• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Liberal Congressman Kucinich defeated in Ohio

Liberal Congressman Kucinich defeated in Ohio - Business - msnbc.com


Dennis Kucinich, just a short 3 1/2 years ago who ran in the Democratic Primary for President of the United States. While certainly a sometimes inflammatory character in Congress, some in the media are lamenting over his primary loss to Kaptur in Ohio's 9th district. Given that the Democrats completed the redistricting and possibly knew that such a move would make a primary battle for Kucinich tougher than in the past, one wonders if the Dennis had done something or perhaps did not do enough after 16 years in Congress to warrant a primary win. I just came back from Cleveland OH and though I didn't meet an excessive amount of people there, those who I did speak to did not seem like the average Kucinich supporter. While redistricting may have had a hand in his failed primary bid another hand may be that his progressive style became a bit tired.




So very happy that I don't have to see his "Dennis!" signs plastered all over town anymore. Worst part about the signs was that he wasn't even asking for permission to put them in peoples yards.
 
Liberal Congressman Kucinich defeated in Ohio - Business - msnbc.com


Dennis Kucinich, just a short 3 1/2 years ago who ran in the Democratic Primary for President of the United States. While certainly a sometimes inflammatory character in Congress, some in the media are lamenting over his primary loss to Kaptur in Ohio's 9th district. Given that the Democrats completed the redistricting and possibly knew that such a move would make a primary battle for Kucinich tougher than in the past, one wonders if the Dennis had done something or perhaps did not do enough after 16 years in Congress to warrant a primary win. I just came back from Cleveland OH and though I didn't meet an excessive amount of people there, those who I did speak to did not seem like the average Kucinich supporter. While redistricting may have had a hand in his failed primary bid another hand may be that his progressive style became a bit tired.

This amazes me! Actually it insults me as it should insult anyone else who can read and think at the same time. In the OP is the following sentence:
The reshuffling of Ohio voting boundaries by the Republican-dominated state legislature created an oddly-shaped district that stretches along the Lake Erie shore from Toledo to just east of Cleveland, forcing a primary race between the two.
. Now Ockham either didn't read the OP, didn't understand the OP (both likely), or decided to misrepresent the OP because it suits his disgusting and slavish attraction to the GOP (very likely). No matter, what we do know is that Ockham was either dropped on his head at a very young age or that he is purposely deceitful, and would obviously misrepresent the truth than acknowledge it. Here is what Ockham said directly under the OP:
Given that the Democrats completed the redistricting and possibly knew that such a move would make a primary battle for Kucinich tougher than in the past, one wonders if the Dennis had done something or perhaps did not do enough after 16 years in Congress to warrant a primary win.
And there is it for all to see.

I have never thought there was a great deal of veracity in the "chemtrails to dumb down the locals" myth. Then again I see something like the above and I wonder. Blind partisanship is the answer. I've seen it on both sides. Not all partisans are blind and thankfully there may be fewer partisans than there used to be. It make sense that both factions of Corpgov, Republicans and Democrats, would be losing supporters. Half the people in America fall below the median IQ.
 
I didnt agree with Kucinich on much, but he was honest, believed what he believed, and was more of a liberal loner than a fierce partisan. Kaptur is just a partisan hack. The congress, as hard as this is to believe, just got worse in my opinion.

i kind of feel the same way.

while i'm not a rabid Kucinich or Paul supporter on the majority of issues, i want them both there. they both seem to have integrity.
 
It didn't have much to do with ideology; both Kucinich and Kaptur are very liberal Democrats. It was just the redistricting. If the congressional districts were the same as last time around, both Dennis Kucinich and Marcy Kaptur would've easily retained their seats. Look at the map; the new Kaptur/Kucinich district (#9, running across Lake Erie) was obviously created explicitly to force them into a primary battle and get rid of one of them.

This is exactly why we should have a computer program re-draw the congressional districts every 10 years, instead of letting congresspeople do it themselves. This kind of crap is not healthy for our democracy. :(

http://content.clearchannel.com/cc-common/mlib/1263/09/1263_1315958341.pdf
If it was 'just redistricting' and they are both 'very liberal democrats' that sort of defeats your whole argument doesnt it?
 
If it was 'just redistricting' and they are both 'very liberal democrats' that sort of defeats your whole argument doesnt it?

