special level of dipshittery involved to bring up the evils of gerrymandering in a thread that has nothing to do with gerrymandering. Especially when republicans are ridiculously guilty of it to an extent that far outweighs a few districts in Maryland.

Idiocy.

*laughs*


Surely you can't possibly be that naive.

They're politicians. Politicians lie, cheat and steal. It's what they do.

That's why anyone with sense is opposed to Big Government— the best government is the least possible government (which is exactly what the authors of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote it).

"...Open your eyes to the ways of the world, my son— the promises of kings have no value, they can claim expedience. If this Shah or the next, or even your great general has to choose between your life and something of more value to them, which would they choose? Put no trust in princes, politicians, or generals, they will sell you, your family, and your heritage for a pinch of salt to put on a plate of rice they won't' even bother to taste..."

-James Clavell
Whirlwind
​

​

​

"...There had been speculation for years about Johnson's relationship to that company [the "LBJ Company"]. Lady Bird had purchased one small radio station in 1943 for $17,500. Since then, thanks in part to a twenty-year-long string of strikingly favorable rulings by the Federal Communications Commission (which, among other aspects, had left Austin as one of the few metropolitan areas with only a single commercial television station), the company had burgeoned into a chain of immensely profitable radio and television stations the length of Texas, and by 1963 it owned as well 11,000 acres of ranchland and major shareholdings in nine Texas banks. Johnson had quieted the speculations by his unequivocal denials that there was any relationship. He had said, over and over, for twenty years, that the LBJ Company was entirely his wife's business and he had nothing to do with it; that, as he claimed in one of his many statements, "All that is owned by Mrs. Johnson....I don't have any interest in government-regulated industries and I never have had." But if Lyndon Johnson had no interest in the LBJ Company, why was it taking out insurance on his life? And, of course, his denials had omitted the salient fact. Texas was a community property state, and therefore since Lyndon Johnson had an interest— a half interest— in all the company's income, he had become rich. If Reynolds' statements became public, it would cast doubt on Johnson's claim that there was no connection between LBJ and the LBJ Company— and once that connection was established, the company's financial dealings would become a subject of journalistic inquiry. Johnson had arrived in Congress poor, and during his career had ostensibly had no source of income other than his government salary. He had been boasting to friends for years that he was a millionaire. By 1963, he, a man who had never held any job but his government positions— whose salary had never been more than $35,000 per year— was not merely a millionaire but a millionaire many times over..."

..." 'Millionaire'— this was perhaps the first time that Johnson had ever been identified as such in print, at least in a national publication; he had perhaps never been identified in a national publication as a wealthy man, let alone a very wealthy man; for Life to do so, it must know something about his personal fortune that he had previously been able to keep hidden.

And, in fact, it did.

The magazine's investigative team had been working since the end of October [1963], and, during that time, say its leader, Associate Editor William Lambert, 'I began to pick up all these hints' about Lyndon Johnson, not merely about Johnson and his relationship with the newly rich Bobby Baker, but about Lyndon Johnson 'and the acquisition of his fortune.' Following up on hints, the team had found, in the words of Russell Sackett, one of its members and also an associate editor, that 'The deeper you got, the more serious they were; he was far richer than anyone had expected,' that he was, in fact, very rich indeed.

'I was very indignant,' Lambert said, and during the week of November 11 [1963], he had gone to the office of George P. Hunt, Life's managing editor, and said of Lyndon Johnson, 'This guy looks like a bandit to me.' Although 'bandit' is, of course, a synonym for 'robber' or 'thief,' Lambert didn't feel he was misusing the word. 'I felt that he had used public office to enhance his private wealth.' 'We're going to have to spend some money [to investigate]. I need some people, and a lot of time.' Johnson's entire financial picture should be looked into, he said. 'It was almost a net worth job, and you know that takes an enormous amount of time. I told Hunt, 'He's got a fortune, and he's been on the [public] payroll ever since he got out of college. And I don't know how he got it, but it's there.' By the time he went to see Hunt, Lambert was to recall, 'We knew he was a millionaire many times over."...​

-Robert A. Caro
The Years of Lyndon Johnson: The Passage of Power
New York, N.Y. 2012.​

​

Lyndon Baines Johnson was a crook, a liar, a cheat, a thief and a blackmailer.

He cheated in every single election he ever entered— beginning as a student at obscure Southwest Texas State Teachers College— and he never stopped.




