Bucky wrote:also, unless state lines can be redrawn at will, the gerrymandering example there makes zero sense

they are redrawn every 10 years by the power in charge. The current ones curiously have broken up the democratic suburban voters in philly and lumped them enough with the republican ones while also preventing the philadelphia voters from having any real competitive races.

pacino wrote:

The states of Washington,[51] Arizona,[52] and California[53] have created standing committees for the redistricting following the 2010 census. Rhode Island[54] and New Jersey[55] have developed ad hoc committees, but developed the past two decennial reapportionments tied to new census data.

i appear to be correct, btw, that democratic states are trending towards non-partisan committees....so where did i imply that i like gerrymandering?

If you're arguing for more toss-up districts in PA, it wouldn't need to be gerrymandering, but it'd be very hard for Democrats to win proportional representation without it. Dem votes are extremely concentrated in a manner that Repub votes are not.

in a state like PA where registration is for one party but not overwhelmingly so, the goal should be competitive districts that still rely on natural boundaries, without regard for one party or another. this is obviously not the case.

obviously i'm the only one that thinks this way. so you guys all win.

pacino wrote:

Bucky wrote:also, unless state lines can be redrawn at will, the gerrymandering example there makes zero sense

they are redrawn every 10 years by the power in charge. The current ones curiously have broken up the democratic suburban voters in philly and lumped them enough with the republican ones while also preventing the philadelphia voters from having any real competitive races.

so i may stay in the same house i live in now and could end up as a new jersey resident?? interesting.

^^^ btw i was referencing Polar's comment about the PA/PHL presidential vote and that being a result of gerrymandering

i thought you meant the state lines for congressional districts. nevermind.

was just looking through the montco results and was surprised to see that barry won my county

also was shocked about the number of people who didn't bother to press the button for an unopposed candidate. in this case it was vincent hughes. 13K votes and like 70k undervotes.

i refuse to ever vote for an unopposed candidate, and especially not the jerk that keeps his PA house job every two years in my area.

Bucky wrote:^^^ btw i was referencing Polar's comment about the PA/PHL presidential vote and that being a result of gerrymandering

I'm not really sure what you're point is here. Philadelphia is entitled to a little over 2 Representatives and the rest of PA a little less than 16. Romney carried the state outside of Philadelphia.

I won't deny that the PA map is gerrymandered to hell, but realistically you're looking at around a 11-7 Republican breakdown utilizing geographical boundaries.

Polar Bear Phan wrote:

Bucky wrote:^^^ btw i was referencing Polar's comment about the PA/PHL presidential vote and that being a result of gerrymandering

I'm not really sure what you're point is here. Philadelphia is entitled to a little over 2 Representatives and the rest of PA a little less than 16. Romney carried the state outside of Philadelphia.

I won't deny that the PA map is gerrymandered to hell, but realistically you're looking at around a 11-7 Republican breakdown utilizing geographical boundaries.

berks county has more representatives than philadelphia currently does. no arbitrary municipal designation that exists merely because the commonwealth allows it to has the 'right' to a certain number of reps.

maybe it misinterpreted, but you pointing out that O won PHL by more than he won the state seemed to me to mean that the way the state lines are drawn assured O victory.

pacino wrote:

Polar Bear Phan wrote:

Bucky wrote:^^^ btw i was referencing Polar's comment about the PA/PHL presidential vote and that being a result of gerrymandering

I'm not really sure what you're point is here. Philadelphia is entitled to a little over 2 Representatives and the rest of PA a little less than 16. Romney carried the state outside of Philadelphia.

I won't deny that the PA map is gerrymandered to hell, but realistically you're looking at around a 11-7 Republican breakdown utilizing geographical boundaries.

berks county has more representatives than philadelphia currently does. no arbitrary municipal designation that exists merely because the commonwealth allows it to has the 'right' to a certain number of reps.

Based on geography, you're looking at:

3 or 4 Dem districts in Philly metro
1 or 2 Dem districts in Pittsburgh metro (If 2, this eliminates a toss-up district, but is probably possible with limited gerrymandering)
1 Dem district near Scranton

The outer Philadelphia suburbs + Berks + the Lehigh Valley create ~3 - 4 districts, but these would be toss-ups.

Edit: Philly area + Berks + Lehigh Valley is roughly 7 districts total. Just keep in mind, if it is drawn as 4 Democratic districts, the toss-up districts become more Republican.

Bucky wrote:was just looking through the montco results and was surprised to see that barry won my county

also was shocked about the number of people who didn't bother to press the button for an unopposed candidate. in this case it was vincent hughes. 13K votes and like 70k undervotes.

I don't vote for unopposed candidates as a matter of principle. Unless I'm the unopposed candidate.

And it's also worth pointing out that while the Philly suburbs have generally supported Dems at the Presidential level, they're still plenty comfortable backing Republicans for Congress. The national GOP doesn't sell well, but Gerlach, Meehan, Fitzpatrick, Pitts and Charlie Dent all represent tough districts and run well ahead of the national candidates.

The final numbers aren't in for this election, but using the current lines and 2008 results, Obama won Gerlach's district 53-46%, Meehan's 51-48%, Fitzpatrick's 53-46%, Pitts' 50-49% and Dent's 52-47%. These are seats Democrats are capable of winning (as they showed in 2006 and 2008). These ARE competitive (or potentially competitive) seats. The Republicans just win them.

Then why are the 6 and 7 abominations if either party can win?

also, those were different districts thant hey are now

The opening 15 minutes of last night's Rachel Maddow show was some of the best television ever.

Doll Is Mine wrote:The opening 15 minutes of last night's Rachel Maddow show was some of the best television ever.

but i hear she's the same as hannity

If Florida can't get its final results two days after the election is over, it should lose all the electoral votes. Still uncalled, and still only 97% of precincts reporting.

somebody send me a link where I can watch that yo