New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

How would you set district boundaries?

middleview

President
Supporting Member
At the simplest level the idea is to evenly divide the population of a state. The way gerrymandering is done is to create
boundaries that insure one party or the other wins the majority...that can be done by isolating the voters of the opposing
party in one district, leaving all surrounding districts with a minority of the other party's voters. That sacrifices one seat
in exchange for a number of others. Another is to spread out the voters of the other party to insure that all districts have a
majority of your own voters.

Does anyone have a mechanism to set districts fairly? What, in your opinion, would be fair?
 

EatTheRich

President
“Politics is the art of war by other means.”-Karl von Clausewitz, badly paraphrased. Pure procedural fairness in politics is a simpleton’s utopia … the vital question is who has the power. Which is why this question can only be answered by reference to a specific situation. I have no objection to leftists with power in their hands exercising control over the fine details of democracy in order to maintain that power.
 
Last edited:
At the simplest level the idea is to evenly divide the population of a state. The way gerrymandering is done is to create
boundaries that insure one party or the other wins the majority...that can be done by isolating the voters of the opposing
party in one district, leaving all surrounding districts with a minority of the other party's voters. That sacrifices one seat
in exchange for a number of others. Another is to spread out the voters of the other party to insure that all districts have a
majority of your own voters.

Does anyone have a mechanism to set districts fairly? What, in your opinion, would be fair?
Sighhhh.... Take NO other demographic other than party registration (no race, no sex, no economic, nothing) and comprise districts 50-50% +/- 3%

Done.

You might get crazy convoluted unless you allow the archaic notion of contiguous geographic districts to go away. That no longer makes sense in the modern era.

You're a math/computer guy why the thread.
 

write on

Governor
Sighhhh.... Take NO other demographic other than party registration (no race, no sex, no economic, nothing) and comprise districts 50-50% +/- 3%

Done.

You might get crazy convoluted unless you allow the archaic notion of contiguous geographic districts to go away. That no longer makes sense in the modern era.

You're a math/computer guy why the thread.
The idea of mapping out districts every 10 yrs when gerrymandering is used IS what's archaic. The will of the majority is erased.

End gerrymandering and we'll see the true vote.

Done.
 
The idea of mapping out districts every 10 yrs when gerrymandering is used IS what's archaic. The will of the majority is erased.

End gerrymandering and we'll see the true vote.

Done.
I have a friend who gave me a link to help me when I wasn't understanding someone... anyone really around here.

It's a translator and I cut and pasted you in and I got this. And I still don't understand you.

+++++++++++Afghan Translator++++++++++++++++
Th' idea of mappin' out districks ev'ry 10 yrs when gerryman'erin' is used IS whut's archaic. Th' will of th' majo'ity is erased, cuss it all t' tarnation.


End gerryman'erin' an' we'll see th' true vote.


Done.
 

EatTheRich

President
The idea of mapping out districts every 10 yrs when gerrymandering is used IS what's archaic. The will of the majority is erased.

End gerrymandering and we'll see the true vote.

Done.
Not remapping districts is how you get rotten boroughs with only a few voters and a voting strength equal to a huge one.
 

bdtex

Administrator
Staff member
Sighhhh.... Take NO other demographic other than party registration (no race, no sex, no economic, nothing) and comprise districts 50-50% +/- 3%
Not all states have party registration. Texas doesn't. Pretty big state...lots of Congressional Districts. I am in TX-36.
 

write on

Governor
I have a friend who gave me a link to help me when I wasn't understanding someone... anyone really around here.

It's a translator and I cut and pasted you in and I got this. And I still don't understand you.

+++++++++++Afghan Translator++++++++++++++++
Th' idea of mappin' out districks ev'ry 10 yrs when gerryman'erin' is used IS whut's archaic. Th' will of th' majo'ity is erased, cuss it all t' tarnation.


End gerryman'erin' an' we'll see th' true vote.


Done.
That's nice of you to speak the language of trump supporters.

1631502089904.png
 

write on

Governor
Not remapping districts is how you get rotten boroughs with only a few voters and a voting strength equal to a huge one.
Excuse me. I should have been more specific and included the definition of gerrymandering.

Definition of gerrymandering

: the practice of dividing or arranging a territorial unit into election districts in a way that gives one political party an unfair advantage in elections

 
Not all states have party registration. Texas doesn't. Pretty big state...lots of Congressional Districts. I am in TX-36.
Well, thats fine right. That makes things more geographically contiguous when you can stuff in indepedents (etc) into it. It could be 30/30/30 or 40/40/20 or 45/45/10 ... or 30/30/20/10 for green party.
 
Last edited:
The other thing @bdtex there is no reason half of your district couldn't cover a fraction of Houston and the other half cover a fraction of Austin. You wouldn't want that but there i no reason that districts need to be completely geographically contiguous is the point I'm making. You could make a rule that the two halves have to be 10 miles or 5 miles from each other. Maybe there are even 3 seperate zones 3 miles from each other making up a district.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Sighhhh.... Take NO other demographic other than party registration (no race, no sex, no economic, nothing) and comprise districts 50-50% +/- 3%

Done.

You might get crazy convoluted unless you allow the archaic notion of contiguous geographic districts to go away. That no longer makes sense in the modern era.

You're a math/computer guy why the thread.
you assume all or even most states are evenly divided by party.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Sighhhh.... Take NO other demographic other than party registration (no race, no sex, no economic, nothing) and comprise districts 50-50% +/- 3%

Done.

You might get crazy convoluted unless you allow the archaic notion of contiguous geographic districts to go away. That no longer makes sense in the modern era.

You're a math/computer guy why the thread.
I started the thread because districts are not easily constructed based on a computer program. I've been writing software since about 1980 and don't see a logical way to do it. Clearly your's would be wrong.
 

JuliefromOhio

President
Supporting Member
Not like this.
GOP took Rep Marcy Kaptur's square of a major metro district and turned it into a snake (green area) at the top of the state. I trust that will be changed.

1631541079324.png
 

Drumcollie

Ending Racism with or without Hillary
At the simplest level the idea is to evenly divide the population of a state. The way gerrymandering is done is to create
boundaries that insure one party or the other wins the majority...that can be done by isolating the voters of the opposing
party in one district, leaving all surrounding districts with a minority of the other party's voters. That sacrifices one seat
in exchange for a number of others. Another is to spread out the voters of the other party to insure that all districts have a
majority of your own voters.

Does anyone have a mechanism to set districts fairly? What, in your opinion, would be fair?
If any one has a fair mechanism, they are not a (D). Districts are based on population.

Lets look at what Duke University studies says:
Gerrymandering is Not about Oddly Shaped Districts – Quantifying Gerrymandering (duke.edu)

One could look at the history of Elbridge Gerry (D), but clearly no politician wants their winning formula broken up and those that can't win do want them broken up. Anyone suggesting a Federal solution to local elections is just trying to turn favor to their party.


Other examples

Experts identify the worst examples of gerrymandering - The Fulcrum

The real question is why now?

With Biden's gigantic failures should we be revisiting this issue? My guess would be correct to assume that the thread starter doesn't want fair, but an advantage under the disguise of fair.
 
Top