Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Phil Perspective
9366 Followers
I am Anomaly
14740 Followers
Comgen & Dr. Socks' love child
12547 Followers
novenatorFeb 2, 2012
>The consequences of redistricting in North Carolina—one of the most important swing states in the country—could determine who controls Congress and the presidency in 2012. Democrats hold seven of the state’s thirteen Congressional seats, but after redistricting they could control only three
This type of power grab is contrary to the very essence of democracy, which is why it shouldn't surprise anyone that conservatives are pushing for it.
southsideirishFeb 3, 2012
You effing kidding me, right? So, it's OK for the Democrats to do it, but the Republican's can't?
This happens every ten years except in the People's Republic of Illinois except it is the Republican's losing the seats.
Whoever has the power will use it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
southsideirishFeb 3, 2012
Oh, and I forgot that are even Black Dems in Chicago that are complaining about being redistricted out of their seats in favor of hispanics. Those in power will use it to their benefit.
Even Ron Paul was redistricted out of his state, by his own party.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Ouzel7Feb 3, 2012
"This happens every ten years except in the People's Republic of Illinois except it is the Republican's losing the seats."
Truth!!!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
novenatorFeb 3, 2012
While there is some gerrymandering going on on both sides of the aisle, the conservatives take it to a whole new level, and it is wrong whoever does it.
That being said, most of the unnatural district splits that are done that Democrats are because of one very key bill: the Voting Rights Act that is meant to ensure minority representation is protected in Congress. Remember that conservatives denies minorities a chance to have any real representation in our national government for many decades due to how they divided up the districts.
PyriteGenieFeb 3, 2012
I particularly dislike the way the GOP has drawn up the districts around Chicago. Oh wait...
shivabeachFeb 5, 2012
His lordship Norquist has admitted they(the GOP) will win the house because of redistricting
jpurdyFeb 5, 2012
Does anyone remember any elections where Grover was nominated or elected to run our nation?
Never mind, he wouldn't run for office. He's being paid very well for what he's doing.
whiteravenFeb 3, 2012
I hope you take the time to qualify your statement quickly to acknowledge how often Democrats do exactly the same thing... surely you can't be this disingenuous.
At this point, gerrymandering is just how the game is played. You just look foolish attacking only one party over it. Hell, a certain amount of any gerrymandering any party does is in part just happening to reveres what the other guys did the last time around.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
"At this point, gerrymandering is just how the game is played."
"At this point, I, whiteraven, am completely ok with levels of corruption that the founders would deservedly shoot me in the face for, as long as that corruption favors the party I personally prefer."
FTFY
whiteravenFeb 4, 2012
Okay, you explain to me how to repair the damage without engaging in more gerrymandering. I don't think you understand that there is no fair and objective way to draw congressional districts. Literally, ALL possibilities are both subjective and favor one side over the other.
jefftsFeb 3, 2012
Oops...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/18/1056154/-Democratic-Gerrymander-of-Connecticut
http://www.news-record.com/blog/54431/entry/103257
http://redstatevirginia.com/2011/04/virginia-democrats-gerrymandering-plan/
http://thevoiceofliberty.us/index.php/colorado/legislature/482-more-democrat-gerrymandering
http://www.svherald.com/content/news/2011/12/19/239943
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/local/2011/10/examiner-local-editorial-marylands-gerrymandering-democrats-target-
I guess it works both ways. Sometimes reality is just a bitch, isn't it?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Now, we just need a link showing how both sides doing something makes it ok.
Got any?
jefftsFeb 3, 2012
Did I say it was OK? I don't believe I did. Show me where I said it was OK.
And while you are at it, why don't you show me why it is OK for Novenator to demonize the Right while letting the Left off the hook constantly and consistently when they do the same thing.
And, if it isn't too much trouble, how about you show me why it is OK to bury facts that prove both sides do the same thing that Novenator only ever accuses one side of doing.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with right or wrong. Maybe facts that make your team look just as bad as those you despise and hate need to be silenced and censored.
Thanks and have a nice day.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
"Did I say it was OK? I don't believe I did. Show me where I said it was OK. "
Ok. How about your comment? You know, the one where the only appropriate response is "No, the Republicans shouldn't be doing that" and your choice is to point out how the Dems do it. That's a tacit endorsement. Basic English and Psych.
"And, if it isn't too much trouble, how about you show me why it is OK to bury facts that prove both sides do the same thing that Novenator only ever accuses one side of doing. "
Well, I can't speak for everyone on digg. But I buried you for, yet again, endorsing something that is wrong just because the other side is doing it.
Which, for the record, is the same reason I buried Novenator. So that high horse you're on? f**k off. I will bury anyone I think is perpetuating the mistakes we keep making, like not calling out corruption where it lives, and I HAVE mentioned, several times in fact, when someone from "your team" (your words, not mine) has made a good point. I even digg trolls when they say something coherent and correct, which is ALSO in my comment history.
In the meantime, calling out others for being biased when your own comment history clearly shows that you think only "evil leftists" would ever disagree with you, means you are not qualified to talk s**t about anyone else's bias, and in fact calling out ANYONE for it makes you a hypocrite.
jefftsFeb 3, 2012
"In the meantime, calling out others for being biased when your own comment history clearly shows that you think only "evil leftists" would ever disagree with you, means you are not qualified to talk s**t about anyone else's bias, and in fact calling out ANYONE for it makes you a hypocrite."
