Dean gets ripped apart

[Toad]

Yes, let's all pretend the gerrymandering is a brand new suprising political tactic that only one party uses in one particular state.

Or may we shouldn't do that.

Gerrymander

Gerrymander
 

Gerrymander, apportionment of electoral districts in such a way as to give the political party in power an advantage in electing its representatives. Gerrymandering is usually accomplished by so dividing electoral districts as to mass the voters for opposing parties into a small number of districts, while the favored party's electorate is spread out in order to win by a light majority in many districts.

One result of this device is to have electoral districts of curious shapes. The term gerrymander originated in 1812, when Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts signed a bill giving his own Republican Party, which had temporarily come into power, such an advantage over the Federalists. One electoral district was shaped so fantastically that it was compared by one Federalist to a salamander. “No,” said another, “better call it a Gerrymander.”

The first known instance in America of gerrymandering took place in 1709, when various counties in Pennsylvania tried to deprive Philadelphia of due representation....

So, now, do you want to discuss this old and dishonorable US Political Practice in light of the last 15 years or so in Texas?

Here's a good place to start, pretty unbiased overview. It's three pages though.

Texas Grows by Two But Not Without Controversy

Registered Republicans outnumber Democrats significantly, yet the Republican Party will not have the chance to take the lead for at least another two years.  This discrepancy results from the fact that: “legislative redistricting in the 1990s was a magnificent work of partisan gerrymandering,” says Masset.

Masset believes the Democratic Party, the majority party at the time, created the new districts by using a process called “packing.”  Essentially, packing is just a form of gerrymander, where the minority group is concentrated, or packed, into the fewest number of districts possible.  

The Democrats accomplished packing by using a sophisticated computer program referred to as the Computer Curtain.  The Computer Curtain successfully arranged the districts so that as many Republicans as possible fit into the least number of districts.  The Republican Party found it impossible to win any sort of a majority.  The effects of this process are still existent even as the new plan for 2002 comes into shape.

Now, talk amongst yourselves...... without the gratuitous insults, of course.

[Holden McGroin]

Al Sharpton is the best the demos have...

At the most recent debate, in an exchange about civil rights positions:

Dean: "I have more endorsments from the black caucus and the hispanic caucus than any other candidate up here!"

Sharpton: "You only need co-signers when your credit is bad."

Al is terrific....

[culero]

Originally posted by Kieran
Are you suggesting it's better to let only the Democrats control gerrymandering? Pretty selective outrage there, isn't it?

snip

No, absolutely not. My point is that if any party accuses the other of having gained influence by gerrymandering, and then proceeds to do the same themselves at the first opportunity, they've condemned themselves to being equally as much of the problem.

I'm not against redistricting, I'm against gerrymandering. My current outrage is directed at the current culprits.

culero

[Kieran]

I am not saying it is right or wrong. It just is. Towd is pretending the Republicans are the only party doing it, and I am pointing out his error. He started his remarks with a suggesting "all hell will break loose". I suggest it already is around his ears. Democrats have had Texas since 1870- wanna guess who's probably had more to do with the districts than anyone else?

Of course he has elaborated many of his Democrat friends are armed, as if that meant something. Laughable really.

[culero]

Originally posted by Kieran
snip
Democrats have had Texas since 1870- wanna guess who's probably had more to do with the districts than anyone else?

Actually, not quite true. Majority in the legislature, OK. But, the Republican party has had a big influence in state politics for a long time now.

Don't forget that GWB was governor here before becoming President. One of the reasons I was happy with him as governor was that he accomplished having >80% of the agendas he cited in his campaign platform passed into law during his term of office, stuff not necessarily "Democrat-friendly". He couldn't have done that without significant cooperation from members of the Democrat majority.

As to the main point of discussion, yeah the Democrats had controlled the gerrymandering for some time, and to their advantage. I'm all for correcting the errors. I just don't appreciate the current Republican majority treating their new-found power as an opportunity to do the same *wrong* thing that their opponents have done for so long. I'd like to see someone play fair, for a change.

culero