|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 24, 2020, 04:18:21 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]
Author Topic: North Carolina GOP (The Gift That Keeps On Giving): NCGOP Chair Indicted  (Read 22528 times)
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« on: December 05, 2018, 03:58:23 pm »

As a person born in North Carolina and lived there til I was 30, the hand-wringing over North Carolina Republicans by the Democrats, a party that ran the state pretty much consecutively from the end of Reconstruction 130 or so years onward, is amusing. It's one corrupt party telling the other party "you're corrupt". Sorry, I actually took a class on North Carolina history.

"We are out of power now, let's go find religion and be for no gerrymandering and other things in elections to ensure wins that we did for more than a century."

For the record as a person that used to live G.K. Butterfield's district, I'll support anti-gerrymandering laws that ban districts purposefully drawn for demographic reasons, which is currently required for North Carolina by federal law. Do Democrats not realize that districts like the 1st which are used to elect African-Americans make them weaker everywhere else? Also, what a gerrymander is needs to be absolutely defined, because I've seen the term used in conflicting circumstances by different commentators to further their respective arguments.

Luckily the Democrats have a large NCSC majority now and can clean up the mess.

More like go to war. Republican majorities rather then supermajorities, a Dem gov, and Dem courts mean that this is not going to be resolved without a fierce fight.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2018, 12:24:02 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.

Because you fail to understand the complexity of the VRA. Districts can be anywhere from <40% AA to >56% AA depending on the circumstances. The AA candidate just needs to confidently win both the primary and the general, which varies by location. The districts also need to be 'realistically' compact, so you cannot spiral across a state just to collect AA voters like Pub gerrymanders love to. You also in most cases can't have a district with a super-majority AA voters, since that counts as racial packing, so what Pubs love to do is stick legislative districts full of AAs and try to make every other voter a white lib.

Finally, the VRA tends to benefit Southern Dems in ever case except dem trifectas, even though it hurts Midwestern dems. Under Pub Gerrys, the VRA forces dem seats, giving dems a floor they wouldn't normally have. For example, One could easily draw 4-0, 6-0, 7-0, 13-3, and 10-2 Pub maps in MS, AL, SC, GA, and NC respectively. In fair maps, the white libs are separated from AA's they would be paired with under Pub Manders to create more dem seats  - check my Sig for example of things like a 5-1-1 SC and AL, 8-5-1 GA, and 7-5-1 NC - all maps which generally match the states PVI. Only if Dems have full control over redistricting does the VRA harm their efforts in creating as many Dem seats as possible.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2019, 11:28:29 pm »

Laughs. Lived in North Carolina all my life up until 2012. Democrats ran the state continuously for more or less 130 years essentially unchallenged.
This sounds a lot like the zany claim that "Democrats were the party of slavery". Yes, in the 1860s. That was a long time ago.

The GOP has not realised that in today's world, politics is about much more than money. It undergirds every aspect of ours lives, from family to consumption to sexuality. Attacking the process of fair elections is denying the right to a fair society, which is the core belief in the US as a country. The anger will never subside.


That there were shocking shenanigans in the 1950s in North Carolina, a time of white male authority when a large chunk of the population was disenfranchised, is immaterial to today's world and does not justify anyone's actions.

The actions I'm describing were from the 1990s and 2000s where the Democrats dominated affairs on a state level. I've not even touched the unique version of straight ticket voting the state at least used to have, not sure if they still do, that the Democrats pushed through (you can vote straight ticket for everything but president, that way if you hated the national Democratic Party as a lot of N.C. Democrats at least used to, you could vote R for president and D for everything else), or how white Democrat vs. black Democrat politics work in smaller voting districts (e.g. municipal level). This wasn't the 1950s, this was the 2000s.

North Carolina Democrats raising hell about the Republican actions in the state is an alcoholic suddenly finding religion and is in favor of throwing the book at anyone that has a sip of wine. I was a resident of the state of North Carolina for 30 years of my life, lived in Beaufort, New Bern, Havelock, Raleigh during my time in college, Rocky Mount, took classes in North Carolina history, was actually awake for them, and you're a resident of Ireland per your avatar. Unless you're lying about where you're from, I think I know more about the state politically than you, with all due respect.

