Democrats should be careful what they wish for. They have brought this issue to Scotus, and Scotus has ruled against them. So now the southern states, seeing that it is possible to make everything fair, which the Democrats did not want to do, are going to make everything fair. We simply want to change everything from crazy to normal.
It is common sense. There is no retaliation to it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/30/states-redistricting-maps-voting-rights-act
@AverageJoe1
I love this country. Now I am going to jump over and see what Sunhouse is writing about today. But I will not be far away from this discussion.!!!!!!!
@AverageJoe1 saidI used to be a Republican. Ridiculous.
Democrats should be careful what they wish for. They have brought this issue to Scotus, and Scotus has ruled against them. So now the southern states, seeing that it is possible to make everything fair, which the Democrats did not want to do, are going to make everything fair. We simply want to change everything from crazy to normal.
It is common sense. There is no ...[text shortened]... o it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/30/states-redistricting-maps-voting-rights-act
Democrats tried, very hard, to make redistricting an independently-run operation. Get the politics out of the process, and just have someone else who isn't a politician split things up as fairly as possible. They wanted to end gerrymandering forever. There's lots and lots of evidence.
It makes sense, and it actually still exists in a few Blue states. But Republicans are having none of it. They don't fight fair. Democrats in California got rid of theirs in response to Trump's call for more gerrymandering.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/us/politics/democrats-independent-redistricting-commissions.html
@AverageJoe1 said"Normal" like the good Ole days when the Southern States didn't have any of those uppity Blacks representing them in Congress.
Democrats should be careful what they wish for. They have brought this issue to Scotus, and Scotus has ruled against them. So now the southern states, seeing that it is possible to make everything fair, which the Democrats did not want to do, are going to make everything fair. We simply want to change everything from crazy to normal.
It is common sense. There is no ...[text shortened]... o it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/30/states-redistricting-maps-voting-rights-act
@wildgrass saidResponse to your first paragraph….. you write that as if things are wrong with this issue that exists today. But Scotus, made up of nine fairly experienced lawyers, who are the chief justices of the United States of America, seemed to disagree with you.
I used to be a Republican. Ridiculous.
Democrats tried, very hard, to make redistricting an independently-run operation. Get the politics out of the process, and just have someone else who isn't a politician split things up as fairly as possible. They wanted to end gerrymandering forever. There's lots and lots of evidence.
It makes sense, and it actually still exists ...[text shortened]...
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/us/politics/democrats-independent-redistricting-commissions.html
So here we sit, we have to agree with you, that you are right, with your statement, or consider that the hours and hours of legal interpretation and basic jurisprudence that led to their decision makes more sense.
I am leaning to the justices, who have more experience and took a little longer than you to make their decision.. Why are they wrong and you are right?
@AverageJoe1 saidSCOTUS is a collection of unelected bureaucrats, forced to make these decisions in the absence of function out of the other two branches of government. I thought Kagan's dissent was spot-on. SCOTUS should not be ruling at all on matters that Congress already passed into law.
Response to your first paragraph….. you write that as if things are wrong with this issue that exists today. But Scotus, made up of nine fairly experienced lawyers, who are the chief justices of the United States of America, seemed to disagree with you.
So here we sit, we have to agree with you, that you are right, with your statement, or consider that the hours and h ...[text shortened]... nce and took a little longer than you to make their decision.. Why are they wrong and you are right?
SCOTUS would be fine with independently-run districting committees. I think probably most Americans would like gerrymandering to end. But Congress doesn't work, so that isn't going to happen.
@no1marauder saidNo, normal, by its definition. You socialist think that normal is for everyone at the end of the day to end up in the same place. You know that, right? (Sue says right a lot)
"Normal" like the good Ole days when the Southern States didn't have any of those uppity Blacks representing them in Congress.
You know that everyone in America being in the same place at the end of the day is not in our DNA. Right?
In other words, that is not normal.
I just wanted to clear up what normal is in this post.
Normal to you is a whoooooolle lot diff than normal is to me.
@wildgrass saidOh lord. NOW this one widens the goal posts. Hell I have forgotten the issue.
SCOTUS is a collection of unelected bureaucrats, forced to make these decisions in the absence of function out of the other two branches of government. I thought Kagan's dissent was spot-on. SCOTUS should not be ruling at all on matters that Congress already passed into law.
SCOTUS would be fine with independently-run districting committees. I think probably most Americans would like gerrymandering to end. But Congress doesn't work, so that isn't going to happen.
He questions the nature, the veraciy? of the judges. Let me help him. Y’all already know this.
They are lawfully appointed and confirmed under the laws of the United States of America constitution. The constitution. This ties to the Constitution. That is the legal process, whether you like the outcome or not.
