In a surprise to fucking nobody. The only way the GQP can cling to power is ratfucking the system in their favor.
this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
241 points (98.8% liked)
politics
19055 readers
4327 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
They gerrymandered Nashville a couple of years ago breaking 160 years of"tradition" because the state of Tennessee could not stand having a blue state capital.
And it's not like the blue voters in Nashville could turn this state purple even.. But the elected officials in the capital were so petty they just could not let it be blue
Nothing like making sure whole swaths of your population isn't represented by their elected officials
#JustGOPThings
Didn't Tennessee also expel 5 representatives because of reasons who then won their own special elections?
Three. But yes they did. There's some really major bullshit going on in the state house of Tennessee.
That's the only way they got their power in the first place.
Who are good little dogs? You are, you guys are good little doggies. I know 6 Supreme Court justices who are getting free vacations this summer!
Can we start whipping them now like your father did?
I think I have a favorite supreme court justice.
What a message to send to state legislators and mapmakers about racial gerrymandering. For reasons I’ve addressed, those actors will often have an incentive to use race as a proxy to achieve partisan ends. See supra, at 20–22. And occasionally they might want to straight-up suppress the electoral influence of minority voters. See Cooper, 581 U. S., at 319, n. 15. Go right ahead, this Court says to States today. Go ahead, though you have no recognized justification for using race, such as to comply with statutes ensuring equal voting rights. Go ahead, though you are (at best) using race as a short-cut to bring about partisan gains—to elect more Republicans in one case, more Democrats in another. It will be easy enough to cover your tracks in the end: Just raise a “possibility” of non-race-based decision-making, and it will be “dispositive.” Ante, at 16. And so this “odious” practice of sorting citizens, built on racial generalizations and exploiting racial divisions, will continue. Shaw, 509 U. S., at 643. In the electoral sphere especially, where “ugly patterns of pervasive racial discrimination” have so long governed, we should demand better—of ourselves, of our political representatives, and most of all of this Court. Id., at 639. Respectfully, I dissent.
I would encourage everyone to read her whole dissent.
Which 'she' is that please?
Elena Kagan
… because the other commenter was unhelpful.
So racial discrimination and disenfranchisement is acceptable, as long as it's in service of rigging elections and undermining democracy? Jesus fucking christ Alito, I know you're a corrupt piece of shit that shows utter disdain things like justice and the rule of law, but this is taking things to another level entirely. At this point it looks like you're trying to beat Dred Scott for the title of worst Supreme Court decision ever.
I think I need to officially change my bet. The Court probably will rule that absolute presidential immunity is a thing. I mean why not? The reasoning here is that politicians can do literally anything that isn't specifically called out as forbidden by the constitution, no matter how egregious or corrupt it may be.
Since we can't rely on even the tiniest hint of deference to even the most basic of legal principles, the only thing left that I can point to to argue against that outcome is the fact that it would immediately give Biden cover to open up 6 seats on the Court. I doubt they'd take that threat seriously, God knows I don't. But after this, I don't think I can even argue that a call to seal team six in that scenario would be doing less damage than leaving the Court in place as the grave diggers for liberty, equality, democracy, and the rule of law.
TL;DR: The decision was bad and everyone should feel bad.
The actual arguments SCOTUS makes on some of their worst decisions are insane.
Like Dobbs: their argument was Roe was based on weak logic that shouldn't form the basis of a ruling decision, and then proceeds to use the same logical argument they called weak for Roe to rule in favor of Dobbs.
Sooo you heard it right here folks from the high court of the US of A.
Racial discrimination is okay as long as a State you can pretend it's just "partisanship".
So much for 'checks and balances' hmm U.S.? Wow.
The dems should embrace the TSTs methodology and just do every single thing within the law as the repubs do. Or even the stuff against the law that is clearly never going to be enforced.
But they wont because their masters tell them not to. Tow the line, be a ~~good~~ willing-but-unable-to-help hero to the GOPs heel, make the people enjoy/hate the show. Either way, nothing changes.
You need to get every Democrat on board, willing to do stupid to evil shit. Won't ever happen, someone will tattle. Republicans walk in lock step, and they will all goose step together, when needed.
So, are we done with this yet?
Done with? Gerrymandering? No way. This current SCOTUS? Depends on November…. And which justices die
Can someone ELI5, are we doomed?
Rewriting the 14th amendment because they have the power not because its good law.
Imo we'd all be better off with proportional voting, its nearly impossible to gerrymander