Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-10-2012, 12:04 AM
hi_im_god's Avatar
hi_im_god hi_im_god is offline
Arlington Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
The GOP is so unhappy with the foolish TeaPublicans, the GOP themselves are redistricting many of them out at the state level (Walsh IL, West FL, for example)
karl rove is a realist. they lost delaware and nevada senate seats that by all rights should have gone republican in 2010.

no one should be surprised to see redistricting used to build a governable majority.

that usually means democrats build the maximum safe districts for democrats in states where they control the process and ditto for republicans.

they'll cut out a few outliers but it's mainly built to protect incumbents.

which is why (i'm talking to you danny) it's a waste of time to concentrate on term limits as a solution.

does it really matter when the chief of staff for a (republican) (democratic) congressman succeeds them due to term limits?

stop letting elected officials draw their own districts and you'll have a lot fewer safe incumbents.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-10-2012, 12:08 AM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hi_im_god View Post
karl rove is a realist. they lost delaware and nevada senate seats that by all rights should have gone republican in 2010.

no one should be surprised to see redistricting used to build a governable majority.
I mean that when the GOP has 2 districts: a choice of a normal republican and Tea Party congressional district, they are redistricting making one Republican district, and eliminating the Tea Party person in the process. The Republicans are orphaning the Tea Baggers from their districts, in favor of non-Tea Party Republicans, where ever they can. It's the easiest way to get rid of them. Most will be one-termers. At least they don't get lifetime healthcare or a pension.

BTW, the courts have thrown out several Republican redistricting maps already.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-10-2012, 12:20 AM
hi_im_god's Avatar
hi_im_god hi_im_god is offline
Arlington Park
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot View Post
I mean that when the GOP has 2 districts: a choice of a normal republican and Tea Party congressional district, they are redistricting making one Republican district, and eliminating the Tea Party person in the process. The Republicans are orphaning the Tea Baggers from their districts, in favor of non-Tea Party Republicans, where ever they can. It's the easiest way to get rid of them. Most will be one-termers. At least they don't get lifetime healthcare or a pension.

BTW, the courts have thrown out several Republican redistricting maps already.
throwing out untenable candidates makes sense. for either side.

it's why we didn't nominate howard dean in 2004.

and the supreme court took the texas case to toss section 5 and approve the republican redistricting plan (+3 republican seats) rather than the the appeals court districts (+3 democratic seats)

i could be wrong about kennedy but it looks 5-4 to me.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.