Umm no? What do you think my argument is? :confused:

I'm saying that the new congressional districts were deliberately drawn to force one of them out. It is not healthy for democracy if legislators choose their constituents rather than the other way around.

If a computer randomly draws the districts, it would be objective and fair, within the context of the parameters it is given.
 
Last edited:
Umm no? What do you think my argument is? :confused:

I'm saying that the new congressional districts were deliberately drawn to force one of them out. It is not healthy for democracy if legislators choose their constituents rather than the other way around.

If a computer randomly draws the districts, it would be objective and fair, within the context of the parameters it is given.
Kucenich was not defeated by a republican...he was defeated by someone you describe as 'very liberal'. He was defeated in a primary by a fellow very liberal democrat. So unless the voting district continued a total moonbat crazy district that was then subdivided (and hey...maybe it was) the fact remains that regardless of the rezoning Kucenich was defeated by a very liberal democrat.

Edit: Computer drawn districts would only be as effective as the parameters programmed into the software. You really think that would be better?
 
The latest round of redistricting reduced one Republican seat and one Democratic seat.

The only "fair" redistricting is letting chickens **** on a map. But I'm sure the two parties would argue over the consistency of the turd.
 
Last edited:
I live in Ohio's 9th district and can tell you that any Republican usually has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the general election here. This district is a Democrat stronghold, even moreso now that Cleveland is also included the 9th district. However, if Kucinich decides to run as an independent (and he just might, knowing him) that could split the vote on the left and give Joe the Plumber a chance.

The counties in between Lucas and Cuyahoga used to elect Republicans regularly. It's only adding in Toledo, and then west Cleveland, which makes it hopeless for Republicans.
 
Kucenich was not defeated by a republican...he was defeated by someone you describe as 'very liberal'. He was defeated in a primary by a fellow very liberal democrat. So unless the voting district continued a total moonbat crazy district that was then subdivided (and hey...maybe it was) the fact remains that regardless of the rezoning Kucenich was defeated by a very liberal democrat.

Yes, that was the idea. Draw the new districts so that two Democrats are both in the same district, forcing them into a primary with each other, and get rid of one of them. This is a fairly routine tactic in gerrymandering for getting rid of an unwanted congressperson. Both parties employ it whenever they get the opportunity.

Edit: Computer drawn districts would only be as effective as the parameters programmed into the software. You really think that would be better?

Most definitely. There are some generally agreed upon parameters for avoiding gerrymandered districts (e.g. keep the districts approximately equally populated, keep them contiguous, keep them as square-shaped as possible). It's not perfect, and I'm sure that there are some possible parameters that could give one side or another a partisan advantage, but it's a lot better than allowing the legislators to draw the map themselves.
 
Last edited:
And in addition to those parameters I mentioned above, which are usually associated with unbiased and non-gerrymandered districts, the fairness of computer-drawn districts could be improved by agreeing to NOT use certain parameters which ARE typically associated with gerrymandering:

1) Demographics of the district, including race, gender, age, religion, language, income, or sexual orientation.
2) How urban or rural the area is (beyond the impact that this inherently has on population and keeping the districts square-shaped).
3) Partisan or ideological affiliation of the area, past voting history of the area, or anticipated future voting habits of the area.
4) The location of the residencies of any specific people...especially incumbent congresspeople or anticipated/declared candidates for Congress.

It still wouldn't be perfect, but by creating a standard list of parameters to always be used by a computer program drawing the districts, and a standard list of parameters to explicitly NOT be used, we could certainly reduce the amount and extremeness of gerrymandering.
 
Last edited:
In the US, corporations are responsible for redrawing districts for their politicians. And Kucinich unfortunately didn't have any powerful corporate sponsors.
 
And in addition to those parameters I mentioned above, which are usually associated with unbiased and non-gerrymandered districts, the fairness of computer-drawn districts could be improved by agreeing to NOT use certain parameters which ARE typically associated with gerrymandering:

1) Demographics of the district, including race, gender, age, religion, language, income, or sexual orientation.
2) How urban or rural the area is (beyond the impact that this inherently has on population and keeping the districts square-shaped).
3) Partisan or ideological affiliation of the area, past voting history of the area, or anticipated future voting history of the area.
4) The location of the residencies of any specific people...especially incumbent congresspeople or anticipated/declared candidates for Congress.

