Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I hope in the future, we will adopt better laws binding both sides. Political gerrymandering divides us into extremes and ensures a lot of voters—in many cases, such as Texas, a majority—disagree with their leaders without any means of effective redress. It's unhealthy for the nation long term.
But for the time being, you have to fight with the tools you have in order to give the future the chance to do the right thing.
Ending gerrymandering is as simple as doing the popular vote.
Popular vote doesn't work for the House, which is intended to be local representation. It can be fixed by setting the number of representatives based on a set number of people per representative instead of having a max size and having a neutral third party draw the districts.
The president should absolutely be elected by popular vote.
it actually could if you did it by party and they had a roster of who would be positioned up to winning the whole house. Its my understanding parliments work somewhat like this but I may not be understanding that correct.
Yes, if we had a completely different system it would be different.
Electoral lists are a feature of some parliamentary systems. They largely ensure that party apparatchiks can impose candidates on the voters by guaranteeing the lifers safe seats. That means you get to vote for a party but have no choice about the person.
I assumed the lists were done in the parlimentary equivalent of primaries.
t can be fixed by setting the number of representatives based on a set number of people per representative
That'll make zero difference.
and having a neutral third party draw the districts
Which then moves the problem to preventing subversion of the supposedly neutral third party. See also: every other appointed regulatory body.
But what if I'm an unpopular ghoul who wants to use an elevated platform to commit crimes?
Then you should be good to go.
Finally! I've been wondering when a white man, such as myself, was gonna catch a break!
Edit: oh god, this needs an /s, doesn't it? Fucking hell, why do shit-assess like this actually exist?
That's not really simple at all. Amending the constitution with both sides so divided is not just impossible, but likely to see Republicans gaining more ground than Democrats.
I agree. Im not much for the crowd that says dems should do things things like trump and maga do them but this is quite clearly self defense.
We won't. Both parties are fine with things as they are
We need new parties
The reality is the parties cannot be displaced or remade from the outside. They must be seized from within through primaries.
Yeah, how’s the Whig party doing?
It fell apart due to the internal pressure of trying to keep together pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions while barreling toward a civil war over that very issue. It was destroyed from the inside, which backs up my point.
Big difference between falling apart and having something new arise from the remains, compared to the same organization continuing with minor internal changes.
Unless you can force them to fall apart, the difference is somewhat academic.
I think I got side-tracked on the “inside” vs “outside”portion of your statement.
What I’m saying is that “primaries” are not the only tool, and perhaps not the most effective. Not that there’s a lot of precedent.
What I think would happen is the party becomes irrelevant to its constituents and just kind of falls into irrelevance or effectively ceases to exist.
That’s very different from “seizing from within through primaries”, which can effect change but probably not the level of change which is the goal here.
Republicans were already
Dems cannot be, I don't think
No, my grandfather’s Democratic Party instituted the New Deal. The Democratic Party that “just rolled over” was you just a few months ago.
Gerrymandering is utter bullshit. But in this case, I say all blue states should GM the FUCK out of their entire states. Fuck the GOP Nazi scum right outta their jobs.
Not that they've ever worked a day in their lives...
Haha, yes it is.
It's the same people still 😂
They pushed David Hogg out, and replaced him with a guy that'll be dead soon.
Now it's your dad's Democratic party that still rolls over, with very few exceptions.
Rolling over is rolling over. Which generation does it does not matter.
This redistricting nonsense is the most toxic development for democracy I’ve seen from the establishment ghouls in a very long time. Not good.
Why there isn’t a non-partisan committee that does this is a bit beyond me. Seems like a great job for AI tbh.
Bringing AI into redistricting would be a nightmare. AI is not objective, it’s trained on biased datasets and that bias is reinforced by the bias of whomever created it or wants to shape it to their will.
We already know how to do nonpartisan redistricting, and many states (including CA) already have a nonpartisan committee in charge of it. But since elections are managed by state and local governments, and explicitly not the federal government, it would take something like a constitutional amendment to make it required nationwide. That’s also why states like CA will temporarily use different maps this cycle (if all goes well tomorrow), because CA being fair and TX cheating doesn’t help the nation as a whole reflect its actual population. Might as well force the fairness by cheating like them. It’s a shitty stopgap, but they’ve left us no choice.
AI can't even transcribe text properly. Pls don't let it into government decision making. Just it being included in inputs is fucking us over.
AI is like a blender. If you put shit into the blender, that's what you'll get out.
Except unless you're gonna train your own models, you really can't avoid shit being put into it.
And as a personal rule, I generally avoid any blended cocktails with noticeable amounts of excrement in them.
You don't need AI. There are computer algorithms to do it perfectly
Redistricting committees just obfuscates the politicization. You'll have an "independent committee" full of Republicans, or the final vote for a redistricting map will be passed to the Supreme Court, encouraging the politicization of the judicial branch.
Just add ~5 at-large seats that are distributed to balance out to match the state-wide popular vote. That's what they do in Europe. Then you can gerrymander all you want, but you'll lose all the at-large seats if the local representatives don't match the state-wide popular vote.