Apparently the GOP in Texas, on a state level, pushed for (and achieved) a redistricting of the state before the Nov 2nd election. The Dems lost out big during the election (obviously on the national level, but also on a state level) and are saying that the Republicans are guilty of blatant gerrymandering while the Republicans, not surprisingly, deny this and say that the new redisdricting allows for better representation.
Anyone know more about this? I'd like to hear some thoughts/responses about this.
__________________________________ "I wouldn't be so cynical if you weren't so #@&%ing stupid." - Bill Maher
Just sour grapes and whining by the Texas Democrats because they didn't want to change anything after the 2000 census. They had already lost badly within the state legislature.
Isn't Texas full of Republicans? No amount of redrawing electoral boundaries is gonna make Texas Democrat. Unless you do what I suggest, and move there with a bunch of your buddies and start talking to your neighbors.
Well, there are a few of them thar Liberal types around Austin, and they do actually (oddly) cross into the evangelical* (miasma(?)) on occasion (rarely, most likely, I'll admit), but I can't say how far they're power extends.
*my best friend turns out to be one -- it's a side that I don't recall coming across during our pyromaniac/stoner youth. But he still likes margaritas, so I let it pass
Posts: 2685 | Location: beyond the pale | Registered: January 31, 2003
quote:Originally posted by Pauline: Isn't Texas full of Republicans? No amount of redrawing electoral boundaries is gonna make Texas Democrat. Unless you do what I suggest, and move there with a bunch of your buddies and start talking to your neighbors.
Well, there are about a billion 1st and 2nd generation Mexicans in Texas, not to mention the large minority contingent of varying degrees. Minorities tend to vote Democrat, so this is why some people are pissed off.
__________________________________ "I wouldn't be so cynical if you weren't so #@&%ing stupid." - Bill Maher
in my electorate, we have a high level of relatively recent arrivals who are socially conservative, but perhaps not so politically conservative (we are a safe labor seat)
Posts: 9999 | Location: rockdale | Registered: September 10, 2003
I live in Austin currently. The map was clearly Gerry-mandered. Austin doesn't even have a district centered around it. It's divvied up into 4 districts that cut up the center of the city. One of the districts runs to Mexico (to concentrate the Democrats) and another stretches to the Houston suburbs to critically dilute the Democrats in that district. It's clearly a gross example of Gerry-mandering, but so far it's passed judicial muster. Unfortunately, that muster is due to the fact that only Bush-appointed courts have overseen this case thus far......
Yup. Been payin' attention to it for about two years now. It's got to go, and hopefully we'll figure out a way. My pref would be to fix district lines and allocate seats in the legislature the same way that seats in the federal House are allocated: by population of the district rather than by a fixed number of reps per district. Now we (and the people of Texas, more specifically) have to figure out a way to make it happen.
Texas resident here. I've looked over the voter stats from the Secretary of State's website. Overwhelming majority of districts voted Republican, but what I found interesting was the ones which voted Democrat, tended to do so in very large numbers and border Mexico or the Gulf. I guess they see the results of Bush's Homeland Security policies more clearly than yokels living out on a ranch. The races tended to be closer in the large metro areas also.
My biggest fear of course, is OBL motivating terrorists to respond to the RED states by attacking the biggest RED city and capital of the American oil industry, Houston, my hometown.
"_ this side to go white man program" - the babelizer
quote:Originally posted by madevilbeats:I guess they see the results of Bush's Homeland Security policies more clearly than yokels living out on a ranch.
A lot of people that live outside the major metropolitan areas like the Bush social conservative thing (or what I like to call the Policy of We Hate How You Live and Want to Make it Illegal), Michigan for example only went to Kerry because of Detroit, most other counties voted Bush.
-- No restraint, no fear
Posts: 5381 | Location: TPA in the FLA | Registered: February 05, 2003
quote: A lot of people that live outside the major metropolitan areas like the Bush social conservative thing...
I agree and I think part of this is the communication methods in rural areas. You are more likely to get news from cable TV and at church than a major newspaper or the Internet, which means you're news may be lopsided. Mostly I find the fact that so many border areas, whether water or national, voted against Bush. I don't think people are stupid at all just because they live in rural areas but, really, what do they have to be afraid of compared to people who live in large cities? Bush must seem like he's doing his job to these people, and all it takes is putting up a fence around the utility stations. Re-election of the Quick Fix president is inevitable as a result. When you are content with the local solution you don't inquire further to see if it's implemented everywhere properly.
quote:what I like to call the Policy of We Hate How You Live and Want to Make it Illegal
And By the Way We Don't Give a Shit About Your Personal Safety Either So Go Asplode Already You Gay Fagets
"_ this side to go white man program" - the babelizer
The Economist has devoted quite a lot of ink to this issue over the last year or so. They've written about it at least three or four times and in editorials about the state of US democracy have come back to it as well. Seems like a classic case of puttting the foxes in charge of designing the henhouse. And Texas is far from the only state where it's happening. But who would agree to give up the power, once in office?
---------------------- The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake.