State Democrats suddenly throwing a fit about gerrymandering, dear God, if there was ever a clearer case of the pot calling the kettle black. "Racial gerrymandering" - go look at the electoral map of eastern North Carolina over the past 30 years. The 1st and 3rd districts of the '90s were outright disasters and the guy that drew it should be locked in jail for having his only eye being toward intentionally segregating voters away from one another based on racial demographics. And you know who drew that map? A Democrat, because they controlled the State House continuously from 1899 to 2010 for all but a handful of years. Democrats can tell me they have changed when they start holding resolutions for their state party going back and censuring the actions of their corrupt members of the past. Until then, don't sit and try and tell me they're any better than the North Carolina GOP and act holier than thou. I'm not sitting here and telling you the North Carolina GOP are intelligent and saints, I'm telling you the Democrats are no better than them. They're a bunch of Bev Perdues, Easleys, and Holden Thorps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina%27s_congressional_districts#/media/File:United_States_Congressional_Districts_in_North_Carolina,_1993_%E2%80%93_1998.tif

Just looking at this 1990s CD map, how was this allowed? I know the 12th was struck down, but the 3rd and 6th districts here are definitely not contiguous. Even the racists of Jim Crow drew contiguous districts.

Around 1990, there was a court decision that mandated Southern states to draw districts to ensure that blacks would be elected to more legislative offices.  IIRC, the Court ruled that these districts had to be 65% black in order to pass muster.  These districts, such as the old NC-12, actually "changed lanes" at some points.  A FL district literally combined black neighborhoods in Jacksonville, Orlando, and Ocala/Gainesville, held together by thin lines.  Another black district went from PART of Fort Pierce, through mostly inland farmland, south to black communities in Palm Beach and Broward Counties.  LA elected two (2) black Democrats in 1992 due to a non-NOLA district that stretched out in a similar manner.

These districts were drawn with the full support of black Democrats at the time.  Black Democrats joined with Republicans to bring this about.  I'm sure that many regret this, as it helped to usher in the end of black-working class white coalitions that elected many Congressional Southern Democrats and Southern Democratic state legislators, but they were all for it back then.

Yes, when VRA districts first came into existance they were opposed by most of the Southern Dems. In part because AA districts necessitated packing your voters, and in part because Southern Dems did't want to see tons of AA representation. This was partially due to racism, partially due to the lack of loyalty AA legislators would have to White Dem state governments, and part because AA legislators were cut from a different cloth ideologically than their white southern democratic partners. So when VRA districts became a thing, you saw the 'super-AA seats' where AA voters were packed into 1 to 2 seats a state, and then the rest were reapportioned in a way to produce seats that could only elect white democrats (too AA for a white R, too white for a AA dem).

Litigation like Shaw v Reno began the slow process of establishing the guidelines for racial packing and cracking we follow today: that the circumstances differ based on a states historical turnout, how many white dems are in the seat alongside AAs, how partisan and lockstep are the republican whites, and what is the trajectory of AA population in the region. But until that point arrived, you saw AAs team up with republicans in the minority from time to time to get back at their White Dem allies and create more AA seats. Or you got court cases establishing what can and cannot be connected to produce and AA seat. But the southern white dems still held this worldview that AAs can be parceled out in a way to prevent any AA and republican legislators - look at Arkansas. The legislature could have drawn one Obama district easily, but that seat would have elected an AA. So they drew three seats that would have elected white dems under the old alliance, but now would easily be safe republican. Its only recently (this decade), with the death of the Southern White Democrat and his migration to the republican party that democrats in the south start fully working with AAs districtwise, in part because the regions democratic parties now look more like those in other parts of the nation rather then legacy products of the 1970s.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2019, 02:41:44 pm »

Laughs. Lived in North Carolina all my life up until 2012. Democrats ran the state continuously for more or less 130 years essentially unchallenged.
This sounds a lot like the zany claim that "Democrats were the party of slavery". Yes, in the 1860s. That was a long time ago.