Citation needed.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
@jeffts
"Well, look at that. I'm being buried for being against forced servitude. Nice to see where you Leftists stand on slavery. I'll be sure to make that my narrative going forward."
Citation provided. Someone disagreeing with you must be a leftist.
jefftsFeb 3, 2012
So, people on the Left who believe health care should be right, which in turn by its very nature would mean that doctors must provide care whether they are compensated or not, is not forced servitude? Was I not being buried for pointing that out and arguing my point by people on the Left for my comments against forced servitude?
Maybe if you dig back farther, you'd also see me going after neoconservatives, progressives, and any other ideologues who choose to bury me or attack me as opposed to debating me.
jefftsFeb 3, 2012
By the way, despite what you claim, I don't think you are an "evil leftist" even though you clearly disagree with me. I do, however, believe your entire attack on me is irrational and the only take-away I get from it is that you are upset that I showed Novenator that his side is equally guilty of the very thing he claims Conservatives are always doing. If you'll notice in another comment, he actually admits, finally, that the Left does the same thing but then turns it around by blaming Conservatives for it.
hibby76Feb 3, 2012
This is politics as usual......both parties do it on a regular basis........and it's despicable.
drich255Feb 3, 2012
Agreed. I wish there was just some sort of computer program that divided districts up into regular chunks. It would actually make it so that you represent a broader base of people and force more politicians to the middle instead of carving out extremes on the left and the right.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
I could definitely agree with this. Any ideas on implementation? I think it would still have to have a population measure of some sort, or you'd have guys representing "districts" with all of 100 people, while the Representative from, say, Denver would have a few million, making individuals harder to hear.
hibby76Feb 3, 2012
They should be given a certain number of "straight lines" that can be drawn on the map. You can draw it anyway you want as long as the districts have roughly even populations and you only use your 20 lines or whatever the number is.
jpurdyFeb 5, 2012
Excellent idea.
jpurdyFeb 5, 2012
The people who control the Republican party today have no honor, integrity or interest in fairness. They'll do anything to win. Charlie White in Indiana is an excellent example.
Anyone with any sense of honor has become independent. I don't care for some of NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg's views, but he had the integrity to leave the Republican party when he saw the idiocy of the social conservatives and tea party fanatics who are causing so much damage to our nation.
hibby76Feb 3, 2012
Hate to say it but this is politics as usual. It's despicable and both parties do it when they're in control of the process.
whiteravenFeb 3, 2012
Ecept the point is to undermine *democrat* voting power, it's not about race. It only looks that way because the DNC has such a large number of black voters indonctinated.
dauntless1Feb 3, 2012
Using anything but sheer competence to win a race, and idiots being ok with using corruption to win, is why you have the government you hate.
whiteravenFeb 4, 2012
It's rather hard to define corruption when the issue is subjective and has no objective "fair" answer. Congressional districts can only be arbitrary by their nature and one side or the other must end up with an advantage because balance is functionally impossible.
angrycat70Feb 3, 2012
BULLs**t.
Every time redistricting comes up, it goes in front of a federal judge to avoid this sort of grandstanding.
If anything, minority voting strength is enhanced by democratic gerrymandering.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
KapsiotFeb 3, 2012
Personally, I prefered a segregated south.
limitgovFeb 3, 2012
Most people tend to want to live next to similar people. This is human nature. Government can use force, however, to "fix" this.
Ouzel7Feb 3, 2012
BURIED because it's just bulls**t.
specimen7Feb 3, 2012
I love how the article implies that every white person born before 1964 is a racist. My parents were born before 1964 - f**k you.
icwydFeb 3, 2012
I don't know. We were all pretty racist back then. /s
davidnivenFeb 3, 2012
Buried as race-baiting leftist flame trash.
Here's a clue, baby. When the GOP is in power, they try to stay in power by redistricting everything so that Democrats get less votes. The Democrats do the same thing when they come to power.
Now, combine that with the fact that people with dark skin/African-Americans/blacks/whatever-term-makes-you-feel-good-as-you-classify-people-into-convenient-groups tend to vote Democrat...and voila.
It's not that the GOP is racist. It's that they are targeting segments of the voting population due to POLITICS, not RACISM.
When Democrats redistrict predominantly Cuban areas in South Florida for their benefit because those Cubans tend to vote GOP, I don't hear the babies at The Nation talk about desegregating.
Buried.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
alanocuFeb 3, 2012
If the Dims didn't have their sickening hatred to project onto others, they'd be left standing naked, with their ugly asses, and putrid stank.
Truly amazing how low they are willing to go.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
alanocuFeb 3, 2012
Seeing how it was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws; and it was the Democrats who started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks; and it was the Democrats who fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s, not only does this piece of garbage article fail, it projects your own Dim hatred onto others.
Try again.
Next.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
steve13665Feb 3, 2012
Yea, because the Democrats of today are the same as the Democrats of the past.
How about YOU try again, Alan.
davidnivenFeb 3, 2012
Yes. In almost every case, they are.
e46fanFeb 3, 2012
can you please provide some argument to show how democrats of today are in anyway similar to the dixiecrats of yesteryear?
davidnivenFeb 3, 2012
Sure. Here are the similarities:
1) Both like big government projects which used wealth redistribution.
2) Both said that minorities couldn't make it on their own.
3) Both like lots of taxes.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.