It still wouldn't be perfect, but by creating a standard list of parameters to always be used by a computer program drawing the districts, and a standard list of parameters to explicitly NOT be used, we could certainly reduce the amount and extremeness of gerrymandering.

#1 is coming to a head.
Race and redistricting: Unholy alliance starting to fray - The Washington Post
As African-Americans overwhelmingly vote Democratic, Republicans want to cram the Democratic vote into as few House districts as possible. There are two ways to dilute that influence in the redistricting wars: “cracking,” or spreading black voters out across multiple House districts, and “packing,” or putting as many black voters as possible into the fewest number of districts.

Cracking the minority vote can easily run afoul of the Voting Rights Act’s 1982 amendment, which mandates that minority voters be able to choose their representatives.

Packing, on the other hand, gives black politicians a better chance at getting elected, while diluting black voters’ influence on other districts. While egregious packing can be challenged in court, it is harder to fight. In the ‘80s and ‘90s, Republicans developed an “unholy alliance” strategy to exploit this sytem.

By packing Democrats into fewer and fewer House districts to protect a handful of black incumbents, Republicans are expanding their control over all 435 House seats by limiting Democratic influence to the smallest number of House seats possible.

“The Voting Rights Act has become one of Democrats’ biggest roadblocks to taking back the House,” said redistricting expert Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report. “This pattern of heavily minority districts and increasingly-whitewashed surrounding districts means Democrats could win the total vote for House by several points and still fall more than a dozen seats short of 218.”
 
Yes, that was the idea. Draw the new districts so that two Democrats are both in the same district, forcing them into a primary with each other, and get rid of one of them. This is a fairly routine tactic in gerrymandering for getting rid of an unwanted congressperson. Both parties employ it whenever they get the opportunity.



Most definitely. There are some generally agreed upon parameters for avoiding gerrymandered districts (e.g. keep the districts approximately equally populated, keep them contiguous, keep them as square-shaped as possible). It's not perfect, and I'm sure that there are some possible parameters that could give one side or another a partisan advantage, but it's a lot better than allowing the legislators to draw the map themselves.
I dont know that there is ever a perfect system. ANY changes will cause some to shriek and scream and cry foul. Someone is ALWAYS impacted. Regardless...Kucenich was defeated by a very liberal candidate...hence we can only assume the DEMOCRATS that voted for her believe she is a better candidate. That, or Ohioans are now going to be represented by a democrat that is "
lacking in integrity, filled with false truths." Compared to the spaceman...Im not sure that thats not an improvement.
 
This amazes me! Actually it insults me as it should insult anyone else who can read and think at the same time. In the OP is the following sentence: . Now Ockham either didn't read the OP, didn't understand the OP (both likely), or decided to misrepresent the OP because it suits his disgusting and slavish attraction to the GOP (very likely). No matter, what we do know is that Ockham was either dropped on his head at a very young age or that he is purposely deceitful, and would obviously misrepresent the truth than acknowledge it. Here is what Ockham said directly under the OP: And there is it for all to see.

I have never thought there was a great deal of veracity in the "chemtrails to dumb down the locals" myth. Then again I see something like the above and I wonder. Blind partisanship is the answer. I've seen it on both sides. Not all partisans are blind and thankfully there may be fewer partisans than there used to be. It make sense that both factions of Corpgov, Republicans and Democrats, would be losing supporters. Half the people in America fall below the median IQ.

My mistake - point ceded... Republicans reshuffled the boundary according to the article. Granted, I must have glazed over that portion. Now you're free to unleash the diarrhea of GOP blame for moonbat Kucinich's loss. Make sure to turn in your pissant victory to your DNC overloard, as there's a little propaganda bonus in there from "Fight the smears". :lamo
 
No Barney Frank, no Kucinich, no Dodd, no Snowe (;)).....what's happening to all the liberals?

If Pelosi, Reid, Biden, and Obama leave, too, who are we going to stuff in the trash cans at school? Wasserman is too easy.
 
I dont know that there is ever a perfect system. ANY changes will cause some to shriek and scream and cry foul. Someone is ALWAYS impacted.

True, but some ways are fairer and more impartial than others. And allowing partisan legislators to draw up legislative districts has to be one of the worst ways to do it. A computer program is relatively impartial...you just feed it the parameters that are agreed upon, and it produces a map. Or better yet, it produces several maps, and each party takes turns eliminating a map until there is only one map left.

