SCOTUS rules on Maryland gerrymander question... (house, roach, place)

[Digger 68]

It looks like most voters in Maryland aren't going to pull the lever for the GOP. A Hogan type , yeah, but not someone like Trump. Not statewide.

I was looking up north/north central Baltimore County and was surprised how carved up it is.
Not surprised Harris has bled into the areas above Parkton, and the eastern side of Loch Raven right around the reservoir.

[westsideboy]

Originally Posted by Digger 68

It looks like most voters in Maryland aren't going to pull the lever for the GOP. A Hogan type , yeah, but not someone like Trump. Not statewide.

I was looking up north/north central Baltimore County and was surprised how carved up it is.
Not surprised Harris has bled into the areas above Parkton, and the eastern side of Loch Raven right around the reservoir.

It doesn't have to be a partisan issue. If a Dem ran for Gov. or 1-C with the pledge to stop partisan gerrymandering, I would strongly consider voting for them.

Would the same apply in Dem primaries in the deep blue part of the state? I have my doubts. I don't think the bulk of our citizenry would change the process because it will lead to a +1 for the GOP in the House.

[Rufus Clay Banger]

Look, the only reason Democrats wanted partisan redistricting struck down is because they want to leverage their higher total voter registrations spread across more districts and **hope** they can convince those voters to actually show up. That's it, nothing more, nothing less. It's kind of like liberals' rushing to let felons vote. It's not because they think felons will vote, but because they **hope** they show up and vote for Democrats. It's also not unlike Democrats rush for open borders and taxpayer benefits for illegal immigrants. They don't believe illegals will vote, but they **hope** the non-voting Latino's to will remember what Democrats did for their brethren should they actually show up at the polls.

Democrats are not clean. They know exactly what they are doing, even as they feign disgust at this ruling.

[bufflove]

Originally Posted by Rufus Clay Banger

Look, the only reason Democrats wanted partisan redistricting struck down is because they want to leverage their higher total voter registrations spread across more districts and **hope** they can convince those voters to actually show up. That's it, nothing more, nothing less. It's kind of like liberals' rushing to let felons vote. It's not because they think felons will vote, but because they **hope** they show up and vote for Democrats. It's also not unlike Democrats rush for open borders and taxpayer benefits for illegal immigrants. They don't believe illegals will vote, but they **hope** the non-voting Latino's to will remember what Democrats did for their brethren should they actually show up at the polls.

Democrats are not clean. They know exactly what they are doing, even as they feign disgust at this ruling.

Yes, of course Dems want to throw out redistricting in part because it is a tool used to undemocratically minimize the influence of their voters. What political system do you prefer if you think politicians trying to win the most votes are "not clean?"

[G1..]

Originally Posted by MrRational

Sun Headline:
U.S. Supreme Court rules in Maryland case
that courts have no role in deciding partisan gerrymandering

No role? If not the Courts then who else can be expected to settle an intra-state matter?
Leaving it open just invites more and worse examples to be attempted.

I thought they struck down the "gerrymandering" going on in NC?

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by G1..

I thought they struck down the "gerrymandering" going on in NC?

Nope they were just as chicken-hearted regarding the abuses down here.

Going deeper into the actual issue...
the US is the only country that allows the legislators to create their voting district lines.
If we ever get back to governance (vs political gamesmanship) maybe we can fix that as well.

[Rufus Clay Banger]

Originally Posted by bufflove

Yes, of course Dems want to throw out redistricting in part because it is a tool used to undemocratically minimize the influence of their voters. What political system do you prefer if you think politicians trying to win the most votes are "not clean?"

Except they do it too. So what excuse will you put forth now?

[lenora]

Originally Posted by MrRational

Sun Headline:
U.S. Supreme Court rules in Maryland case
that courts have no role in deciding partisan gerrymandering

No role? If not the Courts then who else can be expected to settle an intra-state matter?
Leaving it open just invites more and worse examples to be attempted.

Oh, my. Do you remember when the conservative wing of the U.S. Supreme Court took the opposite approach in Bush v. Gore? Also a 5-4 decision. It appears the separation of powers, Federal v. State, is also partisan. Just sayin'.



Have the State Courts had the opportunity to address partisan gerrymandering?

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by lenora

Have the State Courts had the opportunity to address partisan gerrymandering?

Isn't that how the cases ended up in front of the Supreme's?

[Cruzincat]

If someone organized a march on Annapolis to protest gerrymandering, I would go along.