|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 30, 2020, 03:40:37 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, Gass3268, Virginiá)
  North Carolina GOP (The Gift That Keeps On Giving): NCGOP Chair Indicted (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: North Carolina GOP (The Gift That Keeps On Giving): NCGOP Chair Indicted  (Read 21847 times)
Senator tack50 (Lab-Lincoln)
tack50
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,338
Spain


« on: December 19, 2018, 01:05:23 pm »

I like how every commenter after my post glazes over the fact I posted that North Carolina and other southern states are required by the federal government to create supermajority Democrat districts specifically to elect African-American candidates to Congress, and this in turn makes other districts that surround these districts more Republican. If you do not remove that requirement, that means Democrats in the rest of the state's districts would always be fighting uphill.

it has never been required for a super majority district anyway. I think by now outside the deep south a 45% AA district is enough according to some court rulings. In a place like NC a 40% AA district would reliably elect african americans as they would form like 4/5 the primary vote for D's and then the few liberal whites which is greater than Ms liberal whites would elect a black D.

Anyway Im no fan of the VRA required districts and they clearly aren't required anymore outside a few deep south states(see MS LA AL) as we saw people like Lauren underwood and Joe Nuguese get elected in like Purple heart% black districts.

That makes them supermajority Democrat districts, which mean every district that surrounds it is more likely to elect a Republican. What's a gerrymander again?

Drawing districts specifically to elect African-Americans to Congress are by fact gerrymanders because you're taking all the Democrats and putting them in one area. In addition to being disgustingly segregationist, the Voting Rights Act requires them otherwise all the districts get thrown out, and yet some commentators are talking about gerrymandering as the reason Democrats lose while defending the existence of these districts. It's the height of bullsh**t.

I will not take any anti-gerrymandering post or comment by anyone seriously until they say they are for stopping this requirement on drawing districts, period, otherwise you're a walking contradiction. If that requirement was removed, this would IMPROVE Democrats' chances on getting more seats, so you cannot accuse me of supporting this for partisan reasons. So why don't Democrats support this other than they don't have the balls to stand up to the Black Caucus?

Why would anyone Think it important to protect black political representation in the South. You've truly stumbled upon a Deep mystery here and the only explanation is a political Conspiracy run by blacks and, eh, globalists.

Wouldn't blacks (who vote 90%+ democratic) prefer say, 2 or 3 white democrats who agree with their views over one black democrat though?

Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines