Cooked Crack Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Super delegates are literally just a way for the a party to recall a candidate. I don't care if they do away with super delegates as long as it's replaced by another method. I'm not really trying to see any future Roy Moore, Donald Trump, John Edwards type candidates making it to a general election Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 11 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said: Super delegates are literally just a way for the a party to recall a candidate. I don't care if they do away with super delegates as long as it's replaced by another method. I'm not really trying to see any future Roy Moore, Donald Trump, John Edwards type candidates making it to a general election Granted, up till recently, the fear was that some loon candidate might steal a nomination, and lose the general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Puerto Rico governor vows midterm revenge for tax bill Quote Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló says he plans to mobilize 5.3 million Puerto Ricans living on the mainland to shake up the midterm elections in states ranging from Florida to California. Rosselló, a Democrat and member of the island's pro-statehood New Progressive Party, is infuriated about a Republican tax plan that he says could hobble the island’s economy even as thousands of residents remain without power and water three months after Hurricane Maria. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/20/puerto-rico-governor-tax-bill-midterms-245870 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 17 hours ago, SkinsHokieFan said: Oh for ****'s sake superdelegates have had 0 impact on the Democrat primary since they were put in place. Bernie lost, Bernie lost, Bernie lost. He only won lightly attended caucuses while Hillary crushed it in primaries. Not to mention how undemocratic caucus elections are. The most vocal group decides the winner, even if they wouldn'tnormally have the plurality of voters in the state. **** that. That's dumb. Has anyone been following Jess Phoenix in California (CA-25)?What a new face she'd be for the House. And actual ****ing volcano scientist. Wish I could vote for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killerbee99 Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 It's like as soon as the tax bill went through all their life long dreams are complete.... All these assholes are now retiring left and right.... Wish there was a way to repeal the tax law, I really don't see it though. However, they need to gut it like they gutted Obamacare, law that actually helped people and not just rich people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Either that plus their attempt to gut Social Security and Medicare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 She might be baaaack! That loon, Michele Bachmann says she might run for Franken's seat. She's praying on it just like she did when God told her to run for president. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michele-bachmann-senate-minnesota_us_5a4bc19ae4b06d1621bb329b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Mitt Romney in the Senate should be interesting, since he won't necessarily be a Trump lapdog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 4 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: Mitt Romney in the Senate should be interesting, since he won't necessarily be a Trump lapdog. Yeah, he'll be different from every single Republican in Washington. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Maybe he can show the rest of them how not to vote lockstep with the rest of them, unless he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 3, 2018 Author Share Posted January 3, 2018 I can't access Twitter from work, but someone should post Michelle Bachman tweeting that she had to ask God if he was calling on her to run again, and then God (@TheTweetofGod) replying "No." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 3, 2018 Author Share Posted January 3, 2018 On 1/1/2018 at 9:13 PM, SkinsHokieFan said: Oh for ****'s sake superdelegates have had 0 impact on the Democrat primary since they were put in place. Bernie lost, Bernie lost, Bernie lost. He only won lightly attended caucuses while Hillary crushed it in primaries. Exactly Not counting superdelegates, Hillary won 2,271 to 1,820. She won the popular vote by 12% which is pretty much a landslide. She got the nomination. Superdelegates had zero impact. Bernie people are just ****ing babies. On the other hand - Gerrymandering. In the 2017 Virginia House of Delegates election, Dems received 53% of the votes, Republicans only got 43%. Republicans will retain control of the chamber despite losing badly in the popular vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 35 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: Exactly Not counting superdelegates, Hillary won 2,271 to 1,820. She won the popular vote by 12% which is pretty much a landslide. She got the nomination. Superdelegates had zero impact. Bernie people are just ****ing babies. On the other hand - Gerrymandering. In the 2017 Virginia House of Delegates election, Dems received 53% of the votes, Republicans only got 43%. Republicans will retain control of the chamber despite losing badly in the popular vote. You don't think the existence and incidences of super delegates supporting Hillary influenced the earlier primaries? How many of those 53% were