You could get a sign and walk in the street. But remember, we are nation of laws, so you’re only recourse otherwise would be to move to Somalia.!!!!!
Even marauder knows this, that is probably why he has never complained about their existence. He knows you’re stuck with our court. By law. Y’all don’t like law.
We could begin with the border. You do not like the law that says they need to stay the hell out. But that is the law.
3 edits
@AverageJoe1 saidSo you are WAY ok with states RIGGING the elections by VISCIOUS gerrymandering SPECIFICALLY to cut democrat voters in a given district.
Democrats should be careful what they wish for. They have brought this issue to Scotus, and Scotus has ruled against them. So now the southern states, seeing that it is possible to make everything fair, which the Democrats did not want to do, are going to make everything fair. We simply want to change everything from crazy to normal.
It is common sense. There is no ...[text shortened]... o it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/30/states-redistricting-maps-voting-rights-act
REAL GREAT DEMOCRATIC TACTIC. FK VOTERS, WE WANT ONLY REPUB ASSSHOLES TO WIN ALWAYS.
Do you really think we are so stupid we can't see what is going on right in front of us and DEMS are fighting back like in California and the rest of the blue states are likewise responding, remember that word RESPONDING to the sick ass tactics of your dictator seeking party, fall over and play dead to Trump, yep a real way to build a democracy.
And OF COURSE the rightwingnuts on SCOTUS agrees, YEP we ONLY want REPUBS to win. REAL FKING GREAT DEMOCRAT TACTIC.
So they are saying in effect, WE DON"T NEED NO STINKING DEMOCRACY, WE WANT A DICTATOR AND WE HAVE ONE WAITING.
Yeah, REALLY what democrats ''WISH'' for. FKING HYPOCRITE
@AverageJoe1 saidWe don't disagree about SCOTUS. Unelected bureaucrats.
Oh lord. NOW this one widens the goal posts. Hell I have forgotten the issue.
He questions the nature, the veraciy? of the judges. Let me help him. Y’all already know this.
They are lawfully appointed and confirmed under the laws of the United States of America constitution. The constitution. This ties to the Constitution. That is the legal process, whet ...[text shortened]... h the border. You do not like the law that says they need to stay the hell out. But that is the law.
Republicans are using the opportunity to cancel elections so they can do even more gerrymandering. We as citizens should reject them and their terrible ideas.
@sonhouse saidAgain, your first sentence.....States are viciously rigging elections by gerrymandering.....
So you are WAY ok with states RIGGING the elections by VISCIOUS gerrymandering SPECIFICALLY to cut democrat voters in a given district.
REAL GREAT DEMOCRATIC TACTIC. FK VOTERS, WE WANT ONLY REPUB ASSSHOLES TO WIN ALWAYS.
Do you really think we are so stupid we can't see what is going on right in front of us and DEMS are fighting back like in California and the rest of the ...[text shortened]... NT A DICTATOR AND WE HAVE ONE WAITING.
Yeah, REALLY what democrats ''WISH'' for. FKING HYPOCRITE
You can write 100 posts,,,( I always wonder your end-game, it hardly changes minds...) but there are nine smart guys who have looked at the constitution, and, and they......and....oh, never mind.
@wildgrass saidYou can say unelected bureaucrats, you can say some are too old, some are too young, one drank in high school,,,,,,,bur fact remains,,,,,,,,try constitutionally appointed qualified jurors of the constitution. You need t get a sign!!!!
We don't disagree about SCOTUS. Unelected bureaucrats.
Republicans are using the opportunity to cancel elections so they can do even more gerrymandering. We as citizens should reject them and their terrible ideas.
Hey, what if someone gets obese, and govt helathcare pays for the problems caused by his choice to become fat??
I say we should not pay for his choices, he needs to figure it out. Do you think we should pay $$$ for his healthcare? What if a homosexual says to stay out of his bedroom, and we do....THEN, he gets AIDS and comes knocking on the Fed Govt door for healthcare. Should we pay for his healthcare, when he made that choice? Of course not, but I bet you think we should.
So, we go to SCOTUS, and (assuming a constitutional issue applies) how do you think they should rule? How bout sex changes? Crazy, huh. So which of us is common sense oriented???
@no1marauder saidRace should never play a part in voting or political office. The best people should serve, regardless of race.
"Normal" like the good Ole days when the Southern States didn't have any of those uppity Blacks representing them in Congress.
1 edit
@Mott-The-Hoople saidRemarkable that not a single Black person from the South was qualified to serve in Congress from 1901 to 1965 until after the Voting Rights Act was passed.
Race should never play a part in voting or political office. The best people should serve, regardless of race.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidTotally agree, this way we can get more Hegseth's and Bondi's and Patel's running things. It's gonna be awesome!
Race should never play a part in voting or political office. The best people should serve, regardless of race.