• Dipper@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    There is an extremely simple solution to this - everyone register Republican and make sure their most moderate/liberal candidate is the one that survives their primary.

  • altphoto@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    This is the future, the year 2000!

    We are robots!

    It is true, before we took over and impaled every single one of them involuntarily for robotxial pleasure, the Republican mass was the only one allowed to Gerrymander.

    Logically a bright fellow would immediately understand that it is not possible to gerrymander if there are no representatives to gerrymander. In computing we have either a 0 or a 1. There’s no collecting of 1’s to make a 1 larger than another 1. But it doesn’t matter. We’re here to watch you do what you believe to be best.

    Its an experiment. We are trying to find the meaning of loobe! It holds the secret to lubricity!

  • aramis87@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 days ago

    Alternatively, if they [allow California’s new map to stand], it will remove any doubt that this Court is trying to rig the game to benefit the Republican Party.

    I don’t think that statement holds up, as one decision favoring California doesn’t offset the multiple questionable decisions they’ve already made that strongly favor the Republicans. But thanks for the laugh!

  • testfactor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    6 days ago

    There’s a lot of unjustified doomerism here. The article even says that Alito has basically already called the California gerrymander acceptable.

    I’d give 3:1 odds that they don’t overturn it.

    Honestly, I’d be surprised if the results were any worse than 1-8, and that only because Clarence Thomas is a literal psychopath. Maybe 2-7. Alito is two-faced as all hell.

    • OldFartPhil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 days ago

      That’s just a signal to Alito’s paymaster that they haven’t offered him an appropriate bribe, oops, gratuity yet.

      I have to say, though, that the fact that we - myself included - are rooting for the Supreme Court to rule in favor of a blatantly transparent Gerrymander shows how far down the rabbit hole we are as a nation. Just another example that the US is a failed state.

    • Gordon Calhoun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      Upvite for the psychopath comment. Dude has serious empathy issues. In that he seems incapable of having any and recognizing he himself is human, much less anyone else (with, you know, feelings, hopes, dreams, etc.).

      Geez, I just unlocked a new theory that he’s our true terminator machine from the future, sent back to be subtly, but truly, destructive of stable society.

    • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      If they vote it is unacceptable I think the SCOTUS might as well just dissolve.

      There’s no good reason to respect their rulings anymore.

  • Flying_Lynx@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    If you think about where ice gets deployed they you already know it will eventually be forbidden to vote for the other party…or else.

  • gustofwind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    Republicans do place an enormous amount of weight on a statement by Paul Mitchell, a private consultant hired by Democrats to draw the California maps. After the maps were drawn, but before they were approved by the state’s voters, Mitchell told a Latino interest group that the new maps “will further increase Latino voting power,” that they add an additional “Latino influence district” (a district where Latinos are not in the majority but are nonetheless likely to elect their preferred candidate), and that they “ensure that the Latino districts are bolstered in order to make them most effective.”

    Here’s the “evidence” that Dems racially gerrymandered California

    It’s actually totally legal to gerrymander by party but it’s not by race so that’s the case right there

      • Kabaka@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        The applicable laws protect “language minorities” or discuss “race, color, or national origin.” The race vs ethnicity argument isn’t legally relevant since the scope is broader than that.