What happens to the Republican Party now? (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
5,204
Reaction score
8,505
Location
Midwest
Offline
This election nonsense by Trump may end up splitting up the Republican Party. I just don’t see how the one third (?) who are principled conservatives can stay in the same party with Trump sycophants who are willing to sign onto the TX Supreme Court case.

We also saw the alt right types chanting “destroy the GOP” in Washington today because they didn’t keep Trump in power. I think the Q types will also hold the same ill will toward the traditional Republican Party. In fact its quite possible that all the voters who are really in a Trump personality cult will also blame the GOP for his loss. It’s only a matter of time IMO before Trump himself gets around to blaming the GOP.

There is some discussion of this on Twitter. What do you all think?


 

J-DONK

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
389
Reaction score
506
Age
42
Location
Minnesota
Offline
Could it be possible that the Census under-count and number of people that have died due to Covid make gerrymandering accurately harder?

You are hitting on a part of this that I can't wrap my head around. Republicans are generally older then Democrats, and it does vary from state to state. I want to say the average is 6-9 years as an aggregate. We know the average age of those dying from covid skews older. You also have the worst outbreaks happening on red states. We have no way of knowing, ,but you have to think more conservative voters are succumbing the virus. I can't wrap my head around what people like Destantis are thinking.
 

SFIDC3

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
370
Reaction score
422
Age
57
Location
Maryland
Offline
We have no way of knowing, ,but you have to think more conservative voters are succumbing the virus. I can't wrap my head around what people like Destantis are thinking.

What he is thinking is in order to run for President he needs to appear so "strong" just like his idol Trump....and never admit to mistakes or change what he says, the message is more important than lives....I swear if he got hit by a bus tomorrow I would clap....
 

Saint by the Bay

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
1,171
Reaction score
3,998
Age
48
Location
Houston, TX
Offline
But is that really a positive? Given that it is also used just as much to prevent majority "minority" districts, does it actually increase black/minority representation? It's also used to pack certain districts with minorities which limits the overall influence of minorities in an elections and limits their power.

The only way districts should be decided is by population/area. Those are the only two factors that should matter and be considered. I would only give minor consideration to racial makeups if there has been concerted efforts to limit minority representation in an area/state. All districts should be set by independent commissions.

I agree with you, but it also presents a bit of a quandary. If a district is greater than 70% white it is all but guaranteed to elect a white person to Congress. There are some exceptions, but that rule holds true 99.9% of the time. It's the rule that's used to carve districts and decide where to put money in races. The further you get under 70% the better chance a minority can get elected.

After the Voting Rights Act of 68 there was a big effort to Gerrymander districts to ensure blacks were elected so black people could have representation. The result? In 1968 there were 6 blacks in Congress. Today there are 47. There was one session of Congress where the number jumped from 28 to 40 in a single election cycle due to Gerrymandering.

If we went to simple population-drawn districts you would probably see the number of blacks in Congress drop by more than half in a single election cycle. You'd also see Republicans lose a lot of seats and a bunch of State legislators. It's another one of those really tough rock-and-a-hardplace problems that are easy to discuss but harder to solve.
 

zztop

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2020
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
1,657
Age
121
Location
in a van down by the river
Offline
What are the positives surrounding gerrymandering? I'm asking earnestly. I've never actually heard anybody try and defend it other than by saying that it's not against the law.

it was some years ago, but some was mentioned in Last Week Tonight. I think I managed to find the portion where he talks about it and I think I have it linked here where he talks about it. But it is basically what SBTB mentioned. As much as I am for more representation, the negatives greatly outweigh it in my opinion

 

coldseat

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
1,077
Reaction score
1,835
Age
45
Location
San Antonio
Online
I agree with you, but it also presents a bit of a quandary. If a district is greater than 70% white it is all but guaranteed to elect a white person to Congress. There are some exceptions, but that rule holds true 99.9% of the time. It's the rule that's used to carve districts and decide where to put money in races. The further you get under 70% the better chance a minority can get elected.

After the Voting Rights Act of 68 there was a big effort to Gerrymander districts to ensure blacks were elected so black people could have representation. The result? In 1968 there were 6 blacks in Congress. Today there are 47. There was one session of Congress where the number jumped from 28 to 40 in a single election cycle due to Gerrymandering.

If we went to simple population-drawn districts you would probably see the number of blacks in Congress drop by more than half in a single election cycle. You'd also see Republicans lose a lot of seats and a bunch of State legislators. It's another one of those really tough rock-and-a-hardplace problems that are easy to discuss but harder to solve.

