Are the VRA districts the modern version of "seperate but equal"? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 08:52:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Are the VRA districts the modern version of "seperate but equal"? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Are the VRA districts the modern version of "seperate but equal"?  (Read 2154 times)
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,381
Russian Federation


« on: August 04, 2012, 12:55:35 AM »

Lol - YES!!!!!! That's why with my generally left-of-center views i am virulently anti-VRA)))
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,381
Russian Federation


« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2012, 02:13:00 AM »

Some form of proportional representation would obviously be preferable.
You could never get it perfectly proportional short designating by that group A gets X amount of seats set garunteed, group B gets.. etc. But I would prefer moving closer to a world where race doesn't matter one way or another. And of course that world could never exist with VRA districts, regardless of if they're heart is in the right place.

Again - agree 101%))
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,381
Russian Federation


« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2012, 02:54:37 AM »

Some form of proportional representation would obviously be preferable.
You could never get it perfectly proportional short designating by that group A gets X amount of seats set garunteed, group B gets.. etc. But I would prefer moving closer to a world where race doesn't matter one way or another. And of course that world could never exist with VRA districts, regardless of if they're heart is in the right place.

Well, Louisiana is 32% Black; 2 VRA seats could be drawn giving Blacks 33% of the delegation. Pretty ideal as far as proportionality goes.

Only - in especially ugly form, as it was for some time in 90th - infamous "Z-shaped" district. Otherwise - unlikely: except for some very suburban white areas blacks are relatively uniformly distributed in state (of course there are some areas of concentration, but not THAT big, especially - after Katrina). And given almost complete refusal of Louisina's whites to support black candidates (what Obama got among them - 14% in 2008? In 2012 he, probably, will get less) - that becomes REALLY difficult
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,381
Russian Federation


« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2012, 10:51:56 PM »

Some form of proportional representation would obviously be preferable.
You could never get it perfectly proportional short designating by that group A gets X amount of seats set garunteed, group B gets.. etc. But I would prefer moving closer to a world where race doesn't matter one way or another. And of course that world could never exist with VRA districts, regardless of if they're heart is in the right place.

Well, Louisiana is 32% Black; 2 VRA seats could be drawn giving Blacks 33% of the delegation. Pretty ideal as far as proportionality goes.

Only - in especially ugly form, as it was for some time in 90th - infamous "Z-shaped" district. Otherwise - unlikely: except for some very suburban white areas blacks are relatively uniformly distributed in state (of course there are some areas of concentration, but not THAT big, especially - after Katrina). And given almost complete refusal of Louisina's whites to support black candidates (what Obama got among them - 14% in 2008? In 2012 he, probably, will get less) - that becomes REALLY difficult

This is map with 2 VRA seats.

Purple- 52.9% Black VAP
Green- 50.4% Black VAP

The purple district splits a lot of parishes, but is much cleaner than the one of the 1990s.

But you kinda do have a point. While the green one is very Democratic (65% Obama), the purple one is only 56% Obama, meaning that only about 13% of whites voted for Obama. Maybe I should extended the top of the purple district further along the AR border so that it picks up more blacks from Shreveport. 

Still, there were a few competitive races in 2008 where the D's did well. In CD 4, John Flemming won the open seat by less than .5% in a 59% McCain seat. Also, Bill Cassidy won with only 48%...Don Cazayoux got 40% while some f cker named Michael Jackson got 8%, mostly black votes, causing Cazayoux to lose.

MUCH better then it was then. But not sure that 50.4%  (or even 52.9%) black district will surely elect  black. I remember about 2/3 black district in Louisiana's state Senate electing white (and relatively conservative) Democrat. It could even elect a Republican in bad year with low black turnout
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,381
Russian Federation


« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2012, 01:10:14 AM »

Thanks! You convinced me - it's possible. But i don't think it will happen in the near future with Republican majority in state legislature and not a single Republican black state legislator.. The old "conflict" between blacks and whites in Deep South states simply recreated itself (of course - in much more civilized form, but still...) now as a partisan conflict - with 95-99% blacks voting Democratic and 85-90% whites - Republican. In election after election we see less white Democrats elected in Deep South, and soon they will be a rarity like moderate-liberal republicans from, say, New England. So the politica will be reduced to simple GOTV efforts: "i will outvote you here and don't want to listen to your arguments at all", while "you outvote me there.....". As old russian saying goes: "i am a boss - you are a fool, you are a boss - i am a fool..."
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.