Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Democrats held control of the NC General Assembly for close to 100 years only losing it in 2012. Yet in the last 40 years they only voted for one Democrat President. This speaks for itself.
The country has a whole has become more partisan across the board, and how a district votes for President has become a bigger indicator on how a district leans on the Congressional level as well. Regardless, the point remains, the only way you can come up with 10 out of 13 seats won by a President on a state that is basically 50/50 is an extreme gerrymander.
So a western district that has 7-people per square mile in some valley, has the same political weight as Winston-Salem?
Seems like sour grapes.
Look at California---one huge Democrat gerrymander!
California is not a gerrymander, those districts were not drawn by the Assembly, they were drawn y an Independent Commission made up of an equal number of Democrats and Republicans.
I was making a broader point about how someone runs at the top of the ticket can have an impact on down ballot races more so than in the past.
Fact of the matter is, under the current lines Obama won 3 of the 13 districts in the state in 08 despite winning the state narrowly. That doesn't happen unless it is an extreme gerrymander. Same for 2012 when Romney won by 2 points, and this year when Trump won the state by 3.6 points. You have a state that is pretty close at the top, then the Presidential results by district should reflect something similar in a fair map. 7-6 or at most 8-5, not 10-3.
Putting that aside for a second, that wasn't actually the court ruling in the case. The court previously ruled on the Congressional districts and that the gerrymandering went beyond a partisan gerrymander and was also a racial gerrymander and racial packing, which is why the Congressional District maps were previously thrown out. The new districts, really did not change the overall partisan gerrymander of the districts.
During the summer the court made a separate, but similar ruing on the state legislative level, by tossing out those maps as a racial gerrymander as well. The recent ruing which was in the OP, was not a separate ruling on this matter, but continuation of the summer ruling by indicating when the new maps must be approved by and when the Special Election would take place.
I was making a broader point about how someone runs at the top of the ticket can have an impact on down ballot races more so than in the past.
Fact of the matter is, under the current lines Obama won 3 of the 13 districts in the state in 08 despite winning the state narrowly. That doesn't happen unless it is an extreme gerrymander. Same for 2012 when Romney won by 2 points, and this year when Trump won the state by 3.6 points. You have a state that is pretty close at the top, then the Presidential results by district should reflect something similar in a fair map. 7-6 or at most 8-5, not 10-3.
Yet you ignore that the state also voted for a Democrat governor. That completely blows away your narrative. It also proves that people in NC don't vote a straight party ticket.
Yet you ignore that the state also voted for a Democrat governor. That completely blows away your narrative. It also proves that people in NC don't vote a straight party ticket.
Both races were close. Trump won by 3.6, Cooper won by a little over 10k votes. There was about a 4% difference between the margins. None of the districts were remotely that close on either the Presidential or Congressional level.
Both races were close. Trump won by 3.6, Cooper won by a little over 10k votes. There was about a 4% difference between the margins. None of the districts were remotely that close on either the Presidential or Congressional level.
NC voted in a Democrat governor and a GOP president. This proves, clearly, that people here don't vote straight tickets.
Are we still at this topic again? The Supreme Court is going to hear it and strike it down.. you can take that to the bank... the dumb liberals can't figure the difference between stupid and more stupid.. Merry Christmas..
This the usual response when 1 party does something for YEARS and no one complains then when the other party gets control and does the SAME thing, all of a sudden it is "wrong".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
