Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 01:17:38 PM
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)
  Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination"  (Read 4795 times)
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,173


« on: September 15, 2017, 05:45:22 AM »

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/8/16/1690288/-Court-strikes-down-Texas-GOP-s-congressional-gerrymander-but-Democratic-victory-is-limited

DKos estimates it'll be at most a net 1 for Democrats, but even that's no guaranteed. I really don't get why they emphasize that the new representative will most likely be Latino. No wonder the white working class hates the left: this is blatant identity politics.
Ah yes, the white working class hate that the minorities will have a chance to elect people of their own race.  Very progressive of them.

You don't need a majority minority district to elect a minority candidate. See SC-Sen, UT-4, TX-23 is 75% Hispanic and they have a black representative. People don't necessarily vote based on who looks like them. I mean for next year, I'm a Hispanic college student supporting a black candidate for NH-1

"increasing minority representation" means increasing minorities' ability to choose representatives, not increasing the number of minorities in Congress.
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 0.018 seconds with 12 queries.