​

​

 

[adrina]

Apparently you are that much of a charlatan to have your reaction be "whatabout...?"

Especially when the group you are trying to vindicate is insanely guilty of what you're whatabouting.

Takes a special kind of moron for that. In any font.

 

[trysail]

Apparently you are that much of a charlatan to have your reaction be "whatabout...?"

Especially when the group you are trying to vindicate is insanely guilty of what you're whatabouting.

Takes a special kind of moron for that. In any font.

Read, learn and grow, grasshopper.


​

 

[Carnal_Flower]

It is infuriating. Rs are out in the open tearing down democracy.

 

[zipman]

It is infuriating. Rs are out in the open tearing down democracy.

They have no shame. This is a huge disgrace and I think it will backfire on them in a big way.

 

[adrina]

Read, learn and grow, grasshopper.


​

Yeah, uh not from you. A pompous condescending sell out with delusions of grandeur can teach me all sorts of things - like how not to be. ie morally bankrupt.

But hey, party over country right.

 

[trysail]

Can't get your way?

Just pack the Supreme Court. That's what Roosevelt II attempted.

​

 

[trysail]

“Earl likes to cut them down to size before they get too big and fresh,” Tom Sancton said. “You heard what he did to the fellow from Alexandria who got a big retainer from the theatre owners to try to remove a two-per-cent tax on movie admissions? The fellow went to see Earl before the last campaign and came back and told his clients that it was in the bag. Then he went out and worked like a dog for Earl—speaking on television and radio, and stumping and conspiring and kissing babies and hustling votes—until Earl was elected Governor. One of the first things Earl did in the new legislature was to oppose removal of the tax. The fellow from Alexandria went to see him—he was afraid he would have to refund his fee, or the theatre owners would shoot him—and he said, ‘I told my clients that you said you wanted their support and that you wouldn’t block removal of the tax. What do I tell them now? ’ You know what old Earl said? He said, ‘I’ll tell you what to tell them. Tell them I lied.’ ”

“Why did he do that?” I asked. “Did somebody induce him to keep the tax on the movies?”

“Hell, no,” said Tom. “He just didn’t want the other fellow’s clients to think the other fellow was that strong. He likes them to come straight to Uncle Earl.”

-A. J. Liebling
The Earl of Louisiana
New York, NY 1961
​

​

 

[adrina]

Case in point.

Christ you're thick.

So you want to dig almost 80 years into the past when we have the Garland situation from a few years ago.

Keep digging. Would you like your shovel in a special colorized font? I think that would give your rank hypocrisy a little more style and flair.

 

[Sweet_Cupcake]

I wish more people would pay attention to this kind of cheating, voter suppression, court-packing, gerrymandering, etc. Have been reading particularly about Michigan where lame duck legislature is gutting ballot proposals (anti-gerrymandering, voting rights, marijuana) that were just passed with an excess of 60% majorities.

I cannot even understand how that is constitutional to violate the will of the people so cravenly.

I fear people are "too busy" to pay attention and will wake up when it is too late.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Rather than curtailing the powers of the newly elected efforts should be directed at curtailing the powers of the lame ducks.

 

[Sweet_Cupcake]

Rather than curtailing the powers of the newly elected efforts should be directed at curtailing the powers of the lame ducks.

Exactly.

 

[Liar]

Ñ'est-ce pas?



"...Maryland is considered to be one of the most gerrymandered states in the country..."

-Washington Post
​

America's Most Gerrymandered Congressional Districts

​

On House disctrict level it's generally considered that North Carolina, Ohio, Maryland, West Virginia and until recently Pennsylvania are among the most gerrymandered. I think PA got redrawn on court order for this midterm. Which is why we saw so many R to D flips there, and also one D to R flip.

(Not sure what happened in Minnesota, which had seats flipped in all sorts of ways. Might be the the result of redrawing there too, but I haven't hearsd anything about it.)

Gerrymandering works so that you box in the opponent's voters in as few districts as possible and spread out your own in many. The opponent will win their districts with big margin and you win yours with small margin. But you win more seats. I mean, you know this, right?

Ohio and NC have typical gerrymandered outcomes. Wider average win margins for Democratsm but in fewer seats. Narrower average win margins for Republicans, but in more seats.

However, Maryland is a bit weird.

Look at the 2018 results, and you'll see that all D seats were won with bigger margins than the one R seat. So it's not at all clear that redrawing the state would be a disadvantage to Democrats.

