Politics

Politics

  • Obama

    Votes: 5 1.4%
  • Romney

    Votes: 172 48.7%
  • Other

    Votes: 46 13.0%
  • a:3:{i:1637;a:5:{s:12:"polloptionid";i:1637;s:6:"nodeid";s:7:"2882145";s:5:"title";s:5:"Obama";s:5:"

    Votes: 130 36.8%

  • Total voters
    353

drayer54

Well-known member
Messages
8,952
Reaction score
6,359

IRISHDODGER

Blue Chip Recruit
Messages
8,205
Reaction score
6,287
An angry reality TV star wanting to get into politics to go after those who ruined him. Hmmm... That just might have a chance
and it would be on all the dems, their failed policies & the refusal to run a moderate, sane person who would win in a landslide but they refuse.
 

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
16,000
Reaction score
6,269
I am a male and also a few years too young to have gotten into The Hills in the latter 00's. Spencer Pratt rules. Hopefully the people in LA give him a shot. Not sure the last time I heard anyone have anything good to say about LA other than the weather.
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,868
Reaction score
5,697
There's gotta be a better way to solve this gerrymandering problem now. What Florida, Tennessee, etc. are doing is just as bad as what Virginia tried to do (and as bad as Texas, Illinois, Maryland, etc.). I think the left's idea of "non-partisan redistricting committees" is bogus, because we've seen what that results in for California. And I think pure-proportional based systems dividing the state's delegation by popular vote statewide is also bad, as rural areas will have zero representation.
 

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
16,000
Reaction score
6,269
There's gotta be a better way to solve this gerrymandering problem now. What Florida, Tennessee, etc. are doing is just as bad as what Virginia tried to do (and as bad as Texas, Illinois, Maryland, etc.). I think the left's idea of "non-partisan redistricting committees" is bogus, because we've seen what that results in for California. And I think pure-proportional based systems dividing the state's delegation by popular vote statewide is also bad, as rural areas will have zero representation.

My idea of what's fair is different from what another's idea is. Iowa has some nice rules that work for them. We only have 1 rep up here!
 

NDVirginia19

Rally
Messages
4,868
Reaction score
5,697
My idea of what's fair is different from what another's idea is. Iowa has some nice rules that work for them. We only have 1 rep up here!
I think something that could make sense is having N-X number of congressional districts, where N is your state's congressional delegation size and X is a number that goes up in brackets with N. So a state like Virginia has 11 members in their district, they draw 9 districts, and then they have two at large members that are given to make the overall state delegation more representative of the state's popular vote. I think that some math nerds could figure out how that would actually work legislatively. When you vote, you vote for your actual district, and then for the state's at large position (if you don't like your specific district's republican, but you like the generic republican over the generic democrat for the at large as an example). Maybe a 3rd party could actually get representation that way, especially in bigger states like California or Texas.

Wouldn't do anything for North Dakota however lol
 

Bishop2b5

SEC Exchange Student
Messages
9,213
Reaction score
6,460
Dems didn't mind this. Why get upset now? States with an average of 40% Republican voters gerrymandered so that no Republican can get elected to Congress. If you hadn't been doing this sort of thing and gerrymandering dem districts everywhere you could, this latest ruling wouldn't have happened. You brought this on yourself. You're just mad that you can't use race to cheat anymore in drawing up districts.

6814.jpg
 
Last edited:

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,521
Reaction score
13,405
Fight fire with fire.

They should just ignore the state supreme court like the Ohio GOP is doing.
 
Top