North Carolina Congressional Map Ruled Unconstitutionally Gerrymandered

Upon further review this appears to be correct.

Article 1, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators."

Effectively, this means that state legislatures are granted primary authority to regulate federal elections, including how their congressional district lines are to be drawn. However, Congress is the ultimate authority, and may supersede state laws. Congress has exercised this authority, for example, to require single-member districts and to enhance racial and ethnic minority groups' representation. The federal courts have interpreted the federal constitution to require equal population districts. Congress has not mandated a congressional redistricting procedure, despite many bills that have been introduced. States thus retain their authority to draw districts -- congressional, state legislative, and others -- within these federal guidelines.

http://www.publicmapping.org/what-is-redistricting

And once again you lie. I said nothing linking or equating the two.

Another method to end the first-past-the-post system that we use now to ensure minority rule:

Have run-off voting to ensure that anyone sent to Washington has 51% percent of the vote. People can vote for whomever they want in the first round, but if no one receives a majority, there is a second round with only two people on the ballot -- those two who received the most votes in the first round.

Lots of democracies do this, and it's simple.

Violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. You're imposing an extra duty upon some voters to make their political voices heard.

No, I'm imposing it on all voters, which is equal.

How are their voices not being heard?

So you're psychic now?

Then what's all this babbling about Grant?

If you had any actual data, you'd be more than willing to present it. The more you duck and dodge, the more obvious it is that you're relying on nothing more than confirmation bias.

Preferential Voting is how it should be everywhere.

Get list of candidates, number them in order of which you most prefer/least hate.

First preferences are counted, if someone has got 50%+1 of the vote then they win.

If no candidate has got 50%+1 of the vote, the candidate with the least votes is removed from the list and the #2 preferences from their voters are assigned.

Continue the process until a candidate has 50%+1 of the preferences.

Third parties are a lot more viable as the "wasted vote" factor is almost entirely removed.

I knew you'd say that.

Or you could just make them at large by state.

Wouldn't that dramatically ramp up the costs of the average congressional race? Not to mention encouraging candidates to ignore rural areas.

Both might or might not depending on who the candidate wants to target.

yes, that's good stuff.

I've come to the conclusion that I favor the the most logical and ethical district lines regardless of outcome. Automate that shit and make ONE of the parameters the partisan proportions of the state, but not the controlling factor. If you give NC the most ethical, logical, rational districts and it so happens to favor the GOP, then oh fucking well. That's what happens when all liberals choose to live in a small space. I think rational districts can mitigate against that to an extent but if not, so be it.

an interesting concept worth considering. I've not heard enough discussion either way to form a firm opinion - except Dayton saying "wouldn't they ignore rural areas" which...okay. They are elected to represent people, not acres.

Black conservatives exist. I used to be one. My half brother who spent much of his childhood in Texas is one. And there are plenty others who could see that they have far more in common with white conservative views (ie anti abortion, anti queers, anti women) if y'all didn't have it stuck in your head that we are some monolithic hive mind like the Borg and actually, yanno....talked to us.

at no time did I ever say that no blacks vote conservative. But it is a fact that blacks vote democrat in most elections at the 90+ percentage rate.
The low end percentage is 82 percent since 1960, according to this article. So basically since any of us on wordforge have been old enough to vote. If you have any data negating what this article claims, please share it with the class. But true, many blacks are very conservative people in their daily dealings & behavior but they won't vote conservative - probably because they feel they won't be served fairly or adequately under conservative leadership.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-baxley/african-americans-democratic_b_12680256.html

They aren't wrong about that. Democrats aren't much better, especially in the South...hence the voter apathy that keeps cretins like Roy Moore in office.

As I said, if the GOP has a hope and a prayer of getting black votes, the party needs to stop being lazy and fucking do outreach. That's exactly what Obama did in 2007 and he help flip states that were considered solidly red by reaching those that the GOP wouldn't and that, yes, the Democrats would have taken for granted.

