So sayeth the guy who constantly links to 280 character statements and 30 second sound bytes (and yeah, Handy does too, and I don't like it anymore coming from him).
If you're using Handy's and my posts to make decisions, egad!!
So sayeth the guy who constantly links to 280 character statements and 30 second sound bytes (and yeah, Handy does too, and I don't like it anymore coming from him).
Independent nonpartison commission. Districts of approximately equal population size. Shapes must be reasonable. Only data they see is population data. No demographics. You get what you get.
For the electoral college, make it winner take all per congressional district. The two votes that "represent the senate" go to the top vote getter in the state, and split if the margin of victory is within 5 points (or any other agreed upon number).
Wouldn't that fail the Voting Rights Act?
No idea.
EDIT: Out of curiosity, what part would?
Joe thinks the Voting Rights Act requires discriminating based on race against White people.
Take a ex-lax.
Geometry is your overriding concern? Really?Why should that ever be the goal?
There should be one goal, and one goal alone. The districts should be created to create, as near as possible, identical population totals in each district, and to do so in the most geometrically normal way. Anything else should automatically be deemed unconstitutional. This idea that we need two "safe" minority districts because we have five "safe" white districts or some such thing is crazy.
Geometry is your overriding concern? Really?
I don't like "geometry"; I'd prefer "geography". Making a district with a river down the middle and only one bridge and one polling station (so somebody has to cross) seems wrong.
But yes, just raw numbers of voters please, no "who" or "demographics" thank you.
My overriding concern is "how many" are in the district. The minute anyone inquires "who" is in the district, then you are instantly making it about race, sex, national origin, party affiliation, etc..., and that is improper. At that point you forfeit all right to biatch about gerrymandering. If those are going to be the rules you want, don't whine when you are not in power and they work against you.
Divide them up mathematically in geometric sensible shapes. When you start departing from the geometric sensible shapes, then I know you are asking "who" is in the district.
So sayeth the guy who constantly links to 280 character statements and 30 second sound bytes (and yeah, Handy does too, and I don't like it anymore coming from him).
I don't like "geometry"; I'd prefer "geography". Making a district with a river down the middle and only one bridge and one polling station (so somebody has to cross) seems wrong.
But yes, just raw numbers of voters please, no "who" or "demographics" thank you.