Donald Trump: Come Kiss the Ring

Always with the half truths, Tony.


Why Democrats Can't Blame Gerrymandering

54 Sept 8, 2014 12:17 PM EDT
By Jonathan Bernstein

The Upshot's Nate Cohn has a nice item explaining why gerrymandering isn't responsible for Republican majorities in the House (for more on this argument, see an old John Sides post). Dave Weigel has a good response, arguing that yes, gerrymandering is the culprit. Who is correct? They both are! But Cohn is, on the whole, more correct."

I hate gerrymandering, no matter which party practices it. It allows politicians not to have to bear the responsibility of what they vote for and say, because they are in a "safe district". It also leads to their pandering to the most extreme wing of their party so that they don't have to deal with a primary challenger being funded by a big PAC.

My other great hatred is Citizens United, for obvious reasons. These two are great evils in our political system and have led directly to the twisted and extreme positions pols take. Compromise is *not* a dirty word in a democracy. It is how both sides are represented no matter who is in power.

 

No half-truth about it. Democrats are just as guilty of gerrymandering when they have the chance to do it. And you never, ever hear Republicans whine about it.

But, as the link pointed out, the Democrats' big problem is the "clumping." (That and group-think, as evidenced by the precincts that supposedly voted 100% for Obama in 2012.)

 

What I want is for every dollar spent on elections, including PAC money that theoretically is "issues messaging", to be required to list who donated the money. Unions, billionaires, Joe Schmoe's $20 contribution. We should know who these guys are obligated to for getting them elected. That way we can see all the puzzle pieces when they write legislation and vote on bills

 

Nope. Put limits on spending on everyone. How much one can donate. How much a candidate can spend. Then everyone has an equal chance.

 

Except they're the ones thinking it.

 

This is a tweet a non-racist person would tweet.

 

Is it really that hard to find who the donors are?

 

Gee, what a surprise: The source appears to be fake.

Daily News' Shaun King Calls Out Donald Trump For "Bogus" And "Racist" Graphic On Crime

 

Thing Is, the donors don't care, and the politicians don't care. Republicans actually believe buying politicians is free speech, and Democrats shrug their shoulders and say that's the system and they have to play along in order to survive.

 

I stay out of the political pissing matches because I find both sides equally amusing and annoying. Both sides make plenty of strawman arguments.

I just think it is interesting a poster seems to get giddy over the thought some people he doesn't like might be using a particular slur.

 

Same here. That's why I'm not voting. The board needs a political conscience.

 

Fox News poll: Six Republicans would beat Hillary Clinton