The GOP has not realised that in today's world, politics is about much more than money. It undergirds every aspect of ours lives, from family to consumption to sexuality. Attacking the process of fair elections is denying the right to a fair society, which is the core belief in the US as a country. The anger will never subside.


That there were shocking shenanigans in the 1950s in North Carolina, a time of white male authority when a large chunk of the population was disenfranchised, is immaterial to today's world and does not justify anyone's actions.

The actions I'm describing were from the 1990s and 2000s where the Democrats dominated affairs on a state level. I've not even touched the unique version of straight ticket voting the state at least used to have, not sure if they still do, that the Democrats pushed through (you can vote straight ticket for everything but president, that way if you hated the national Democratic Party as a lot of N.C. Democrats at least used to, you could vote R for president and D for everything else), or how white Democrat vs. black Democrat politics work in smaller voting districts (e.g. municipal level). This wasn't the 1950s, this was the 2000s.

North Carolina Democrats raising hell about the Republican actions in the state is an alcoholic suddenly finding religion and is in favor of throwing the book at anyone that has a sip of wine. I was a resident of the state of North Carolina for 30 years of my life, lived in Beaufort, New Bern, Havelock, Raleigh during my time in college, Rocky Mount, took classes in North Carolina history, was actually awake for them, and you're a resident of Ireland per your avatar. Unless you're lying about where you're from, I think I know more about the state politically than you, with all due respect.

State Democrats suddenly throwing a fit about gerrymandering, dear God, if there was ever a clearer case of the pot calling the kettle black. "Racial gerrymandering" - go look at the electoral map of eastern North Carolina over the past 30 years. The 1st and 3rd districts of the '90s were outright disasters and the guy that drew it should be locked in jail for having his only eye being toward intentionally segregating voters away from one another based on racial demographics. And you know who drew that map? A Democrat, because they controlled the State House continuously from 1899 to 2010 for all but a handful of years. Democrats can tell me they have changed when they start holding resolutions for their state party going back and censuring the actions of their corrupt members of the past. Until then, don't sit and try and tell me they're any better than the North Carolina GOP and act holier than thou. I'm not sitting here and telling you the North Carolina GOP are intelligent and saints, I'm telling you the Democrats are no better than them. They're a bunch of Bev Perdues, Easleys, and Holden Thorps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina%27s_congressional_districts#/media/File:United_States_Congressional_Districts_in_North_Carolina,_1993_%E2%80%93_1998.tif

Just looking at this 1990s CD map, how was this allowed? I know the 12th was struck down, but the 3rd and 6th districts here are definitely not contiguous. Even the racists of Jim Crow drew contiguous districts.

Water and touch point contiguity.

The 6th district has the 12th cut right through it.  You cannot full get through the 6th from North to South without crossing the 12th. Same with the 3rd and 1st districts.  With these rules, you could draw checkerboard block districts that literally skip every other house.

See TX's map from the same period, they did do just that to protect their dems.

Generally these days if districts do touch point continuity or spidermanders like TX they get thrown out by the courts  for a host of other reasons unrelated to the partisan side of gerrymandering.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2019, 03:22:51 pm »

Laughs. Lived in North Carolina all my life up until 2012. Democrats ran the state continuously for more or less 130 years essentially unchallenged.
This sounds a lot like the zany claim that "Democrats were the party of slavery". Yes, in the 1860s. That was a long time ago.

Static parties is false yes, but party flip theory is also bullcrap. Especially in a state like NC. You can make a case that in some states, Segregationists went from being Democrats to Republicans over night like in say South Carolina, but not here.

