Seems pretty clear that if NY had been allowed to gerrymander like all the red states were allowed to gerrymander then the house would have stayed blue. Yet another example of an unequal playing field.
-
11
-
agip wrote:
Seems pretty clear that if NY had been allowed to gerrymander like all the red states were allowed to gerrymander then the house would have stayed blue. Yet another example of an unequal playing field.
How do you still not understand this?
Republicans got more house votes nationwide by about 5%. That means nationwide, the Democrats are the ones benefiting by gerrymandering.
If NY Democrats don't benefit from gerrymandering that's just an exception against the overall trend.
21 -
Hardloper wrote:
agip wrote:
Seems pretty clear that if NY had been allowed to gerrymander like all the red states were allowed to gerrymander then the house would have stayed blue. Yet another example of an unequal playing field.
How do you still not understand this?
Republicans got more house votes nationwide by about 5%. That means nationwide, the Democrats are the ones benefiting by gerrymandering.
If NY Democrats don't benefit from gerrymandering that's just an exception against the overall trend.
So far hardloper has claimed that the fact that Dems have won 7/8ish of the last presidential popular votes is…next to meaningless and doesn’t mean there are more Dems than Repubs.
and
That Dems benefit more than Repubs from gerrymandering.
judge his posts accordingly.
21 -
agip wrote:
jonesy22 wrote:
You better hope Trump runs. It is the only chance the Dems have in 2024, Desantis will easily get elected.
I still don't think desantis will run in 2024. He has a glass jaw and isn't charismatic enough. he doesnt' have the kind of fight in him that would make him want to subject him and his family to the onslought of m'aga. I mean trump will endanger desantis' family.
Trump will destroy DeSancterized. Trump plays for keeps. Trump doesn't just beat you, he DESTROYS you.
All these fools rushing to DeSanctum are going to regret it.
02 -
agip wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
How do you still not understand this?
Republicans got more house votes nationwide by about 5%. That means nationwide, the Democrats are the ones benefiting by gerrymandering.
If NY Democrats don't benefit from gerrymandering that's just an exception against the overall trend.
So far hardloper has claimed that the fact that Dems have won 7/8ish of the last presidential popular votes is…next to meaningless and doesn’t mean there are more Dems than Repubs.
and
That Dems benefit more than Repubs from gerrymandering.
judge his posts accordingly.
1. Yes, and I cited the most well-known poll on party identification.
2. Correct. FiveThirtyEight measures gerrymandering bias by comparing the "tipping point" district to the overall popular vote (on articles you have cited).
Right now, the tipping point district will be around R+0.5, if Republicans hold the Senate. If the overall vote is round R+4, that means this year's map had a D+3.5 bias, by 538's metric.
Any counterarguments to the above?
21 -
Hardloper wrote:
agip wrote:
So far hardloper has claimed that the fact that Dems have won 7/8ish of the last presidential popular votes is…next to meaningless and doesn’t mean there are more Dems than Repubs.
and
That Dems benefit more than Repubs from gerrymandering.
judge his posts accordingly.
1. Yes, and I cited the most well-known poll on party identification.
2. Correct. FiveThirtyEight measures gerrymandering bias by comparing the "tipping point" district to the overall popular vote (on articles you have cited).
Right now, the tipping point district will be around R+0.5, if Republicans hold the Senate. If the overall vote is round R+4, that means this year's map had a D+3.5 bias, by 538's metric.
Any counterarguments to the above?
Here’s some more sophisticated analysis that finds Repubs do have an advantage from gerrymandering but far less than it was for a long time.
Meaning the repub advantage from nasty gerrymandering was fairly strong leading up to 2022 but only a small advantage now.
10 -
Academic Discussion wrote:
agip wrote:
interesting idea I just read:
Biden's forgiving student debt might have won midterms. It let young people say 'hey it matters who wins elections - my peers just got some debt relief. The Rs didn't want that to happen. I hate them. I better go vote.'
Sad development if illegal and unconstitutional bribing worked.
