Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 12, 2019, 03:36:11 am
News: 2020 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, Gass3268, Virginia)
  North Carolina GOP (The Gift That Keeps On Giving): NCGOP Chair Indicted (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: North Carolina GOP (The Gift That Keeps On Giving): NCGOP Chair Indicted  (Read 20541 times)
Badger
badger
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,364
United States


« on: December 22, 2018, 09:24:38 pm »

I like how every commenter after my post glazes over the fact I posted that North Carolina and other southern states are required by the federal government to create supermajority Democrat districts specifically to elect African-American candidates to Congress, and this in turn makes other districts that surround these districts more Republican. If you do not remove that requirement, that means Democrats in the rest of the state's districts would always be fighting uphill.

it has never been required for a super majority district anyway. I think by now outside the deep south a 45% AA district is enough according to some court rulings. In a place like NC a 40% AA district would reliably elect african americans as they would form like 4/5 the primary vote for D's and then the few liberal whites which is greater than Ms liberal whites would elect a black D.

Anyway Im no fan of the VRA required districts and they clearly aren't required anymore outside a few deep south states(see MS LA AL) as we saw people like Lauren underwood and Joe Nuguese get elected in like Purple heart% black districts.

That makes them supermajority Democrat districts, which mean every district that surrounds it is more likely to elect a Republican. What's a gerrymander again?

Drawing districts specifically to elect African-Americans to Congress are by fact gerrymanders because you're taking all the Democrats and putting them in one area. In addition to being disgustingly segregationist, the Voting Rights Act requires them otherwise all the districts get thrown out, and yet some commentators are talking about gerrymandering as the reason Democrats lose while defending the existence of these districts. It's the height of bullsh**t.

I will not take any anti-gerrymandering post or comment by anyone seriously until they say they are for stopping this requirement on drawing districts, period, otherwise you're a walking contradiction. If that requirement was removed, this would IMPROVE Democrats' chances on getting more seats, so you cannot accuse me of supporting this for partisan reasons. So why don't Democrats support this other than they don't have the balls to stand up to the Black Caucus?

VRA is essentially to proper representation of minority populations, especially in the Deep South. Saying otherwise is ignorant.

Agreed. Posting garbage like this while North Carolina Republicans literally do everything and anything humanly possible, legal or otherwise, to retain power animator demonstrating exactly play the VRA is necessary as we speak, is the height of make combined Pinnacle of stupidity and arrogance.
Logged
Badger
badger
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,364
United States


« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2019, 11:58:09 pm »

This should be where we stand going into 2021 redistricting, assuming this decision also gets applied to the NC congressional districts.  Green = significant restrictions on legislature, Yellow = completely independent process



Notes:

CT+ME: 2/3rds of legislature needed to pass a map
OH: partisan maps expire after 4 years instead of 10
KY: state constitution prohibits splitting counties unnecessarily (so cannot gerrymander KY-03)
NY+UT: commission proposes map that legislature can amend within certain limits




You've correctly noted the restrictions in Ohio, but I would not deem them significant.
Logged
Badger
badger
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,364
United States


« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2019, 12:26:44 pm »

This should be where we stand going into 2021 redistricting, assuming this decision also gets applied to the NC congressional districts.  Green = significant restrictions on legislature, Yellow = completely independent process



Notes:

CT+ME: 2/3rds of legislature needed to pass a map
OH: partisan maps expire after 4 years instead of 10
KY: state constitution prohibits splitting counties unnecessarily (so cannot gerrymander KY-03)
NY+UT: commission proposes map that legislature can amend within certain limits




You've correctly noted the restrictions in Ohio, but I would not deem them significant.

Are they really not? I thought the restrictions on city/county splits was a rather significant one. In other words, for example, there should have to be a district entirely within Hamilton County that contains all of Cincinnati.


( last comment on this to avoid derailing)

Sorry, I thought you meant only the requirement to remap after 4 years if the parties can't agree rather than waiting a full 10. That's pretty much a paper tiger in my book, though the restrictions on city and county splits is noteworthy I agree.
Logged
Badger
badger
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24,364
United States


« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2019, 10:30:39 pm »

It appears that the Court has accepted the remedial map for state legislative districts drawn by the NC General Assembly, instead of opting to re-do it themselves:



The maps are only slightly less gerrymandered, and the Republicans would still likely maintain control of both chambers after the 2020 election.

The maps drawn last month more or less locked in the 2018 result - slim R majority but no chance at supermajority, even with the few dem gains guaranteed by the new lines. Slim chance of state senate flipping but don't bet on it. Doesn't really matter long term since Cooper looks the  be remaining at the helm right now, the lines are only for 2020, and the court has been moving to take de facto redistricting powers from the de jure legislature.

And damn the utterly coward Democratic legislators who accepted this Republican gerrymander Lite merely because it was also drawn to offer them incumbent protection
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC