Because it got voted in (blame the TEA Party being duped by the GOP for this), but now the courts overturned it.
Also, according to Wikipedia WI does use the census data to draw the 99 state assembly districts.
3 Likes
You know, there won’t be a smooth transition either way, as the Trump Team is simply incapable of doing anything right. It’s been a clusterfuck from the beginning.
6 Likes
Obviously the remedy is to pack the Supreme Court with more conservative judges who…
…oh, you’re opposed to gerrymandering?
10 Likes
What I mean is that here in Germany (where gerrymandering is a smaller issue because of the mostly proportional system) the law demands that electoral districts follow ordinary political subdivisions as far as the numbers allow.
So for example you can’t simply cut a city in half and pad both halves with surrounding countryside if there is a solution that fits the whole city into one district. Of course finding the best partition can be complicated, but at least that provides a basis to challenge badly justified districts.
I wondered whether there are comparable rules in America.
1 Like
Compactness is not necessarily the best metric. Cities tend to break compactness
However, I think it would be useful if most people could look at a small scale map, and determine what district they belonged to.
The other, more complicated issue is vote efficiency.
1 Like
Trump did. Not sure how many people outside of his hard-core supporters actually believe it.
7 Likes
How to describe the German Bundestag election of parliamentarians in two words?
Fucking complicated.
There’s the party vote, where you vote for a list of candidates, and also a direct mandate to represent a district. Thanks to there being more party list candidates than there are district candidates, there are all sorts of fiddly rules to balance things out. And I don’t have the time or patience to go into it, except to say that the party vote makes gerrymandering the direct districts moot.
America’s Constitution does not mention political parties even once. The concept didn’t really exist, and it was the hopes of some of the Founding Fathers that individual conscience would be more important than any affiliation.
edited to add another paragraph
8 Likes
Hey, they are used to getting their way through bullying and whining, why stop now?
1 Like
And can be crushed by giant logs to the head!!
3 Likes
He sure as hell doesn’t represent me at all. I refuse to capitalize the word President while he is in office due to him not being qualified to even be the janitor at the White House.
3 Likes
Except for example if you have a party that can reasonably expect to win at least three districts outright while falling short of five percent of the popular vote nationwide, as it was an issue in Berlin in 2001.
1 Like
I subscribe to the school of constitutional interpretation which regards the founders as naive fools.
1 Like
The election “was not close”? As in Trump was not close to getting as many votes as Clinton?
ETA: Is “Man-date” how Trump refers to his visits with Putin?
14 Likes
I agree with Conway. The election was not close. Trump lost by getting on for 2 million votes.
16 Likes
I’m not a guy that is huge on data analysis, so I’m not advocating a particular type of grouping so much as an impartial method to create districts using computation of data.
I don’t know how to get around major cities with compactness, but it would work terrifically for 95% of the US’s landmass.
1 Like
If Hillary had said at the last debate, “Unlike my weasel wording opponent, I will accept the results of the election regardless of who wins”, it would have bearing on what happens now.
1 Like
Yeah, that bothers me too. The margin of Trump’s victory is a little irrelevant. Americans have put in place a Republican house and senate. We’ve given them the power to proceed as they wish for at least the next two years and probably much longer than that. Trump is really just the rubber stamp at the top of the pile.
But she did accept the results. She issued a concession speech. She is being asked to contest the election results by the computer security expert who stresses that these is a deadline and yet she does nothing.
So why should she have had to say something when her actions, or lack thereof, are much more telling.
9 Likes
Concession phone calls aren’t binding. Gore took his back when he asked for the Florida recount in 2000.
4 Likes
The White House has reportedly asked Clinton not to challenge the Wisconsin, Michigan or Pennsylvania counts, because doing so could threaten the much-vaunted “smooth transfer of power.”
Fuck you, Obama.
You know that if the shoe was on the other foot there’d be congressional inquiries, tweet storms, pundits losing it on air, and protests in the street. Why do the Dems have to play by the rules while the other side cheats and lies their asses off?
13 Likes