from safe Dem districts though? Winning with large margins in certain districts and losing in close races can give wrong impressions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 3, 2018 Author Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, twa said: You don't think the existence and incidences of super delegates supporting Hillary influenced the earlier primaries? No. Just now, twa said: How many of those 53% were from safe Dem districts though? Winning with large margins in certain districts and losing in close races can give wrong impressions That is how gerrymandering works. You don't draw the lines so that each district is close with a slight edge to your side. You draw the lines so that a small number of districts have an overwhelming number of your opponents voters concentrated there (and are therefore "safe"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 That is also how minority /majority districts work in most cases. How many districts in Virginia are safe D districts?....several Dems here certainly encourage stacking their district Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 3, 2018 Author Share Posted January 3, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Pro Bono Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 3 hours ago, twa said: How many of those 53% were from safe Dem districts though? Admiring the chutzpah of twa looking at Virginia, and announcing that votes from districts which he alleges the Republicans in Richmond gerrymandered shouldn't count. (If said Republicans in Richmond garrymandered said districts to favor Democrats.) 3 hours ago, twa said: That is also how minority /majority districts work in most cases. When gerrymandered by Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 3, 2018 Share Posted January 3, 2018 Just now, Larry said: Admiring the chutzpah of twa looking at Virginia, and announcing that votes from districts which he alleges the Republicans in Richmond gerrymandered shouldn't count. (If said Republicans in Richmond garrymandered said districts to favor Democrats.) When gerrymandered by Republicans. the votes should certainly count...in the district they vote in. Never have got a answer on how many is the proper ratio in a court ordered minority majority district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 2 minutes ago, twa said: Never have got a answer on how many is the proper ratio in a court ordered minority majority district. There is no "proper ratio". Attempting to create a "proper ratio" is called "gerrymandering". (And it's bad). Now, the word "majority" might provide you a clue as to what the ratio is, to comply with the law. (Hint: it's not 90%). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 majority of population or voters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 8 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said: That is how gerrymandering works. You don't draw the lines so that each district is close with a slight edge to your side. You draw the lines so that a small number of districts have an overwhelming number of your opponents voters concentrated there (and are therefore "safe"). Actually, there's several ways it works. For purposes of this post, I'm going to just make up some imaginary situations. And I'm going to pretend that my job is to create districts that contain 100 voters each. Simplest scenario. Let's pretend that there's a city of 100 voters, that votes 60% D. And it's surrounded by miles of countryside, that votes 60% R. You might think that a fair system is to have the city elect a representative, and have the country elect several Rs. But if I'm the Rs, then I divide the city into three districts. Each of which contains 33 city voters and 66 rural voters. Now, even though the city has 100 voters, 60 of whom vote D, the city is represented by three Rs. (None of which really care about the city, because their district is mostly rural, and the city didn't vote for him, any way). This is is called "cracking":. Taking a bunch of people who vote against you, and fracturing them into several districts, each of which contains a small number that votes against your side, and a larger number that votes for you. But, suppose the city has 300 voters, and votes 60% D. In order to disenfranchise all of those D voters, you'd have to divide the city up into 20 districts, of maybe one block each. That's hard to do, and really obvious as gerrymandering. So, you do the next best thing. You create a district that's got 100 people in it, and 100% of them vote D. You just turned 300 voters, 180 of which vote D, (a city that really ought to be represented by 3 D's), into 100 voters who are 100% D, and 200 voters, of which only 80 vote D (40%). 300 voters, who vote 60% D, are represented by 1 D and 2 Rs. I understand that's called "packing". When you can't fragment the other side into a large number of districts dominated by your side, then cram as many of them as possible into one district, so that the remainder can then be more easily fragmented. (I assume you know this. And I'm absolutely certain twa does. I simply hope that some others might benefit from it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 4, 2018 Share Posted January 4, 2018 Maybe it's me..but the Trump effect seems to be a lot of younger professional women are gearing up to run for House seats in 2018, as Democrats. Fitting since the end of 2017 became known for female empowerment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.