That's a lot of good added perspective. Thanks for the post.

I do have question though. Are the majority of the 47 black Congressman from majority black districts? I'm not sure if you know that or not, but I'm just curious how many majority black districts there are.

Just as an added thought, I do think we eventually have to move away from considering race in drawing districts. As hard as that may be, I think it will be better for us as a nation in the long run for a number of reason. First, factoring race into the districting reinforces the idea that only minorities can represent minorities and only white people can represent white people. If we want a truly multi-racial society, I don't know that that is good. Also, by removing race form these decisions it lowers the power/impetus of white nationalist sentiment that drives some of these power struggles. I think that would be good for the country overall. You also lower the ability of the extremist on the right to get elected to Congress. My hope would be that it could be done in a way that doesn't repress minority representation, but I do not know that for sure. For all of the reason that you mention in your post, I think it would be very, very hard for many minority politicians and political groups to go along with.
 

RobF

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
582
Reaction score
1,877
Location
Warrington, UK
Offline
That's a lot of good added perspective. Thanks for the post.

I do have question though. Are the majority of the 47 black Congressman from majority black districts? I'm not sure if you know that or not, but I'm just curious how many majority black districts there are.

Just as an added thought, I do think we eventually have to move away from considering race in drawing districts. As hard as that may be, I think it will be better for us as a nation in the long run for a number of reason. First, factoring race into the districting reinforces the idea that only minorities can represent minorities and only white people can represent white people. If we want a truly multi-racial society, I don't know that that is good. Also, by removing race form these decisions it lowers the power/impetus of white nationalist sentiment that drives some of these power struggles. I think that would be good for the country overall. You also lower the ability of the extremist on the right to get elected to Congress. My hope would be that it could be done in a way that doesn't repress minority representation, but I do not know that for sure. For all of the reason that you mention in your post, I think it would be very, very hard for many minority politicians and political groups to go along with.
I'd add that while the presence of representation is important, it's also important that presence is effective. If a system gives more of that representation, but also essentially rigs things so that representation is likely to be unable to achieve much, how much of a positive is that?

And in that sense, gerrymandering to ensure or increase representation for particular demographics is a crude fix to a first-past-the-post system that can, and does, leave significant groups and viewpoints unrepresented otherwise. But I would argue the solution to that isn't any form of gerrymandering, it's ditching the first-past-the-post electoral system for one which addresses that, through proportional representation, for example.
 

Saint by the Bay

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
1,171
Reaction score
3,998
Age
48
Location
Houston, TX
Offline
I don't know the answer on if the majority of black Congress members come from majority-black districts. I'll see if I can find something on the demographics. Remember though you don't need them to actually be the majority, just about 35%. Unless you're deep in an urban area in the south or the coasts it will be hard to have a district that is majority-minority. The rule of thumb is a district that is 35% black makes a black candidate viable. So really the question is are the majority of those 47 from districts that are at least 35% black. My guess is yes, but that's just me making an assumption based on the usual political demographic norms.
 

insidejob

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
2,787
Age
85
Location
Back in 70124
Offline
As far as gerrymandering goes, if you look at the district that was drawn (after the last census? Actually, I think it was already this screwed up before 2010, IIRC) for Steve Scalise, it's clear as day that he'd have no chance of ever getting elected without the map drawn as it is. And then consider the amount of power that piece of garbage wields and ask yourself if gerrymandering is worth it. The dude hasn't held a town hall style meeting in his district where his constituents could attend in a decade. Why bother? He can't lose with that district map simply because he's white and has an R behind his name. It sure would be nice for those of us who live in his district to have the opportunity to voice our displeasure with him and his lack of actually accomplishing anything that benefits his district since his Tea Party arse got elected.

ETA: Check it out...


I'm in the tiny part of Orleans Parish that is included in his district. If you want to go strictly by the representative being elected being the same race as his constituents, yeah, this works/worked for Cedric Richmond as well, but I'd have much rather have had him as my Rep. while he was in office than Scalise. Not only do I live in the tiny carved out portion of Orleans Parish (Lakeview), but I work right across the 17th Street Canal in Metry in the same building where his office is. He has two black Suburbans with his security detail that drive him around and he/they care so much about not only his constituents, but also his office building neighbors, that they go flying through the flooded parking lot pushing water into cars every time the lot floods which is basically every time there is a strong thunderstorm. I was standing there one day when they did it talking to the guy who's in charge of maintenance for the building just looking at the lake the parking lot had become and talking about it and he got so pissed off that he put one of those bright orange stickers on each Suburban that they use when you park in a private spot that isn't yours with a handwritten message telling him and his people to slow down to stop flooding peoples' cars. The next day they came back and there was white shirt stuck all over the windows because the stickers don't come off easily at all. They're like those ones that cops put on uninsured vehicles after busting someone and making them leave the car on the side of the interstate.
 
