ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 4th January 2019, 03:42 PM   #1
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NeverLand
Posts: 15,025
SCOTUS on course to protect gerrymandering from legal challenges

Quote:
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to consider protecting politically gerrymandered voting districts from legal challenges in a case that could bolster Republican candidates and mark a show of force from the court’s new conservative majority.

The justices will review separate lower court decisions that said North Carolina’s Republican-drawn congressional map and a Democratic-drawn congressional district in Maryland are so partisan they violate the Constitution. The court will hear arguments in March and rule by June.

The court has never struck down a map as too partisan. But it also hasn’t explicitly barred challenges, mostly because Justice Anthony Kennedy refused to rule them out. Kennedy’s retirement in 2018 -- and replacement by Justice Brett Kavanaugh -- means the court may now have the five votes needed to say that courts lack power to consider partisan gerrymandering cases.
Linky.

Of course, they (Roberts) could still punt, like they did on the last gerrymandering cases.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 04:42 PM   #2
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,374
"....that courts lack power to consider partisan gerrymandering cases." ???? Do they mean Federal courts? Or is it a 'separation of powers' thing, that courts can't get involved in the internal mechanisms of a congress? Because i've always figured SCOTUS can ajudge anything.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 04:52 PM   #3
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 23,052
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
"....that courts lack power to consider partisan gerrymandering cases." ???? Do they mean Federal courts? Or is it a 'separation of powers' thing, that courts can't get involved in the internal mechanisms of a congress? Because i've always figured SCOTUS can ajudge anything.

They can judge anything they decide they want to judge.

How is anyone going to appeal that decision?
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 05:00 PM   #4
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
They can judge anything they decide they want to judge.



How is anyone going to appeal that decision?
The court has ruled from time to time that the legislature is the proper authority to decide a certain question.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 05:12 PM   #5
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 26,918
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The court has ruled from time to time that the legislature is the proper authority to decide a certain question.


That argument holds weight when the legislature actually reflects the will of the majority of the people. But these cases make the point that a gerrymandered district is intended to thwart that very will. If the Supreme Court punts on this one, the US is essentially ******.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 06:26 PM   #6
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 23,052
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The court has ruled from time to time that the legislature is the proper authority to decide a certain question.

True. but irrelevant.

They could just as easily at some future time rule that they do have jurisdiction over the exact same question.

Like I said, how is anyone going to appeal that decision?
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 06:47 PM   #7
RolandRat
Thinker
 
RolandRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 199
How do you guys allow this to happen? Your political system is so openly corrupt, and has such influence on your courts, that third world dictatorships look on in admiration.

Why don't you have an independent body that decides things such as voter boundaries, voter registration rules and whatnot?
RolandRat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 07:41 PM   #8
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,602
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
How do you guys allow this to happen? Your political system is so openly corrupt, and has such influence on your courts, that third world dictatorships look on in admiration.

Why don't you have an independent body that decides things such as voter boundaries, voter registration rules and whatnot?
The short version? What was a huge improvement in the 18th century is backwards today, but we've got our dicks in so many potatoes that sensible people prefer reliable corruption to a destabilizing revolution.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 07:47 PM   #9
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
How do you guys allow this to happen? Your political system is so openly corrupt, and has such influence on your courts, that third world dictatorships look on in admiration.

Why don't you have an independent body that decides things such as voter boundaries, voter registration rules and whatnot?
I have been informed by right-wing USAian members of this forum that "independent bodies" are impossible, because no one can ever be non partisan. It's supposedly some sort of law of nature.

So therefore, gerrymandering is awesome, or something.
__________________
Cracking eggs and shooting children in the head is the exact same thing.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 08:29 PM   #10
cmikes
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 460
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
I have been informed by right-wing USAian members of this forum that "independent bodies" are impossible, because no one can ever be non partisan. It's supposedly some sort of law of nature.

So therefore, gerrymandering is awesome, or something.

That's the whole point of the American system of government, the Founders realized that men were not angels and couldn't be trusted to put aside their own interests which is why separation of powers is such a big deal in the Constitution.