North Carolina is a completely different kettle of fish. NC for one was a border state and one of the last to secede, it arguably only seceded because VA seceded and it was surrounded by secessionist territory. After the war, unlike the Deep South where Democrats would routinely get 80% or 90% of the vote, NC was much closer. The unionist mountain counties of the west voted Republican and many of the surrounding areas had much softer Democratic margins, similar to the piedmont regions of VA and other places where 50% margins for the GOP interchanged with 50% margins for the Democrats. The only solid part of NC was Eastern NC.

Yes there were two groups that did flip, African Americans gained the right to vote and became Democrats and the Jessecrats (led by Jesse Helms) flipped the Piedmont region to being solid Republican from being tied. Republicans also made gains in Charlotte and Raleigh metros creating the East West divide that defined the state's politics on the state level as late as the 2000s. But in the rest of the state and in terms of the Democratic establishment, their was no massive flip of parties or anything and the fact that the Republicans couldn't take and hold the legislature until 2010 is proof of that. It took the New Deal Democrats dying off to flip the state legislature.

Democrats very slowly declined in the rural areas and as state boiler said, the NC Democrats did what they had to do to cling to power. They saw what happened in 1964 and other elections where Goldwater caused GOP slates to win because of straight ticket voting. So they created the ballot he talked about which meant that people could vote Nixon, Reagan, Bush and still vote straight Democratic down ballot. This was was how Bush won NC by double digits and at the same time Easley won by almost the same margin. They resorted to gerrymandering, using black voters to prop up flailing white Democratic districts, at the expense of reducing minority representation in the state legislature and Congress. They used corruption on an extensive level to maintain power.

And yes Democrats had it out for vocational education as state boiler said. There was this sense that Democrats were beholden to the big three Universities and that if you weren't planning to go to a college they didn't give a crap about you. In the 2000s, Republicans were actually seen as the more reasonable ones on education. That didn't change until the budget cuts of the early 2010s pushed by the newly GOP state legislature.

If that tit for tat rule applied, can you imagine what the cheating, lying, bribing GOP would deserve next time the Dems take over? That alone should give you pause before defending the Dowlesses of the world.

That is already happening. The current excess of the GOP is motivated by a desire to get back at the Dems for their treatment of the GOP For 100 years. And once the Democrats return to power they will indeed do the same stuff they did before. There are no good guys in this state.

That is why my votes are strategic. You cannot trust either side to have complete control of this state.

I agree with you, up to a point though. I think the part you missed, in part because it is kinda going under the rader, is the transformation of the southern democratic parties. With the advent of race-line voting with Obama, and then the GOP gerrymanders of the 2010s, the Southern Democrats are dead. Those people who worshipped the ideology of power unquestioningly were replaced by caucuses forced to be majority black with hyper-liberal College seat dems and other minorities as supplemental. This cataclysmic event arguably brought southern democratic parties into line with the rest of the national democrats. Like, look at 2018. The only 'southern dem' who got on a significant major ticket were Bresden and Nelson, and that was because one lacked competition and the other was an incumbent. You had Abrams and Gillum, not Crist and Carter. And even as the nation gave the dems a big wave, rural southern white dems still lost their state legislative seats that they had somehow held in 2014. The places where these parties are growing similarly reflect this policy changes - they are all areas being fed by non-southerns migrating south like Atlanta, the Triangle, NOVA, and all the Texas cities.

I know you said that it feels like the criminal suddenly finding god..but well they kinda have if we look to what the VA dems are doing. And its because their repentance moment was the equivalent of losing an arm and a leg.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2019, 05:01:06 pm »
« Edited: July 15, 2019, 06:44:47 pm by Oryxslayer »

Laughs. Lived in North Carolina all my life up until 2012. Democrats ran the state continuously for more or less 130 years essentially unchallenged.
This sounds a lot like the zany claim that "Democrats were the party of slavery". Yes, in the 1860s. That was a long time ago.

Static parties is false yes, but party flip theory is also bullcrap. Especially in a state like NC. You can make a case that in some states, Segregationists went from being Democrats to Republicans over night like in say South Carolina, but not here.

