What do you think of gerrymandering?

rturner76 said:

Is it legitimate to carve up a district into pieces making their votes ineffective in the new districts?

Click to expand...

No.

[/quote] It seems to me it can turn the tide of a state's election [/quote]
That's right.

Why or why not should this tactic be practiced and who benefits the most?

Click to expand...

Neither party should practice it but both have done so in the past. The courts have put something of a damper on gerrymandering by requiring districts to have similar populations, as compact shapes as possible, and etc., but it's still possible if done less obviously. The recent California redistricting commission was accused of having gerrymandered some districts in Southern California in favor of the Democrats.

rturner76 said:

Is it legitimate to carve up a district into pieces making their votes ineffective in the new districts? It seems to me it can turn the tide of a state's election

Click to expand...

It has been used by Republicans for many years to nulify the black vote.

rturner76 said:

Is it legitimate to carve up a district into pieces making their votes ineffective in the new districts? It seems to me it can turn the tide of a state's election

Why or why not should this tactic be practiced and who benefits the most?

Interesting article I read about the topic The maps are what is interesting. It shows how effective it can be.

I want to say it could be either party doing it, this article happens to show republican led states.

These maps show how Republicans are blatantly rigging elections

Click to expand...

Here's a solution:

Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight
A citizen ballot initiative took redistricting out of the hands of partisan legislators. The result: competitive political districts — and an example of how to push back against hyperpartisanship.
Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight

stevil said:

It has been used by Republicans for many years to nulify the black vote.

Click to expand...

And it's used right now in order to guarantee black majority districts that will elect a Democratic Congressperson.

Gerrymandering for racist purposes, in other words.

Halbhh said:

Here's a solution:

Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight
A citizen ballot initiative took redistricting out of the hands of partisan legislators. The result: competitive political districts — and an example of how to push back against hyperpartisanship.
Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight

Click to expand...

Well, what did you expect from the New York Times? Accuracy? LOL.

The so-called "Independent" commission was made up of about 2/3 Democrats who voted that way. The referendum that set up this commission and took redistricting away from the Legislature, however, was based upon there being equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats.

rturner76 said:

Is it legitimate to carve up a district into pieces making their votes ineffective in the new districts? It seems to me it can turn the tide of a state's election

Why or why not should this tactic be practiced and who benefits the most?

Interesting article I read about the topic The maps are what is interesting. It shows how effective it can be.

I want to say it could be either party doing it, this article happens to show republican led states.

These maps show how Republicans are blatantly rigging elections

Click to expand...

I have heard the same. I think its a terrible practice.

I really wish someone would post the examples of Democrat gerrymandering so we can compare prevalence.

rambot said:

I have heard the same. I think its a terrible practice.

I really wish someone would post the examples of Democrat gerrymandering so we can compare prevalence.

Click to expand...

Maryland, which is arguably the worst in the country, though we now have an independent redistricting commission that's redrawing the maps.

Albion said:

Well, what did you expect from the New York Times? Accuracy? LOL.

The so-called "Independent" commission was made up of about 2/3 Democrats who voted that way. The referendum that set up this commission and took redistricting away from the Legislature, however, was based upon there being equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats.

Click to expand...

When they are labelled "democrats", what does that entail? Are they politician bureaucrats or citizens?
When you look at the newly created maps are there problems with it?

In my opinion, I feel like if gerrymandering gets to a point where the resulting seats won does not proportionately match the popular vote, there should be redistricting before the next election.

Halbhh said:

Here's a solution:

Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight
A citizen ballot initiative took redistricting out of the hands of partisan legislators. The result: competitive political districts — and an example of how to push back against hyperpartisanship.
Ungerrymandered: Michigan’s Maps, Independently Drawn, Set Up Fair Fight

Click to expand...

Another solution is to get rid of electorial and/or district seats and use a Proportional system. e.g. If you get 52% of the vote then you get 52% of the seats.
Gerrymandering will become a relic of a corrupt and archaic past.

Albion said:

Well, what did you expect from the New York Times? Accuracy? LOL.

