|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:Wyoming is not an example of gerrymandering Isn’t it something like an State having outsized influence relative to its population? Montana being another one?
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 01:24 |
|
|
# ? May 14, 2024 14:14 |
|
Nystral posted:Isn’t it something like an State having outsized influence relative to its population? Montana being another one? That is most definitely not what Gerrymandering is.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 01:29 |
|
Flikken posted:That is most definitely not what Gerrymandering is. In fairness, the state boundaries were not designed with the goal of disenfranchising California in the senate but being tribalist mountain shithole tax receivers has ended with that effect, and there's no way they'll hold their own accountable, or vote for themselves to have less outsized power in government.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 01:31 |
|
Flikken posted:That is most definitely not what Gerrymandering is. I was referring to Wyoming as an example of an electoral college issue people feel is a failure, not Gerrymandering.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 01:33 |
|
Nystral posted:I was referring to Wyoming as an example of an electoral college issue people feel is a failure, not Gerrymandering. Yeah, but that's not what people were talking about.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 01:53 |
Nystral posted:Isn’t it something like an State having outsized influence relative to its population? Montana being another one? Gerrymandering is redrawing districts in a way that manipulate how your vote within the state counts. You can turn a majority into a minority and vice versa by drawing districts in such a way that each district has as many people as your party needs to win it. The GOP is especially notorious for this, to the point where several states (like South Carolina) would be far more left-wing if they weren't gerrymandered to hell. To give a real world example, this is what Republicans in Texas did: With Wyoming, the problem is that every state has to have a minimum of 2 senators to "ensure equality", because some states are so empty that they'd have fewer than 1 vote. But this results in rural areas having their votes counted disproportionately more, giving them far greater influence than they should have in the population. When you do the math, a Wyoming resident has their vote count 57 times more than a resident of California. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Oct 30, 2019 |
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 13:49 |
|
Wyoming disenfranchises California in the same way LA, SF, and SD disenfranchise the entire rest of the state, or Chicago disenfranchises everybody else in Illinois. Getting rid of the senate might solve some problems but the whole “only coastal cities matter” thing would rapidly eclipse that.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:07 |
|
That’s horseshit, land doesn’t vote the last time I looked; rural areas in states are getting representation proportional to their population. Both gerrymandering and the electoral college are examples of the MAUP.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:35 |
|
But u see, if we got rid of electoral college, politicians would only campaign in big cities and ignore all the smaller populations. And the implied message is that they won’t care about the little people or something? Which they totally do care about now Basically it seems like the people advocating for the electoral college to remain (who aren’t just bog-standard duplicitous scumbags) are people who think that presidential hopefuls visiting rural Iowa once during their campaign and then forgetting they exist is equivalent to actually giving half a poo poo about those people. It’s just falling for bad, low-effort political theater. Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Oct 30, 2019 |
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:38 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:Wyoming disenfranchises California in the same way LA, SF, and SD disenfranchise the entire rest of the state The rest of the state has lovely politics hth
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:43 |
|
I sort of think an interesting solution would be to give the largest cities (assuming you can find a way of fairly classing them as such, since city boundaries/population are arbitrary) Senate seats of their own. Whether or not that involves them becoming independent federal states or some sort of other arrangement who knows, although the tears from downstate Illinois would be ridiculous when they realize they’re basically rural Indiana without Chicago.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:46 |
|
dissolve the Senate
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:47 |
|
EBB posted:The rest of the state has lovely politics hth So do the cities though
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:50 |
Internet Wizard posted:Wyoming disenfranchises California in the same way LA, SF, and SD disenfranchise the entire rest of the state, or Chicago disenfranchises everybody else in Illinois. Coastal cities are where the people are. What you’re actually complaining about is the population disenfranchising dirt.
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:53 |
|
Remember when the filibuster was destroyed because it benefited the party in power, then the other party took over and it was bad for everything ever since? If you put all the legislative power in the House, how do you expect that to end differently?
