Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Pittsburgh Footy]

It can be.

Colorado just voted to remove it's redistricting process from the legislature to a (hopefully) more independent commission system.

This just happened in Pennsylvania. We had crazy gerrymandered districts that our state supreme court threw out, and the 2018 election was based on a new map. This needs to happen everywhere.

 

[BirkenheadBlue]

If you look only at the Senate, yes. But California has 53 seats in the House of Representatives, while Wyoming has 1.

Should larger states ever unite on an issue, it would only take the votes of 9 states in the House to override the wishes of the other 41.

So in theory, we have a system that should work to balance the wishes of the majority against the rights of the minority.

In theory.

Which is still uneven, since California has ~ 70x the population of Wyoming.

The argument is always "protecting the interests of the minority" - and usually comes from those who have very little interest in protecting the rights of minorities. (Not throwing you in that basket btw).

You never hear anyone concerned about protecting the rights of Californians or New Yorkers, both of whom are effectively subject to the "three fifths compromise" when compared to Wyoming

 

[mezzrow]

well kumbaya!

good night for you then...

tough break about Scott "Integrity" Walker, but he'd had a good innings, and the damage has been done

hope you enjoy the red tide you voted for ; ) ; )

Hard to get a third bite of the apple. They got tired of PB and J. It'll look good again soon enough.

Sets my mind to tales of former legislative caucuses at the Tilted Kilt in an adjacent state. Teacher's Union badly hung over this morning in Dairyland. I bet they threw a corker.

 

[abelard]

This just happened in Pennsylvania. We had crazy gerrymandered districts that our state supreme court threw out, and the 2018 election was based on a new map. This needs to happen everywhere.

It is one of the few issues that has overwhelming bipartisan support.

If the Democrats were a competent organisation, their slogan in 2020 will be (or should have been, in 2018) Medicare For All and Fair Elections

But it has literally not occured to the leadership to campaign on policy, so they'll instead have spent millions of dollars paying some K Street PR firm to spew out abstract nonsense like "Leading Toward a Better Future For Tomorrow, Today" or some other nonsense

 

[TheBigIguana]

Still don't get this.

Really doesn't make sense.

The Senate has never been about population. It made sense and would still make sense if the original point of having all states given an equal seat at the table in half of the legislature so they could have their interests represented. The problem is senators don't really do that anymore so instead you get more than half the senate elected by way less than 50% of the population and a party in control with less than a majority support.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Pretty good results for R's and Trump especially. D's might have had their blue wave without insane Kavanaugh campaign.

 

[abelard]

Hard to get a third bite of the apple. They got tired of PB and J. It'll look good again soon enough.

Sets my mind to tales of former legislative caucuses at the Tilted Kilt in an adjacent state. Teacher's Union badly hung over this morning in Dairyland. I bet they threw a corker.

Did Gillum have you worried there, even for a moment?

 

[abelard]

D's might have had their blue wave without insane Kavanaugh campaign.

their base would have abandoned them, had they not been seen to have made an effort

 

[TheBigIguana]

Midterm Election, Most House Seats Lost by President's Party in Power 2010 Obama: -63 1994 Clinton: -52 1958: Eisenhower: -48 1974 Ford (Nixon): -48 1966 Johnson: -47 1946 Truman: -45 2006 Bush: -30 1950 Truman: -29 1982 Reagan: -26 2018 Trump: -26 *NY Times data since 1946

Pretty sure Trump will end up in the 30s but I'm guessing the point you're making would still stand.

Honestly it's hard to say either side really won or lost. Both had things go their way that they'll point to as victories but there are huge losses on both sides as well. The Dems need to go at Trump with some kind of plan in the House so it doesn't look like they've gone crazy trying to catch him.

 

[verreauxi]

What does the democratic party stand for

Not those things. See here.

 

[BirkenheadBlue]

Midterm Election, Most House Seats Lost by President's Party in Power 2010 Obama: -63 1994 Clinton: -52 1958: Eisenhower: -48 1974 Ford (Nixon): -48 1966 Johnson: -47 1946 Truman: -45 2006 Bush: -30 1950 Truman: -29 1982 Reagan: -26 2018 Trump: -26 *NY Times data since 1946

Trump will end up in the 30's

But it's worth mentioning that 2010 came on the back of a double blue wave (06, 08), with a lot of Dems losing seats that (by demographics) they really had no business holding in the first place.

Also that the Dems' gains last night came in the face of the most heavily gerrymandered electoral map there's been in recent memory.

 

[TheBigIguana]

Pretty good results for R's and Trump especially. D's might have had their blue wave without insane Kavanaugh campaign.

They miscalculated whether Americans were ready to respect women. It was unfortunate but I don't know that I'd call it insane.

 

[BirkenheadBlue]

Pretty good results for R's and Trump especially. D's might have had their blue wave without insane Kavanaugh campaign.

lol

 

[mezzrow]

Did Gillum have you worried there, even for a moment?

It has been a long time since Democrats have been in charge of Florida, and I thought a dose of it would be a bracing reminder for Floridians. I didn't vote for him, but I was much more focused on the Senate race. Both were a very close run thing, and recounts or the request for same are to be expected. It's not really over yet.

There is a deep well of cynical GOP humor about car trunks and Democrat recounts. (see: Al Franken)