"Once the People find out they can vote themselves Money, that will herald the end of the Republic." -Benjamin Franklin
It may have been a brilliant political move to forgive a chunk of student debt, but it will be thrown out by the courts because he had no power to do so.
11 -
meanwhile the chance of an R house keeps dwindling...down to a (still high) 77%.
00 -
agip wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
1. Yes, and I cited the most well-known poll on party identification.
2. Correct. FiveThirtyEight measures gerrymandering bias by comparing the "tipping point" district to the overall popular vote (on articles you have cited).
Right now, the tipping point district will be around R+0.5, if Republicans hold the Senate. If the overall vote is round R+4, that means this year's map had a D+3.5 bias, by 538's metric.
Any counterarguments to the above?
Here’s some more sophisticated analysis that finds Repubs do have an advantage from gerrymandering but far less than it was for a long time.
Meaning the repub advantage from nasty gerrymandering was fairly strong leading up to 2022 but only a small advantage now.
Looks like they use the same formula as 538 that I just alluded to. They provide an estimate, but the results will be different from the estimate, and if it goes like I said, will show a D bias.
12 -
agip wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
1. Yes, and I cited the most well-known poll on party identification.
2. Correct. FiveThirtyEight measures gerrymandering bias by comparing the "tipping point" district to the overall popular vote (on articles you have cited).
Right now, the tipping point district will be around R+0.5, if Republicans hold the Senate. If the overall vote is round R+4, that means this year's map had a D+3.5 bias, by 538's metric.
Any counterarguments to the above?
Here’s some more sophisticated analysis that finds Repubs do have an advantage from gerrymandering but far less than it was for a long time.
Meaning the repub advantage from nasty gerrymandering was fairly strong leading up to 2022 but only a small advantage now.
of course the corollary is that Rs have succeeded in dragging down the Dems to their lower level of ethics. Ds used to try to stay above the fray and not do absurd gerrymanders, but finally Dems got tired of structural disadvantage and decided to lower themselves to the level of Rs and do nasty gerrymanders. (Except in their 2nd biggest state - not allowed there. )
Which is pretty much how this country is going - Rs plunge to new trumpian levels of crime and dishonor and that drags the rest of us down to their levels. I'm sure soon we'll have legions of Dems who believe nonsense like so many millions of Repubs believe nonsense.
11 -
agip wrote:
of course the corollary is that Rs have succeeded in dragging down the Dems to their lower level of ethics. Ds used to try to stay above the fray and not do absurd gerrymanders,
Um no. Just no. Democrats literally invented gerrymandering (it's named after a Democrat) and states like Illinois have been doing it forever. It's only when Republicans got good at it did it become a "problem."
21 -
agip wrote:
so I suppose trump still announces next week but man what a terrible terrible week he's having.
the Rs got smacked around and everyone is blaming him
many ma'ga candidates outright lost
his company is on trial in NY and the Trump CFO is testifying against the trump organization.
R muckamucks are lining up behind DeSantis, who had a great night in FL.
and trump has backed himself into a corner - if he announces it will trigger a bunch of 'trump is damaged goods' stories but if he doesn't announce he looks like a coward.
Ouchies!
If he announces his candidacy, RNC will stop paying his legal bills. Not that it matters a lot, since he has enough donors to pay his bills.
01 -
Hardloper wrote:
agip wrote:
of course the corollary is that Rs have succeeded in dragging down the Dems to their lower level of ethics. Ds used to try to stay above the fray and not do absurd gerrymanders,
Um no. Just no. Democrats literally invented gerrymandering (it's named after a Democrat) and states like Illinois have been doing it forever. It's only when Republicans got good at it did it become a "problem."
that NYT article shows the massive advantage Rs had for decades from their gerrymandering and still enjoy in the states. You can't just sigh and say 'they're all the same.' Rs were far worse for decades and decades. It's like one runner used steroids for 30 years, quits and then says 'ok all equal now!'
Dems only have around 30% of the state house states in WI because of gerrymandering. Shows you.