Originally Posted by The Federalist #51
If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.
Federalist #51

Contrast that with more the more Utopian socialist ideal that the tiny ruling elite in charge of society can put aside their own interests and rule benevolently.

On the thread topic, my solution would be to balance the number of Republicans and Democrats on whatever body the state legislatures empower to set district lines. And maybe have a single extra member of the party currently in charge to break ties and prevent complete deadlocks. With the sides mostly evenly matched, compromise would be much more simple and hopefully any real attempts at freezing the other party out could be highlighted and fought against.
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 08:42 PM   #11
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,980
Originally Posted by RolandRat View Post
How do you guys allow this to happen?
Each state has the authority to make its own laws about how they choose members for the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. If there is a legal coup in any state then nobody else can do anything about it.

The laws should be uniform across the US but that would mean changing the constitution to give congress the authority to make the laws and no state is going to agree to give up any power to the congress.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 08:52 PM   #12
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
That's the whole point of the American system of government, the Founders realized that men were not angels and couldn't be trusted to put aside their own interests which is why separation of powers is such a big deal in the Constitution.
Has is ever occured to you that "the founders" were not infallible? That they may have gotten some things wrong?

Seriously, the way some of you seem to worship them as some sort of godlike beings is just weird.
__________________
Cracking eggs and shooting children in the head is the exact same thing.

Last edited by Lambchops; 4th January 2019 at 08:54 PM.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 08:59 PM   #13
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 47,780
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Each state has the authority to make its own laws about how they choose members for the House of Representatives and the Electoral College. If there is a legal coup in any state then nobody else can do anything about it.

The laws should be uniform across the US but that would mean changing the constitution to give congress the authority to make the laws and no state is going to agree to give up any power to the congress.
It's actually happened before:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorr_Rebellion
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 09:57 PM   #14
cmikes
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 460
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
Has is ever occured to you that "the founders" were not infallible? That they may have gotten some things wrong?

Seriously, the way some of you seem to worship them as some sort of godlike beings is just weird.

Of course the Founders weren't infallible. Again, you're missing the entire point. They obviously included themselves as men in the above quote, hence the separation of powers included in the Constitution. Also, there are plenty of things that they were wrong about, which is why it's possible to amend the Constitution. It's been amended 27 times and there's always the possibility of it being amended even more.

Really, just the simple fact that the anti-slavery Founders weren't prepared to go to the mat to free the slaves in the original Constitution as first proposed rather than having to wait for the 13th shows that they weren't infallible but the amendment process acknowledges that they themselves realized that they weren't infallible.
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 10:36 PM   #15
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,980
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
It's actually happened before:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorr_Rebellion
Yep. Only the state residents can do anything about it and probably not legally.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th January 2019, 05:42 PM   #16
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 10,799
As long as Americans continue to allow partisan gerrymandering of electoral boundaries, and not have a universal system of proportional representation for its Federal elections, the United States will continue to be what it is now... a first-world country with a third-world electoral system, a deeply flawed democracy and a laughing stock the world over.
__________________
#THEYAREUS “Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.” - Andrew Cummins
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 07:22 AM   #17
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,374
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
I have been informed by right-wing USAian members of this forum that "independent bodies" are impossible, because no one can ever be non partisan. It's supposedly some sort of law of nature.

So therefore, gerrymandering is awesome, or something.
The case includes cases from both sides of the aisle. Here in California, it's the Dems who get to do the Gerrymandering. And what with the Dem majority in Congress, the power of the evil conservatives through gerrymandering shows. Riiight. Because all of us here at ISF know them Repuglickers are cheating with THEIR gerrymandering, but us Civil Rights Aware Dems only do it to preserve civil rights, Yup. Sure.

