-two squares would ensure a crapshoot on parties and no minority ever being able to win
-a district with mostly one party in each district would ensure each party had representation
-a district with the entire minority in one district would ensure minority representation
Each one is fair depending on your viewpoint. And people will naturally gravitate to communities who agree with them. Which why in florida the panhandle is conservative, and the south is liberal and the center is a mix
Women (Nasty or otherwise) are going to be the reason that Donald Trump is NEVER President!
and yes, some gerrymandered districts are ****ing stupid too..... both parties are incredibly guilty of this kind of bull****.
the one you show in Florida is pretty bad.... and the illinois 4th is even worse
It dont have to be....they are decided by politicians,
Ultimately yes as everything else, but the process can be as unpolitical as you want it.put in place by the political process.
Split the island in 2 depending on where the population is. Pretty simple. If the population is centered in a major city, then split the city down the middle. It is pretty simple.I dont see how to do it otherwise. Take an island with 50% of each party, and 25% minority. How do you create two fair districts?
And? How is that the fault of the districting? The problem is two big parties and the inability for other parties to get in.-two squares would ensure a crapshoot on parties and no minority ever being able to win
That will happen naturally. For example in Denmark everyone knows that certain districts of Copenhagen will most likely vote left, and other areas in the suburbs will vote right. You cant avoid having certain districts vote for one party or another, but what you can avoid is specifically designing those districts so they will always vote for one party or another. Now nothing is ever set in stone as people change their views over time.-a district with mostly one party in each district would ensure each party had representation
Why do "minorities" need representation? I understand it was a problem in the 1960s but now? I thought your country was over its racist past and even if it aint, then getting rid of "minority" districts is the way forward. Some areas will automatically be minority districts, where others wont.. minorities tend to keep together.. even though people tend to deny this on these boards.-a district with the entire minority in one district would ensure minority representation
Sorry I do not buy that. The political leaning of the area in question is often decided by economics and in the case of the US.. sadly still race. For example, as I pointed out in Copenhagen. The areas that vote left, are the "poorer" traditionally worker class areas. The areas that vote right, are traditionally middle and upper class pro Royalty areas. The districts were not created to favor these populations, as our districts are based on population and geographic criteria. That is why the rural districts tend to vote center right, but the cities/larger towns tend to vote center left. It is just how it is. But what we do is use a commission based on all the political parties plus bureaucrats to maintain the district boundaries and so on. No one party can "build its own" district.Each one is fair depending on your viewpoint. And people will naturally gravitate to communities who agree with them. Which why in florida the panhandle is conservative, and the south is liberal and the center is a mix