Gerrymandering

RedDenver said:
If you read the article, there's statistical data to support their conclusion but it's far from a certainty as Kennedy has done the opposite 39% of the time. (177 times has voted against when directing zero words towards that side out of 449 time he directed zero words towards a party.)
Click to expand...


Yep. I liked that they provided the the data for either decision.

Got to hope he sides with those who abhor gerrymandering. I think the fact he immediately asked about whether the practice could be used to infringe upon the 1A rights of members of different parties (meaning they're not getting fair representation). 

He's had nearly a decade and a half to ruminate on this issues since last time... Let's hope he's done some soul searching.

 
RedDenver said:
[...] it's far from a certainty as Kennedy has done the opposite 39% of the time. ....
Click to expand...


giphy.gif


Here's another fun fact:  SCOTUS cases take an average of 81 days from opening arguments to decision.

I guess I could un-clench a little

MajesticHonoredDikdik-max-1mb.gif


 
Very surprised we haven't heard anything about this.  A simple google search of "gerrymandering supreme court case" shows the last article written on October 5th.  That's 4 weeks ago today.

Thought I remember reading somewhere that a decision would be usually in a couple weeks.

 
funhusker said:
Any idea when a ruling will be made?  
Click to expand...


BigRedBuster said:
Very surprised we haven't heard anything about this.  A simple google search of "gerrymandering supreme court case" shows the last article written on October 5th.  That's 4 weeks ago today.

Thought I remember reading somewhere that a decision would be usually in a couple weeks.
Click to expand...


According to the omnipotent Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gill_v._Whitford

A decision in the case is expected by June 2018.
Click to expand...


By then we will be knee-deep in dissecting the new coach's first full recruiting efforts...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's some recent "news"

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/report-robin-vos-confronted-john-kasich-over-wisconsin-redistricting-position/article_6252e787-d7b2-5bc5-baf0-36341816abcb.html

John Kasich (R)  is getting some heat from Republicans for taking an anti-gerrymandering stance on this case.  Was called a "traitor"to his party. Ha!

I dislike John a lot less than the other former GOP candidates.  This is some common-sense stuff that shouldn't be a partisan issue.  IIRC he is moderate in some other areas, as well.  Moderates don't always fare well in primaries, but would be better in office, IMHO.

 
Kiyoat Husker said:
Here's some recent "news"

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/report-robin-vos-confronted-john-kasich-over-wisconsin-redistricting-position/article_6252e787-d7b2-5bc5-baf0-36341816abcb.html

John Kasich (R)  is getting some heat from Republicans for taking an anti-gerrymandering stance on this case.  Was called a "traitor"to his party. Ha!

I dislike John a lot less than the other former GOP candidates.  This is some common-sense stuff that shouldn't be a partisan issue.  IIRC he is moderate in some other areas, as well.  Moderates don't always fare well in primaries, but would be better in office, IMHO.
Click to expand...


He's who I wanted to vote for last year.

 
Kiyoat Husker said:
Moderates don't always fare well in primaries, but would be better in office, IMHO.
Click to expand...


There's your problem. No one who is moderate/sane enough to win a general election/be a good president can win a GOP primary.

This isn't yet the case on the left, but Democrats haven't nominated some radical socialist or communist, yet, either.

 
dudeguyy said:
There's your problem. No one who is moderate/sane enough to win a general election/be a good president can win a GOP primary.

This isn't yet the case on the left, but Democrats haven't nominated some radical socialist or communist, yet, either.
Click to expand...
I don't think you have to be moderate to be a good President, but you have to be sane.

And you need to be able to build consensus, both in Congress and with the American people. LBJ went primarily through Congress using political threats; JFK went through the American people using speeches; Reagan went through the American people using a series of TV spots. FDR used a combination of all three.

 
Back
Top