North Carolina is a completely different kettle of fish. NC for one was a border state and one of the last to secede, it arguably only seceded because VA seceded and it was surrounded by secessionist territory. After the war, unlike the Deep South where Democrats would routinely get 80% or 90% of the vote, NC was much closer. The unionist mountain counties of the west voted Republican and many of the surrounding areas had much softer Democratic margins, similar to the piedmont regions of VA and other places where 50% margins for the GOP interchanged with 50% margins for the Democrats. The only solid part of NC was Eastern NC.

Yes there were two groups that did flip, African Americans gained the right to vote and became Democrats and the Jessecrats (led by Jesse Helms) flipped the Piedmont region to being solid Republican from being tied. Republicans also made gains in Charlotte and Raleigh metros creating the East West divide that defined the state's politics on the state level as late as the 2000s. But in the rest of the state and in terms of the Democratic establishment, their was no massive flip of parties or anything and the fact that the Republicans couldn't take and hold the legislature until 2010 is proof of that. It took the New Deal Democrats dying off to flip the state legislature.

Democrats very slowly declined in the rural areas and as state boiler said, the NC Democrats did what they had to do to cling to power. They saw what happened in 1964 and other elections where Goldwater caused GOP slates to win because of straight ticket voting. So they created the ballot he talked about which meant that people could vote Nixon, Reagan, Bush and still vote straight Democratic down ballot. This was was how Bush won NC by double digits and at the same time Easley won by almost the same margin. They resorted to gerrymandering, using black voters to prop up flailing white Democratic districts, at the expense of reducing minority representation in the state legislature and Congress. They used corruption on an extensive level to maintain power.

And yes Democrats had it out for vocational education as state boiler said. There was this sense that Democrats were beholden to the big three Universities and that if you weren't planning to go to a college they didn't give a crap about you. In the 2000s, Republicans were actually seen as the more reasonable ones on education. That didn't change until the budget cuts of the early 2010s pushed by the newly GOP state legislature.

If that tit for tat rule applied, can you imagine what the cheating, lying, bribing GOP would deserve next time the Dems take over? That alone should give you pause before defending the Dowlesses of the world.

That is already happening. The current excess of the GOP is motivated by a desire to get back at the Dems for their treatment of the GOP For 100 years. And once the Democrats return to power they will indeed do the same stuff they did before. There are no good guys in this state.

That is why my votes are strategic. You cannot trust either side to have complete control of this state.

I agree with you, up to a point though. I think the part you missed, in part because it is kinda going under the rader, is the transformation of the southern democratic parties. With the advent of race-line voting with Obama, and then the GOP gerrymanders of the 2010s, the Southern Democrats are dead. Those people who worshipped the ideology of power unquestioningly were replaced by caucuses forced to be majority black with hyper-liberal College seat dems and other minorities as supplemental. This cataclysmic event arguably brought southern democratic parties into line with the rest of the national democrats. Like, look at 2018. The only 'southern dem' who got on a significant major ticket were Bresden and Nelson, and that was because one lacked competition and the other was an incumbent. You had Abrams and Gillum, not Crist and Carter. And even as the nation gave the dems a big wave, rural southern white dems still lost their state legislative seats that they had somehow held in 2014. The places where these parties are growing similarly reflect this policy changes - they are all areas being fed by non-southerns migrating south like Atlanta, the Triangle, NOVA, and all the Texas cities.

I know you said that it feels like the criminal suddenly finding god..but well they kinda have if we look to what the VA dems are doing. And its because their repentance moment was the equivalent of losing an arm and a leg.

I didn't say that, State boiler did.

Also are you implying that progressive and minority based state Democratic parties don't engage in corruption, gerrymandering etc?

Nope. In fact AA's in safe districts I think engage in corruption more, see Corrine Brown, Gillium, Chakka Fattah, and many others because they feel safe. No, what I am saying the culture and fundamental bedrock that shapes the party has shifted.