I don't think there is a partisan way for the SCOTUS to rule. Except that Gerrymandering preserves the seat of thos in power, which principle crosses party lines. So for the sake of preserving our Winners Stay In Power system, they will leave gerrymandering as is. Because it was the will of the people put them into those seats, it's OK to stack the deck to keep them in their seats. Non-partisanly.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 09:22 AM   #18
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,446
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
Contrast that with more the more Utopian socialist ideal that the tiny ruling elite in charge of society can put aside their own interests and rule benevolently.
There may be some people who think that, but that is hardly a Utopian Socialist principle.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 12:12 PM   #19
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by cmikes View Post
On the thread topic, my solution would be to balance the number of Republicans and Democrats on whatever body the state legislatures empower to set district lines. And maybe have a single extra member of the party currently in charge to break ties and prevent complete deadlocks. With the sides mostly evenly matched, compromise would be much more simple and hopefully any real attempts at freezing the other party out could be highlighted and fought against.
I don't see how your solution would stop the same type of gerrymandering that occurs today.

Party wins an election so they get the extra seat. They propose a highly gerrymandered map and break the tie with their extra vote. They win all future elections because of the highly gerrymandered map and thus always have an extra vote to ensure they keep their highly gerrymandered map.

Right now attempts to freeze the other party out occur and are highlighted and fought against, but the way the system is setup it doesn't matter. This is literally no different.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 01:25 PM   #20
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 47,780
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 02:16 PM   #21
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.
Voting districts that change randomly every two years is probably the stupidest solution yet proposed.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 02:45 PM   #22
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Voting districts that change randomly every two years is probably the stupidest solution yet proposed.
Which proposed solution in this thread is better?
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 02:52 PM   #23
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Which proposed solution in this thread is better?
I'm sorry; are you actually defending random voting districts every two years?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 03:23 PM   #24
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 39,872
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
As long as Americans continue to allow partisan gerrymandering of electoral boundaries, and not have a universal system of proportional representation for its Federal elections, the United States will continue to be what it is now... a first-world country with a third-world electoral system, a deeply flawed democracy and a laughing stock the world over.
It's gone past the laughing stage
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 05:07 PM   #25
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 23,052
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.

I don't think they should be changed that often, although I could see an argument for prior to every Presidential election, and I'm not too sure about randomly.

Computer analysis today is more than capable of assigning the most compact of equally populated districts without regard to political affiliation.

I'd be quite in favor of that.
__________________
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 06:52 PM   #26
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sorry; are you actually defending random voting districts every two years?
No. I asked you a simple question. Which proposed solution in this thread is better?
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th January 2019, 07:45 PM   #27
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 10,799
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
I have been informed by right-wing USAian members of this forum that "independent bodies" are impossible, because no one can ever be non partisan. It's supposedly some sort of law of nature.

So therefore, gerrymandering is awesome, or something.
I find it remarkable, and frankly, unbelievable that other counties in the world seem to have no trouble finding enough non-partisan, fair minded people to serve on electoral committees ensuring that gerrymandering does not take place, yet star-spangled, awesome 'Merica seems to be completely incapable of this.

There must surely be enough people in the USA who have utterly no interest in politics whatsoever, but who would be capable of drawing fair electoral maps, a job requiring mathematics and statistics skills, in much the same way that a draughtsman working for a car maker could have no interest in cars.

Also, a set of rules could be made as to how counties and districts can be divided and combined. For example, some rules might state that;

1. Two districts being combined must share a common border
2. Three districts being combined must each share two common borders with the other two districts (to stop "chaining")
3. The boundaries dividing a district into two or more districts must follow existing roads tracks and the resulting areas must be the same size as each other ± 15%


ETA: Additional rules which are similar to ones we have in this country

4. Each electorate must contain 1/435th of the total number of enrolled voters nationally (or 1/435th of the national population), with a variation of 20%. This ensures that no "stacking" can take place, where you end up with, say, five electorates with a similar number of voters to one other electorate.

5. The electoral committee is not permitted to have any access to statistical information on how people in the various electorates voted. Boundaries must be drawn purely on the basis of population and voter number information.
__________________
#THEYAREUS “Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.” - Andrew Cummins

Last edited by smartcooky; 6th January 2019 at 08:49 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 02:44 AM   #28
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,980
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.
Locally a redistribution is triggered whenever a certain number of seats fall outside of population tolerance.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 10:16 AM   #29
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 20,353
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.
Computers yes, random no. Develop an algorithm to put the same number of voters in each district while minimizing the length of district boundaries.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 10:33 AM   #30
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Use computers to draw the district boundaries randomly for each election.
Quote:
Computers yes, random no. Develop an algorithm to put the same number of voters in each district while minimizing the length of district boundaries.
I think random is fine, The problem with TM's proposal is is the "for each election". The current is every 10 years, it's what the census is all about. I think a ten year cycle would be more stable.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 10:42 AM   #31
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
No. I asked you a simple question. Which proposed solution in this thread is better?
My mistake; I thought it was a rhetorical question. If you're not defending random redistricting every two years, then what's the purpose of the question? Are you asking how superlatives work, and what "the stupidest" means in this context? If so, that's easy: The answer is "All of them, and the status quo too."

