Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No, we need less gerrymandering not more.
Yes, because it is a 18th century relic of a time when the franchise was limited and those in power didn't trust the general public to make sure an important decision. It doesn't make sense now.
It would be an improvement, but gerrymandering already is enough of a problem without adding more incentive to do so. Also, this wouldn't deal with one of the bigger issues (in both the house and indirectly the EC) that there is often a big difference in how many people are in each district on a national level. A true proportional system would be a better way to do it.
Why shouldn't the people in the cities have more control? 80% of the country lives in an urban area.
so then maybe it would be better for the states to be encourage to do it that way instead if requiring it is not a viable option
Wait ,I am confused it is my understanding ( and I could be wrong but it is my understanding that they (the government purposely try to make the districts fairly equal in terms of population. In other words, it has been my understanding that if there are say a million people in a state ( for round numbers sake and say 10 districts ( I know those numbers are different than real numbers, but just for the sake of having round numbers to work with in that case the districts would try to be arranged so that ( roughly) 100k people would live in each district .
so you are supposing that cites should control rural areas even when we do not want to be controlled by city policies? Several here will tell you if we wanted to live in a rural area we would move since we like it this way we purposely take steps to avoid becoming too developed. This does not mean that everyone in the country is opposed to a few businesses coming in or anything, but in many areas there would be an awful lot of push back in urbanizing certain area.
When it comes to state or nation wide votes the majority is going to carry the day, the majority of people live in urban areas.
I have no issue with someone reading them the test.
You trust those in power to make a test that would exclude people from voting to not make it so that it would exclude those who would vote against them?
that was why the EC was set up ( in part so that rural areas would have a say in policy ( note not the only reason. This would be why something like this would be a good middle ground because then each vote could count without it being a statewide thing. Why do you think it is that unless you live in a handful of states if you are in the minority party there is really little point in voting? I cannot help but notice looking at those maps that there is a LOT more red than blue yet the blue usually wins out, so if we had it where the districts made the decisions then it should be a more actuate resesention
If you had people make the tests where it would be impossible to vote against all of them because they came from the full range of political stances.
Again, the lifestyles tend to be different ( otherwise in today's day and time people would move. There are things that "fly" in the cities that good luck getting them to "fly" out here with the different way of life.
Those maps have the places where most people live highlighted in shades of blue.
Who are these mythical impartial people you would give a say over my right to vote?
Honest question how would that be gerrymandering if the populations were roughly equal ( particularly if the maps were drawn up fairly ? Which why do you think certain maps have been taken to court because people had issues with how they were drawn up.
Therefore low population states and areas should be over represented in a national/state vote? Going to have to walk me thought that one.