Doesn't always work as intended. Kim Wyman, Washington's SecState is the only Republican on the west coast to be elected to statewide office. It was a forgone conclusion though when 6 Dems split 55% of the primary vote and 2 Rs split 45%. For the general we had a choice of 2 Rs.

I prefer instant runoff/ranked choice. Never a wasted vote that way.

It is rarely possible for a strange combination of candidates and rankings to result in a situation where not putting your preferred candidate as #1 can hurt, but those situations are much more unlikely.

Why did each party run multiple candidates?

I used to be like you, and wonder "why won't the Republicans just reach out to minorities? Why won't they do it? Why won't they do it? Why. Won't. they. DO. It??".
Then I figured it out.
They're racist.
The answer was too obvious to accept.
But there it was.
Staring me in the face.
"But..but...even if they're racist, wouldn't they want to WIN so bad, they'd court the minority vote anyway??????".
No, cuz here's the other thing....
They're stupid.
Yes, THAT stupid.
I know, it's too obvious to seem possible.
Yet there it is.
Staring you in the face.
They're THAT racist, and THAT rigid and stupid about their racism.
It's something they just can't get past to the detriment of their survival.
And I for one, welcome it.
Let them die.
Let them goddamn die.

Here's the proof of it!!!
They'd rather destroy democracy with suppression and gerrymandering than court minorities!!
They know old bigots are dying, they know young people are more tolerant, they know that tolerance is leading to multi-colored humping and babies, and that white people are eventually going to go extinct....they'd rather burn democracy down.

It could be (I'm not a politician so I might be wrong) that Republicans consider winning over more black voters is a high risk/low reward situation.
Let's say (to keep it mathematically simple) that blacks are 20 percent of the total voting population. If every black voter decided to vote Republican, they would have 20 percent more votes. But typically only 10 percent of blacks vote Republican - so Republicans are looking at realistically 10 percent of the 20 percent of the total voting pool - so 2 percent black votes. If Republicans dedicated more resources and time to courting black voters and doubled their black votes they would still only get 4 percent. But if by using those same resources to court white voters (who might be on the fence or disinterested) who make up 80 percent of the total voters (the flip-side to the black 20 percent) and even get a 10 percent increase in white voters that's 8 percent more - double their results for the same effort as courting black voters. It's just not cost effective - that's the bottom line of politics in the US at the current time and it isn't likely to change anytime soon.

And why would that be?

this was covered many times in this & various threads - most blacks feel that Republicans don't represent their interests & concerns. You can't turn that ship around overnight.
All the convincing & sweet talk in the world won't counter several generations of Democrat voters that the younger black voter might encounter on a daily basis for political guidance.

It would be SO FUCKING EASY!!!

The black community is majority Christian, and Christians are homophobic, and the Republican party is now openly anti-LGBT.
The black vote made Prop 8 a thing.

Republicans are all about Big Business, and Big Business is all about greed, and avarice, and materialism, and conspicuous consumption, and grasping, and clutching, and gorging.
Black rap/sports/celebrity culture is about greed, and avarice, and materialism, and conspicuous consumption, and grasping, and clutching, and gorging.

It would be such an easy fucking sell!!!

But the Republicans would have to put what we all know they are up front in their sales pitch, and they want to wrap themselves in this crumbling veneer of "moral values", and flag waving, and bullshit that we all know is painted rust.

It's the primary for everyone. You pay the fee your name is on it. Courts said people are allowed to identify the party they align with. So you get:
John Smith (prefers Republican Party)

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/18/politics/north-carolina-supreme-court-redistricting/index.html

SCOTUS issues injunction halting redistricting until they can hear the matter. Current maps are likely to be used in midterms.

Of course it did.

Of relevance - Pennsylvania courts ruled that the GOP had to submit a plan to redistrict their congressional lines more equitably or, if they didn't, the court would draw up lines itself. The GOP, obviously, tried appealing to the SC, who sayeth nope:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/05/politics/supreme-court-pennsylvania-redistricting/index.html