This would be easier to explain with texts like Edward Gibson's 2012 Boundary Control, that explores how sub-national authoritarianism can survive and propagate even in healthy liberal democracies. But the short summery is that once Jim Crow came into place, the democratic party of the solid south took hold and ruled the states uncontested. One can draw a straight line from Jim Crow to Civil Rights to 1994 to 2010. When rivals did appear in these states they were drawn away in gerrymandering, or powers were stripped from the offices they held to limit 'damage,' or a favorable local press kept everyone in line. Even as the coalitions changed, the people in power did not, in part because there were southern dynasties, in part because they were the only people who had ever controlled the states for the democrats. These people were raised in the culture of the Southern Authoritarianism, and their only goal in politics was to maintain power. even as ideology changed, this bedrock always remained.

Then in 2010, everything changed. Well, everything had already changed in 2008 with the election of Obama, but the decades long decline had paid off. Voter voters who had been efficiently governed by southern authoritarians were dead or in Florida, and people like us were around who only remembered the decline and the consistent attempts to cling to power, not the goodwill that is brought during the heyday of authoritarian leaders. There was the migration of voters who were loyal to republicans, there was racist undercurrents, there was the classist undercurrents, there was suburban expansion in exurbs, and much much more. In general, the bottom fell out from the southern dems. That authoritarian class? Gone, or relegated to the decaying minority of the party.

What was left of the southern Democratic parties was the African American caucus, once a minority just like the republican shoved aside by the white democrats. And of course these caucuses were larger then ever, thanks to GOP gerrymandering both based on parties and to eliminate every white dem from their legislature. You had the liberal whites left who had never been part of the southern democratic class, they were always big-city or university based. And you had assorted other minorities like Hispanics in Texas or Vietnamese in Louisiana who were in a similar boat like the African Americans. Even though all of these groups had held power alongside the Authoritarian southern democrats during the decline, they never were in control, or even close to the true levers of power. Always the Southern Dems, always the White Authoritarians.

And so in effect, its a whole new generation now. The loss of the southern dems have sent Southern Parties into the wildnerness and the ideologies that they have come back resemble the liberal (small l) ones held by northernern and western and every other party in the united states. Its a type of people who look at the Georgia legislature and are happy that its almost entirely minority. Its a type of people who have moved to the region from areas without an authoritarian legacy. Sure, these people want power, thats the goal of all parties. But they don't see power as the be all end all goal. They are happy to trade the majority and minority, as long as the other party plays just as fair. Just like every other party, policy, ideology, and Identity now play roles. Its why southern democratic parties today are pursuing platforms, reforms, and campaigning on the spirit of the national platform, rather then going their own way in a vain quest for power.

Now, Northerners aren't exempt from this phenomenon. In fact, Illinois is developing into a one party local-authoritarian system with Madigan as its king, but that is a topic for another thread.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2019, 08:56:13 am »
« Edited: July 16, 2019, 09:09:28 am by Oryxslayer »





Follow @mcpli if you want live tweets of the case's arguments each day.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2019, 04:32:24 pm »

Now that SCOTUS has leaned in and decided that gerrymandering is non-justiciable, how could the SCONC alter the map and get it to stick for 2020?

The ruling applies to federal courts. The SCONC is using state law, so similar to the PA case, the maps will stand for 2020 if implemented. In fact the Supreme court case changed very little since they had always thrown out Non-VRA gerry cases beforehand, the two big court-ordered remaps in PA/FL this cycle came from state laws and state courts. States can do whatever they want, and in fact the Supreme's verdict stated that state insitutions or congress can legislate for gerrymandering in whatever manner they please, it just never can be a federal court issue and really never was.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #8 on: September 03, 2019, 03:13:05 pm »
« Edited: September 03, 2019, 03:36:41 pm by Oryxslayer »



Its here! So what will the dem court do now is the question. Perhaps they draw a bunch of competitive seats. Perhaps they will draw seats that will result in a dem majority, to force divided govt in 2020. Perhaps they just change around the AA seats in the east. Perhaps the GOP will try to claw onto their majority for 2 more years.  Who knows for now.  

Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #9 on: September 03, 2019, 03:40:51 pm »



Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #10 on: September 03, 2019, 04:04:38 pm »

So the referee will get to pick the maps drawn by either the defendant legislature or the plaintiffs?

Considering its the NCGOP, the court will either pick the plaintiffs or draw their own. I have no faith in the NCGOP going along with this,
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #11 on: September 03, 2019, 04:21:01 pm »

Apparently the legislature has 2 weeks to submit a legal map, before  the courts and master seize control.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2019, 07:58:33 pm »

Activists now prepare to move against the Congressional Map, though they would have to move fast with the  primaries approaching.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2019, 04:02:22 pm »

Just because black incumbents in search of safe seats in primaries supported a racial gerrymander does not make minority groups any less represented. Still, it would be nice if they didn't provide votes to the Republicans so often in these cases.

They tend to do it when they know a democratic map is impossible and republicans have the initiative, so why not hop on and get rewarded. We just saw a lot of that in 2010 because the GOP held so many of the states where stuff like this could have occurred.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2019, 11:49:28 am »

This should be where we stand going into 2021 redistricting, assuming this decision also gets applied to the NC congressional districts.  Green = significant restrictions on legislature, Yellow = completely independent process



Notes:

CT+ME: 2/3rds of legislature needed to pass a map
OH: partisan maps expire after 4 years instead of 10
KY: state constitution prohibits splitting counties unnecessarily (so cannot gerrymander KY-03)
NY+UT: commission proposes map that legislature can amend within certain limits




You've correctly noted the restrictions in Ohio, but I would not deem them significant.

Are they really not? I thought the restrictions on city/county splits was a rather significant one. In other words, for example, there should have to be a district entirely within Hamilton County that contains all of Cincinnati.

Okay, this is far enough off topic for NC related redisrticting, which this thread is about.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2019, 11:09:51 pm »

The plaintiffs have requested Nathaniel Persily to be the referee. He drew the Pennsylvania Congressional redo last year. He also drew the current districts for Connecticut and New York at the beginning of the decade.



He's a excellent choice for the type  of outcome desired by the plaintiffs.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #16 on: September 11, 2019, 10:56:03 pm »

btw can anyone explain how the D's get the 6 seats to flip the NC house?

They are literally maxed out in Charlotte afaik due to a dummymander. The GOP should probably have 1 seat there in 2018 in a fair map. How would they flip 7 other seats?

Because the seats they need aren't in Charolette/Raleigh, those areas fell in 2018 and if drawn fairly probably would have fallen earlier. The seats Dems need to win are in the East and the Greensboro/Winston-Salem area where race plays a big factor in voting Because of this, its very easy for the GOP to pack up the AA seats and divide the white dems, and they did it before. It's those places where the map falls down.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #17 on: September 12, 2019, 12:22:02 pm »

The state legislature has made a mockery of the process, and hopefully the North Carolina Supreme Court recognizes this and appoints a special master.

yeah they know they lost so this is all just trolling.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #18 on: September 12, 2019, 04:15:04 pm »


He probably watched himself get thrown under the bus in real time.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #19 on: September 14, 2019, 10:12:14 am »

DRA has new data and features specifically for North Carolina and North Carolina legislative redistricting. If you want to play around, go crazy!
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2019, 04:27:05 pm »



Courts making moves.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,863


« Reply #21 on: October 28, 2019, 05:37:01 pm »

It appears that the Court has accepted the remedial map for state legislative districts drawn by the NC General Assembly, instead of opting to re-do it themselves:



The maps are only slightly less gerrymandered, and the Republicans would still likely maintain control of both chambers after the 2020 election.

The maps drawn last month more or less locked in the 2018 result - slim R majority but no chance at supermajority, even with the few dem gains guaranteed by the new lines. Slim chance of state senate flipping but don't bet on it. Doesn't really matter long term since Cooper looks the  be remaining at the helm right now, the lines are only for 2020, and the court has been moving to take de facto redistricting powers from the de jure legislature.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.238 seconds with 14 queries.