Democrat Let's Cat out of Bag on VRA

[Torie]

Query, is this matter of a minority being able to elect a candidate of their "choice," mean a candidate whom 50% + 1 support of their particular minority, or some lower percentage?  If 45% of Hispanics prefer a Pub, and 55% a Dem somewhere, does that mean a Pub district is "bad" for such a district because it will elect a candidate "only" supported by 45% of Hispanics, even if the CD has a majority of CVAP Hispanics?

This is the fundamental flaw in the VRA in my opinion. Absent rather extreme cases, things rapidly move into shades of grey. Yet another reason to dump the VRA. Outside the black zone in certain places, things are hardly black v white, with almost no twilight zone.

[Torie]

For the VRA to apply there must be racially polarized voting. A statistically significant difference must exist between a minority population and the white majority. Without that difference the choice of the voters is presumably race neutral. If there is a difference then one should be able to identify in an election the candidate of choice of the minority voters.

So assuming racial differences in voting, which of course exists almost everywhere, candidate of "choice" means 50% plus 1 of the minority in question. And if, say, a majority of Hispanics somewhere, someday, support Pubs, then the world turns upside down. Wonderful!