Same thing can be said for West Virginia. It is technically gerrymandered, but it's hard to see how redrawing the districts would lead to much different outcome.

 

[butters]

the repubs must see the advantages or they'd not consider it. from what i understand, though, this is mostly about curbing decisions the dems will be able to make that the former repubs in charge had no issue about making themselves purely to restrict any "liberal" changes the dems may wish to make. that is, quite simply, undemocratic. people voted in the majority for dems in these areas and - thusly - were voting for a more democratic slant to how things worked there.

 

[pointless]

yeah, republicans are scum bags especially the ones we have here in michigan. i've known that for quite awhile. hell, just ask flint.

 

[trysail]

On House disctrict level it's generally considered that North Carolina, Ohio, Maryland, West Virginia and until recently Pennsylvania are among the most gerrymandered. I think PA got redrawn on court order for this midterm. Which is why we saw so many R to D flips there, and also one D to R flip.

(Not sure what happened in Minnesota, which had seats flipped in all sorts of ways. Might be the the result of redrawing there too, but I haven't hearsd anything about it.)

Gerrymandering works so that you box in the opponent's voters in as few districts as possible and spread out your own in many. The opponent will win their districts with big margin and you win yours with small margin. But you win more seats. I mean, you know this, right?

Ohio and NC have typical gerrymandered outcomes. Wider average win margins for Democratsm but in fewer seats. Narrower average win margins for Republicans, but in more seats.

However, Maryland is a bit weird.

Look at the 2018 results, and you'll see that all D seats were won with bigger margins than the one R seat. So it's not at all clear that redrawing the state would be a disadvantage to Democrats.

Same thing can be said for West Virginia. It is technically gerrymandered, but it's hard to see how redrawing the districts would lead to much different outcome.

Ask the people of Maryland's 6th Congressional District who voted for Roscoe Bartlett what they think about it.

From wikipedia:

...Bartlett's district was significantly altered in redistricting plans released in October 2011, which was described as gerrymandering. The Washington Post reported that the new district lines shifted the district slightly to the south, adding some heavily Democratic territory closer to Washington DC.

Specifically, the redistricting plan shifted all of heavily Republican Carroll County and a mostly Republican section of Frederick County to the heavily Democratic 8th district. It also lost heavily Republican sections of Harford and Baltimore counties to the already heavily Republican 1st district. In their place, the legislature added a heavily Democratic section of Montgomery County. While John McCain carried the old 6th with 57 percent of the vote, Barack Obama would have carried the reconfigured 6th with 56 percent of the vote... ​

​

 

[Liar]

Ask the people of Maryland's 6th Congressional District who voted for Roscoe Bartlett what they think about it.

From wikipedia:

...Bartlett's district was significantly altered in redistricting plans released in October 2011, which was described as gerrymandering. The Washington Post reported that the new district lines shifted the district slightly to the south, adding some heavily Democratic territory closer to Washington DC.

Specifically, the redistricting plan shifted all of heavily Republican Carroll County and a mostly Republican section of Frederick County to the heavily Democratic 8th district. It also lost heavily Republican sections of Harford and Baltimore counties to the already heavily Republican 1st district. In their place, the legislature added a heavily Democratic section of Montgomery County. While John McCain carried the old 6th with 57 percent of the vote, Barack Obama would have carried the reconfigured 6th with 56 percent of the vote... ​

​

I dunno. I tend to prefer math. Math is not anecdotal.

I'm sure you could craft two even more diluted R-leaning districs with re-drawn lines. Which would make the remaining D-leaning districts egen more strongly D. Which would, in essence, box in Maryland Democrats, gerrymandering in favor of R.

Now, I think "first past the post"-systems are terrible in general, that y'all should scrap House districts alltogether and send a popular vote proportional delegation from each state instead. Would be great for R in Maryland.

What it would do for R nation wide is another story...

 

[Aglaopheme]

What were we talking about? Oh yeah.

http://www.joshklemons.com/uploads/8/9/2/1/8921451/2018-gerrymandered-map_orig.jpg

 

[adrina]

What were we talking about? Oh yeah.

http://www.joshklemons.com/uploads/8/9/2/1/8921451/2018-gerrymandered-map_orig.jpg

Exactly. And the republican cheaters have pushed it through and most likely, that spineless sweater vest will sign it.

At some point, you'd think they would develop a sense of shame. But nope. Party over country. Every time.