California

And of course at the same time that Arnold was trying to take the power of redistricting away from the Democratic controlled California legislature, Tom Delay was rolling in Republican legislature shit in Texas, giving us 12 new Texas Republican seats, ensuring Repuke control of the House, which affects everyone in this country, but that was Ok with you. Let’s make it a bigger margin, by getting repuke governers to take the power to redistrict away from democratic legislatures in democratic states, and laugh our fucking repuke asses off about what is going on in Texas all the while making sure we post “well I don’t agree with what Delay is doing”.

Why don’t you phonies come out of the closet? The California voters saw through your crock of shit dressed up as “this is much fairer, we should take politics out of redistricting! You know, in blue states we should” and you didn’t like it. Too bad!
 
Darla said:
Right, you’re missing it Cawacko. Because it was just a coincidence that the legislature was controlled by democrats when Arnold tried to put through that change. If Republicans had controlled it, he would have made the proposal anyway. Right Cawacko.
Click to expand...

Party over country (or state in this case) if I may borrow a ubiquitous line. As I already stated the way the state lays out like minded political people already locate close to each other so it would not make much a difference.

As I said people in the state complain that the legislature is too partisan and have approval ratings in the teens and twenty's. While this was not necessarily going to change the number of Democrats and Republicans in the state legislature (so no worry there you partisan hacks) the hope was at least more competitive districts might keep out the extreme partisans on the left and right.
 
Darla said:
And of course at the same time that Arnold was trying to take the power of redistricting away from the Democratic controlled California legislature, Tom Delay was rolling in Republican legislature shit in Texas, giving us 12 new Texas Republican seats, ensuring Repuke control of the House, which affects everyone in this country, but that was Ok with you. Let’s make it a bigger margin, by getting repuke governers to take the power to redistrict away from democratic legislatures in democratic states, and laugh our fucking repuke asses off about what is going on in Texas all the while making sure we post “well I don’t agree with what Delay is doing”.

Why don’t you phonies come out of the closet? The California voters saw through your crock of shit dressed up as “this is much fairer, we should take politics out of redistricting! You know, in blue states we should” and you didn’t like it. Too bad!
Click to expand...


I'm talking about the state legislature. You are talking about the federal government.
 
And so it's wrong to bring the redistricting process from the hand of the Democrats to the hands of people who are fair?

You Democrats are going to regret this decision one day, whenever you need fair redistricting. But bias it up all you want now.
 
cawacko said:
Party over country (or state in this case) if I may borrow a ubiquitous line. As I already stated the way the state lays out like minded political people already locate close to each other so it would not make much a difference.

As I said people in the state complain that the legislature is too partisan and have approval ratings in the teens and twenty's. While this was not necessarily going to change the number of Democrats and Republicans in the state legislature (so no worry there you partisan hacks) the hope was at least more competitive districts might keep out the extreme partisans on the left and right.
Click to expand...

Listen, you better get straight who you are talking to. I know what the agenda is, and it’s not “fairness”. No doubt the Repuke financed attempt to split California’s electoral votes, but not Repuke states like Texass, is in the interest of “fairness”, if I listen to you or beefy or the California repukes.

But I know it’s about not allowing another Democrat to take the white house ever again. I know it’s about the repuke permanent majority. And if not wanting a repuke permanent majority makes me a party hack, then I’ll wear it with pride. Wanting one party government makes you anti-democratic no matter wtf you choose to call it. Now, you can sell your fairness bs story to a lot of people, especially third party people, like RS and Beefy and Young Libertarian.

But you better know that I understand what is at stake here. For my country, for the rest of my life. So you save your sales job for them. I ain’t buying. Thankfully, neither were a majority of California voters.
 
Darla said:
Listen, you better get straight who you are talking to. I know what the agenda is, and it’s not “fairness”. No doubt the Repuke financed attempt to split California’s electoral votes, but not Repuke states like Texass, is in the interest of “fairness”, if I listen to you or beefy or the California repukes.