The so-called "Independent" commission was made up of about 2/3 Democrats who voted that way. The referendum that set up this commission and took redistricting away from the Legislature, however, was based upon there being equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats.

Click to expand...

The commission is roughly evenly split between Democrats, Republicans and Independents. In fact the Independents have a slight plurality.

Michigan's old Gerrymandered districts:



The new districts drawn up by the independent commission:

stevil said:

Another solution is to get rid of electorial and/or district seats and use a Proportional system. e.g. If you get 52% of the vote then you get 52% of the seats.
Gerrymandering will become a relic of a corrupt and archaic past.

Click to expand...

Hmmm.... I was just looking at the UK system, which is sorta interesting. https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/

I don't believe in gerrymandering. I think all districts should be divided into equal populations. I'm sure someone can find fault in this, but it seems to be the most fair way of doing it.

Halbhh said:

Hmmm.... I was just looking at the UK system, which is sorta interesting. https://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/

Click to expand...

In NZ we used to use First Past the Post, which was somewhat similar to the USA Electorial system where a party which gets a smaller share of the votes can actually win the election.

Now we use MMP, which means the party or group of parties that get more than 50% of the vote end up winning the election.
What has usually happened is that our two major parties get less that 50% each and a centre party which has enough votes to join one of the majors and combine to more than 50% then decides the winner. This centre party goes into negotiations with the major parties and eventually we are told who the winner is. Having a coalition of parties means that the winner is moderated in someway. The more votes the centre party gets, the more negotiating power they have.

In USA if you had MMP you could have a Progressives party, a far left party, a centre left party, a centre right party, and far right party, a christian party, a nationalist party.
When the election is over you could see where the votes are going. Maybe more centre right than far right or nationalist. When all the right leaning parties combine forces maybe they get more than 50% of the vote, but amongst them they would know which party had the biggest votes, that party would probably get the president role. (here I'm mixing up president/Republic with prime minister/democracy) I'm not quite sure if it can translate, but just trying to show how you would end up with a representative government.

Gerrymandering should be prohibited.

Here's one option:
"To combat rampant gerrymandering, Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and others have introduced the Freedom to Vote Act (FTVA). If passed, this bill would block the most extreme gerrymanders until courts complete a full review. If it were in place now, it would significantly change redistricting for the 2022 elections, our research finds.

Under the FTVA, a congressional redistricting plan is presumed biased if it gives one party an advantage of more than 7 percent of a state’s House seats or in one congressional district, whichever is greater, using partisan fairness metrics. In practice, this means a map is considered biased if a party would be likely to win more seats than you would expect from its share of the state’s votes.

Consider North Carolina’s existing district map. In the 2020 elections, Republican candidates won eight of the 13 seats in the state, or 61.5 percent, while Donald Trump won 49.9 percent of the vote. The state’s newly drawn map creates 10 districts — or 71 percent of the district total — that Republican candidates will almost certainly win, even if they still won only 55 percent of the statewide vote. That imbalance would trigger the FTVA’s presumption of gerrymandering.

If two or more of the four previous presidential and Senate elections delivered results this unbalanced, the FTVA would enable any interested party to sue. Then the map couldn’t be used until and unless the state proved in court that it was not unbalanced — showing, for instance, that it is not possible to draw a more neutral plan."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/10/gerrymandering-manchin-ftva-fair-maps/

rturner76 said:

Is it legitimate to carve up a district into pieces making their votes ineffective in the new districts? It seems to me it can turn the tide of a state's election

Why or why not should this tactic be practiced and who benefits the most?

Interesting article I read about the topic The maps are what is interesting. It shows how effective it can be.

I want to say it could be either party doing it, this article happens to show republican led states.

These maps show how Republicans are blatantly rigging elections

Click to expand...

My first thought from the title question was McGyver, great show imo. Second thought I'd like to know is what's the difference between gerrymandering and gaming the system?

I feel like Gerry has had a monopoly on the mandering in America, leaving it boring and tiresome. It is quite time to give Sally a chance to mander. Can you imagine how angry Gerry will be haha?