10 -
jonesy22 wrote:
agip wrote:
so I suppose trump still announces next week but man what a terrible terrible week he's having.
the Rs got smacked around and everyone is blaming him
many ma'ga candidates outright lost
his company is on trial in NY and the Trump CFO is testifying against the trump organization.
R muckamucks are lining up behind DeSantis, who had a great night in FL.
and trump has backed himself into a corner - if he announces it will trigger a bunch of 'trump is damaged goods' stories but if he doesn't announce he looks like a coward.
Ouchies!
You better hope Trump runs. It is the only chance the Dems have in 2024, Desantis will easily get elected.
I'd take 80% chances of DeSantis win over 50% chances of Trump. I don't agree with DeSantis on many things, but at least he is not an existential threat to our republic.
00 -
agip wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Um no. Just no. Democrats literally invented gerrymandering (it's named after a Democrat) and states like Illinois have been doing it forever. It's only when Republicans got good at it did it become a "problem."
that NYT article shows the massive advantage Rs had for decades from their gerrymandering and still enjoy in the states. You can't just sigh and say 'they're all the same.' Rs were far worse for decades and decades. It's like one runner used steroids for 30 years, quits and then says 'ok all equal now!'
Dems only have around 30% of the state house states in WI because of gerrymandering. Shows you.
Wisconsin's map doesn't seem to bad according to this. And a Democrat governor signed off on it?
11 -
Hardloper wrote:
agip wrote:
that NYT article shows the massive advantage Rs had for decades from their gerrymandering and still enjoy in the states. You can't just sigh and say 'they're all the same.' Rs were far worse for decades and decades. It's like one runner used steroids for 30 years, quits and then says 'ok all equal now!'
Dems only have around 30% of the state house states in WI because of gerrymandering. Shows you.
Wisconsin's map doesn't seem to bad according to this. And a Democrat governor signed off on it?
WI votes 51% Dem but Dems can only win 30% of state house. Your view is that isn't because of gerrymandering. You sure?
00 -
Oh man, Agip is schooling yard signs Hardloper 😂😂😂😂
DELIGHTFUL 😏
11 -
agip wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Wisconsin's map doesn't seem to bad according to this. And a Democrat governor signed off on it?
WI votes 51% Dem but Dems can only win 30% of state house. Your view is that isn't because of gerrymandering. You sure?
Your view is the Democrat governor signed off on a Republican-gerrymandered map? And that Princeton's project gave it an A rating for partisan fairness?
I can't find the specific results, but imbalances between vote total and representation can happen even on fairly-drawn maps.
11 -
In AZ, Kari Lake will be taking the lead tonight and will cruise to victory. Blake Masters continues to close the gap as these upcoming drops start including election day only votes.
In NV, Lombardo will win the Gov race and Laxalt is ahead by approx 16,000 votes with about 50K ballots remaining to be counted in Clark County. Masto will need at least 66% of that 50K ballots in order to defeat Laxalt- that might be a bridge too far. This does not count the remaining rural counties which skew heavily for Laxalt.
As I said before, these races ain't over yet. I also see victory for the GOP to control the House.
12 -
Hardloper wrote:
agip wrote:
WI votes 51% Dem but Dems can only win 30% of state house. Your view is that isn't because of gerrymandering. You sure?
Your view is the Democrat governor signed off on a Republican-gerrymandered map? And that Princeton's project gave it an A rating for partisan fairness?
I can't find the specific results, but imbalances between vote total and representation can happen even on fairly-drawn maps.
where does it say the governor signed off on the actual districts for the state house as voted on? Not clear to me that he signed the map from Tuesday. There have been many maps - princeton gave an A to one of the maps. Could have been a rejected map.
as for the princeton gerrymander project, they say WI has an extreme gerrymander:
Pitfalls
Wisconsin is home to some of the most extreme partisan gerrymanders in the United States. It was the subject of the 2018 case of Gill v. Whitford, in which a lower court found the state Assembly plan to be an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the case in light of its ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause that federal courts have no jurisdiction to hear partisan gerrymandering claims.10
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.