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:55 |
|
Rural CA is blood red GOP territory. The cities, for whatever faults, don't want children in cages or elimination of a woman's right to choose. I would call that significantly better politics
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:55 |
|
maffew buildings posted:Rural CA is blood red GOP territory. The cities, for whatever faults, don't want children in cages or elimination of a woman's right to choose. I would call that significantly better politics No they just elect their fellow Bay area techbros and/or Nancy "compromise on just a few million more dollars for child cages" Pelosi chitoryu12 posted:Coastal cities are where the people are. What youre actually complaining about is the population disenfranchising dirt. The working class isn't dirt hth
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 14:59 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:The working class isn't dirt hth Very few people live on the mostly uninhabited land you are so ignorantly defending you dense motherfucker
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:02 |
|
hmm yes the Democrats have indeed elected some bad people and put forth some bad policies but in response we should try not kowtowing to people who think theyre going to be forced to have a gay marriage and are a-ok with extrajudicial murder
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:06 |
Internet Wizard posted:
yes because there aren't any poor, working class or blue collar people in cities and those that are there should have their votes count less hmmm your argument is both factually correct and totally logical and you in no way deliberately misinterpreted the point about population
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:09 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:Coastal cities are where the people are. What you’re actually complaining about is the population disenfranchising dirt. Can we stop with this tired narrative? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lakes_Megalopolis See also the urban parts of Texas, Atlanta, etc. Yeah, west of the Mississippi is like 95% desolate, but there’s a poo poo ton of people and cities that aren’t on the east/west coasts.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:11 |
|
UP THE BUM NO BABY posted:Very few people live on the mostly uninhabited land you are so ignorantly defending you dense motherfucker So are you intentionally playing along with the right-wing narrative that coastal democrats hate rural America or are you just that dumb. Is it really hard to understand why people might support a party that tells them comforting lies while screwing them over instead of supporting a party that openly insults and neglects them? Campaigning in Iowa is a pointless waste of time but like maybe actual tax reform and green initiatives and social welfare programs and public education reform would actually be a cool thing for the democrats to support rather than making noises about and just going along with furthering capitalist exploitation of our natural resources. Plus cities are a blight on the planet and responsible for an insane amount of the national carbon footprint but let’s keep acting like they’re the best ever
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:33 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:Wyoming disenfranchises California in the same way LA, SF, and SD disenfranchise the entire rest of the state, or Chicago disenfranchises everybody else in Illinois. A state with less people having more power than places with more people is exactly the same as regions with more people having more power than regions with less people. I am very smart.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:42 |
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:58 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:Wyoming disenfranchises California in the same way LA, SF, and SD disenfranchise the entire rest of the state, or Chicago disenfranchises everybody else in Illinois.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 16:21 |
|
Eliminate states. Bing bang boom problem solved.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 16:22 |
|
Flying_Crab posted:Can we stop with this tired narrative? Considering Toronto is the biggest city in the Megalopolis, it's not a good comparison.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 17:19 |
Internet Wizard posted:Plus cities are a blight on the planet and responsible for an insane amount of the national carbon footprint but let’s keep acting like they’re the best ever Cities are actually the lowest per capita environmental footprint of anything by a wide margin. Efficiency of scale. Turns out packing everything together makes things like heating, transportation, and food distribution markedly better
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:31 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:So are you intentionally playing along with the right-wing narrative that coastal democrats hate rural America or are you just that dumb. What? On a per capita basis cities (at least ones that aren’t Phoenix) have a far lower carbon footprint. You should be looking towards suburbia and sprawling exurbs for the problem there.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:37 |
|
beefnoodle posted:Considering Toronto is the biggest city in the Megalopolis, it's not a good comparison. You may have heard of this place called Chicago? Anyway, tally up the US only population and GDP, it’s unquestionably one of the most significant regions of the US.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:39 |
|
Flying_Crab posted:You may have heard of this place called Chicago? Anyway, tally up the US only population and GDP, it’s unquestionably one of the most significant regions of the US. I'm loving with you. Toronto proper is (surprisingly) bigger than Chicago proper, but the metropolises are of course what you'd expect.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:45 |
|
.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:49 |
|
Good point
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 19:39 |
|
Proud Christian Mom posted:dissolve the Senate in acid
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 20:17 |
Flying_Crab posted:Can we stop with this tired narrative? And every single one of those people are equal and should receive equal representation.
|
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 22:00 |
|
Internet Wizard posted:So are you intentionally playing along with the right-wing narrative that coastal democrats hate rural America or are you just that dumb. Yes make politics stupider.
|
# ? Oct 30, 2019 23:08 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:And every single one of those people are equal and should receive equal representation. They sort of do, in the house: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_congressional_districts
|
# ? Oct 31, 2019 00:10 |
The Senate was intended to keep powerful rural interests safe from the urban masses, which if you're building a republic by/of/for wealthy gentleman plantation owners is pretty reasonable, but in our day and age the ultrarural states are essentially rotten boroughs controlled by the same old Wall Street billionaire types.
|
|
# ? Oct 31, 2019 00:54 |
|
Nullify the Senate and increase the house. Bing bang boo. So simple.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2019 01:06 |
|
|
# ? May 14, 2024 14:14 |
|
Flying_Crab posted:They sort of do, in the house: Even there, a Rhode Islander is nearly 2 Montanans. The House would need to be way bigger (or start combining the low population states) for it to be proportional.
|
# ? Oct 31, 2019 01:10 |