Regardless...Kucenich was defeated by a very liberal candidate...hence we can only assume the DEMOCRATS that voted for her believe she is a better candidate.

The issue isn't that the people of the district preferred one or the other of them. The issue is that the district was specifically drawn to produce the desired result.
 
True, but some ways are fairer and more impartial than others. And allowing partisan legislators to draw up legislative districts has to be one of the worst ways to do it. A computer program is relatively impartial...you just feed it the parameters that are agreed upon, and it produces a map. Or better yet, it produces several maps, and each party takes turns eliminating a map until there is only one map left.



The issue isn't that the people of the district preferred one or the other of them. The issue is that the district was specifically drawn to produce the desired result.
Who agrees on the parameters? Id like to say we could just trust a non-partisan committee to oversee redistricting wherever it should be needed...but...what do you suppose the odds of that EVER happening would be? it doesnt matter who the party in charge is...they will both act in a manner they justify. Id be interested to see what the computer redistricting boundaries would look like...and immediately afterward who would cry foul.
 
Who agrees on the parameters?

Depends on the state, and how they currently do their redistricting. In some states, it might require a constitutional amendment approved by the voters. In other states, it might simply take an act of the General Assembly to delegate the parameter-setting responsibility to an independent committee.

Id like to say we could just trust a non-partisan committee to oversee redistricting wherever it should be needed...but...what do you suppose the odds of that EVER happening would be?

We have independent committees for other things where legislators can't be trusted to be impartial: Military base closures, monetary policy, etc. So it is possible to get them to give up some of their power under certain circumstances.

it doesnt matter who the party in charge is...they will both act in a manner they justify.

That's a problem that having the districts drawn by a computer program would help fix.

Id be interested to see what the computer redistricting boundaries would look like...and immediately afterward who would cry foul.

As I see it, the process toward keeping bias out, and making the map nonpartisan, would go something like this :

1) The legislature establishes an independent, nonpartisan committee to negotiate the parameters of the districts. And if they're feeling ambitious, they also forbid the committee from using certain parameters historically associated with gerrymandering.

2) The committee sets the parameters for how the districts should be drawn. They would be able to draw upon the studies of good-governance watchdog groups to help them.

3) The agreed-upon parameters are fed into a computer program. The program then proceeds to randomly draw up any number of possible maps...say, 10 of them.

4) The leaders of each party take turns eliminating one of the maps until only one remains. This will tend to produce a result near the middle of what could be expected by chance (i.e. something reasonably fair). It eliminates the possibility that the resulting map is lopsided in one party's favor strictly by chance.

5) The agreed upon map becomes the basis for the new congressional districts, and remains in place until after the next census. Meanwhile, the good governance watchdogs could study the parameters they used and measure how well they work, so the next time around they could be even better.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the state, and how they currently do their redistricting. In some states, it might require a constitutional amendment approved by the voters. In other states, it might simply take an act of the General Assembly to delegate the parameter-setting responsibility to an independent committee.



We have independent committees for other things where legislators can't be trusted to be impartial: Military base closures, monetary policy, etc. So it is possible to get them to give up some of their power under certain circumstances.



That's a problem that having the districts drawn by a computer program would help fix.



As I see it, the process toward keeping bias out, and making the map nonpartisan, would go something like this :

1) The legislature establishes an independent, nonpartisan committee to negotiate the parameters of the districts. And if they're feeling ambitious, they also forbid the committee from using certain parameters historically associated with gerrymandering.

2) The committee sets the parameters for how the districts should be drawn. They would be able to draw upon the studies of good-governance watchdog groups to help them.

3) The agreed-upon parameters are fed into a computer program. The program then proceeds to randomly draw up any number of possible maps...say, 10 of them.

4) The leaders of each party take turns eliminating one of the maps until only one remains. This will tend to produce a result near the middle of what could be expected by chance (i.e. something reasonably fair). It eliminates the possibility that the resulting map is lopsided in one party's favor strictly by chance.

5) The agreed upon map becomes the basis for the new congressional districts, and remains in place until after the next census. Meanwhile, the good governance watchdogs could study the parameters they used and measure how well they work, so the next time around they could be even better.
4 is where you lose me. Thats a pretty good indicator that it is still bias driven...it just lands with the 'least' bias...or rather...ends when people run out of chances to pick a map that better suits their philosophy.
 
Back
Top Bottom