HTH. HAND!
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 10:44 AM   #32
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 16,547
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Computers yes, random no. Develop an algorithm to put the same number of voters in each district while minimizing the length of district boundaries.
The Shortest Split Line Algorithm. It really is the perfect solution.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 11:37 AM   #33
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,969
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My mistake; I thought it was a rhetorical question. If you're not defending random redistricting every two years, then what's the purpose of the question? Are you asking how superlatives work, and what "the stupidest" means in this context? If so, that's easy: The answer is "All of them, and the status quo too."

HTH. HAND!
Because there was at most 1 or 2 other suggestions at the time of your post, none of which actually solved the problem of gerrymandering, which by most standards would not make them bette. But I thought I'd let you choose specifically which other post you thought better so you could explain.

But I see now you only seem to be posting to be an evasive dick so I'll just ignore you.

Thanks for the help!
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 12:25 PM   #34
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Because there was at most 1 or 2 other suggestions at the time of your post, none of which actually solved the problem of gerrymandering, which by most standards would not make them bette. But I thought I'd let you choose specifically which other post you thought better so you could explain.
I count at least two suggestions in the thread to that point, that would solve the problem of gerrymandering. Not only that, but replacing a problem with another worse problem is stupid, even if none of the other suggestions solve the problem either. In that case, the status quo is also better than the other thing.

I'm not trying to be an evasive dick. I'm an IT troubleshooter by trade. Usually when a user asks a question, it's important to get a better understanding of what the user is trying to do, before answering the questions. Much of the time, the issue the user is trying to solve is quite different from the issue the question seems to present.

I apologize if this rubbed you the wrong way. Given that there had been cromulent solutions proposed in this thread, what was the point of your question?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2019, 02:51 PM   #35
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 43,346
The ultimate solution to the Gerrymanderins problem is political,not legal.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2019, 07:02 AM   #36
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 79,588
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm sorry; are you actually defending random voting districts every two years?
What's wrong with the idea?

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My mistake; I thought it was a rhetorical question. If you're not defending random redistricting every two years, then what's the purpose of the question? Are you asking how superlatives work, and what "the stupidest" means in this context? If so, that's easy: The answer is "All of them, and the status quo too."

HTH. HAND!
Sounds like you're unable to actually explain what's wrong with it, and are trying to change the subject.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2019, 09:26 AM   #37
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 45,466
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
The ultimate solution to the Gerrymanderins problem is political,not legal.
False dichotomy. SCOTUS deals with politics all the time.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2019, 10:51 AM   #38
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
What's wrong with the idea?
The cost of redrawing district lines every two years, for one thing.

The effect of decoupling representatives from the citizens they're supposed to represent, for another.

Random probably has unintended consequences, too. It often does.

Quote:
Sounds like you're unable to actually explain what's wrong with it, and are trying to change the subject.
Could be worse: TM is apparently unable to actually explain what's good about it, and simply abandoned the thread rather than continue to participate in the discussion.

Last edited by theprestige; 9th January 2019 at 10:54 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2019, 10:57 AM   #39
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 16,547
"Politicians redrawing voting districts specifically and un-apologetically to clump their own voters together so that the final results are not representative of the population as a whole is a bad thing."

Are there actually people on the other side of that statement?
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2019, 11:00 AM   #40
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,576
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
"Politicians redrawing voting districts specifically and un-apologetically to clump their own voters together so that the final results are not representative of the population as a whole is a bad thing."

Are there actually people on the other side of that statement?
Would you actually engage with them about their ideas if you found one?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.