But I know it’s about not allowing another Democrat to take the white house ever again. I know it’s about the repuke permanent majority. And if not wanting a repuke permanent majority makes me a party hack, then I’ll wear it with pride. Wanting one party government makes you anti-democratic no matter wtf you choose to call it. Now, you can sell your fairness bs story to a lot of people, especially third party people, like RS and Beefy and Young Libertarian.

But you better know that I understand what is at stake here. For my country, for the rest of my life. So you save your sales job for them. I ain’t buying. Thankfully, neither were a majority of California voters.
Click to expand...

Non-partisan redistricting probably wouldn't get the Republicans much, it would just mean that odd districts wouldn't be drawn for sole partisan purpose.

It's not like this is even a question of GIVING the Republicans something, it's a question of fairness, and it doesn't have federal consequences.
 
So, you want a Democratic dictatorship? You aren't interested in, you know, if Republcians win the majority of the votes, they get a majority of seats, or they at least get their voice heard?

Why don't you guys just tell that to the people and get rebuked for the vile creatures you are?
 
Watermark said:
Non-partisan redistricting is great. It's done by every major world nation except for the US. I think it should be a federal mandate.
Click to expand...

I agree with that. Politicians should not be allowed to re-district. Iowa has a panel of judges that do it and they have competitive races each year.
 
Watermark said:
So, you want a Democratic dictatorship? You aren't interested in, you know, if Republcians win the majority of the votes, they get a majority of seats, or they at least get their voice heard?

Why don't you guys just tell that to the people and get rebuked for the vile creatures you are?
Click to expand...

Shut up water.
 
Darla said:
It it's done federally. And only if.
Click to expand...

I mean, of course FEDERAL redistricting should be done federally.

But I also think that state districting should be done in a non-partisan manner. It doesn't really matter if we move one-state at a time on that one, because it doesn't cripple one unfairly at the federal level. If the Democrats won they'll still win.

But it'd just be easier to pass it through on one simple motion through the feds.
 
Watermark said:
I mean, of course FEDERAL redistricting should be done federally.

But I also think that state districting should be done in a non-partisan manner. It doesn't really matter if we move one-state at a time on that one, because it doesn't cripple one unfairly at the federal level. If the Democrats won they'll still win.
Click to expand...

It is nice to know Darla cares so deeply about our California state legislature as it has a major effect on New York.
 
cawacko said:
It is nice to know Darla cares so deeply about our California state legislature as it has a major effect on New York.
Click to expand...

Yeah, guess what? When Tom Delay put his redistricting into effect in Texas, that ensurede the house for the repukes. Now, does that affect me in NY? Yeah, you bet. And it affects you in California, but then you liked it.

I hope you used Clairol last night, since you are playing the dumb blonde today?
 
Darla said:
Yeah, guess what? When Tom Delay put his redistricting into effect in Texas, that ensurede the house for the repukes. Now, does that affect me in NY? Yeah, you bet. And it affects you in California, but then you liked it.

I hope you used Clairol last night, since you are playing the dumb blonde today?
Click to expand...

Notice the Texas redistricting was done by a politician? The whole point of Califiornia's initiative was that a non-partisan panel of judges who decide so as to prevent the Tom Delay's of the world from doing what he did.
 
cawacko said:
Notice the Texas redistricting was done by a politician? The whole point of Califiornia's initiative was that a non-partisan panel of judges who decide so as to prevent the Tom Delay's of the world from doing what he did.
Click to expand...

LOL

Right. That was the whole point.
 
cawacko said:
Yes Darla. The point was a non-partisan group of judges would make redistricting choices not politicians. Who is the dumb blond?
Click to expand...

You are, if you believe that Arnold, who was an R servant before the voters kicked him in his ass, had making “the system faiiiiirr” as his intention here.
I don ‘t buy it, and like I said, a majority of California voters didn’t buy it either. Thankfully.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top