Last edited:

Optimus Prime

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,870
Reaction score
2,983
Age
44
Location
Washington DC Metro
Online
Wasn’t sure what thread to put this in
============
The Census Bureau has released new figures showing the increasing diversity of the United States. It’s a complicated and fascinating picture, and one that contains the seeds of even greater political division and anger.


In a better world, the new data would lead us to celebrate the intricate mosaic of American life. In this one, we’re going to fall further into a cycle of recrimination and revanchism that both left and right, for opposite reasons, will wind up feeding.


The headline everywhere is that Whites have fallen to their lowest share ever of the U.S. population, from 63.7 percent in 2010 to 57.8 percent in 2020.

It has happened for a number of reasons: an aging White population, higher birthrates among some minority populations, immigration and changing ways in which people think of themselves.

Strikingly, the number of Americans who call themselves multiracial more than tripled in the past 10 years, from 9 million to 33.8 million.
The many nuances of these figures will not, however, be understood by most Americans.

That’s in large part because on the right, the simplest version of the story — Whites are declining, minorities are increasing — will be used as fuel for a preexisting narrative and political project, both to generate anger and increase Republicans’ urgency to solidify minority rule.


That’s not all that will distress White conservatives: Most of the growth has been occurring in metropolitan areas, and a majority of those under 18 are non-White as well. The counties that are growing are mostly dominated by Democrats; the ones shrinking are mostly dominated by Republicans……….

 

superchuck500

U.S. Blues
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
2,666
Reaction score
6,415
Location
Charleston, SC
Offline
This Twitter thread is so precise - well written. I think it could fit on several current discussions here on MAP but I’m gonna put it here because the reality is that this viewpoint has massive influence in America due to being embraced and coddled by the GOP.

 

insidejob

Well-known member
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
2,787
Age
85
Location
Back in 70124
Offline
This Twitter thread is so precise - well written. I think it could fit on several current discussions here on MAP but I’m gonna put it here because the reality is that this viewpoint has massive influence in America due to being embraced and coddled by the GOP.


The end of his thread really is a good conclusion for it.
 

Paul

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 22, 2021
Messages
1,323
Reaction score
524
Location
Latin American from Potomac, Maryland 20854
Offline
Wasn’t sure what thread to put this in
============
The Census Bureau has released new figures showing the increasing diversity of the United States. It’s a complicated and fascinating picture, and one that contains the seeds of even greater political division and anger.


In a better world, the new data would lead us to celebrate the intricate mosaic of American life. In this one, we’re going to fall further into a cycle of recrimination and revanchism that both left and right, for opposite reasons, will wind up feeding.


The headline everywhere is that Whites have fallen to their lowest share ever of the U.S. population, from 63.7 percent in 2010 to 57.8 percent in 2020.

It has happened for a number of reasons: an aging White population, higher birthrates among some minority populations, immigration and changing ways in which people think of themselves.

Strikingly, the number of Americans who call themselves multiracial more than tripled in the past 10 years, from 9 million to 33.8 million.
The many nuances of these figures will not, however, be understood by most Americans.

That’s in large part because on the right, the simplest version of the story — Whites are declining, minorities are increasing — will be used as fuel for a preexisting narrative and political project, both to generate anger and increase Republicans’ urgency to solidify minority rule.


That’s not all that will distress White conservatives: Most of the growth has been occurring in metropolitan areas, and a majority of those under 18 are non-White as well. The counties that are growing are mostly dominated by Democrats; the ones shrinking are mostly dominated by Republicans……….

Afghanistan people may look homogenous from the outside, however, they have 14 different tribes and they not always get along.
 
Last edited:

Bigdaddysaints

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2019
Messages
466
Reaction score
606
Age
48
Location
Prairieville, La
Offline
After WW1, Ottoman Empire was carved up by the League of Nations without any regard for the culture, ethnicity, religious beliefs or interests of the peoples living in the regions. That was just a disaster waiting to happen there. The Middle East has been in turmoil since.
 
OP
MT15

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
5,204
Reaction score
8,505
Location
Midwest
Offline
Corruption everywhere

 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom