• 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!

Kaisch: Fix GOP or Else

straykatz said:
Agree! Both sides are equally bad in the sense that these elected officials are nothing but buffers between we the ordinary people and the corporations that control them and our country. Money needs to be removed from elections/politics before we will ever see anything truly change.
Click to expand...

Nope we just need to get folks to realize that their own lying congress critter is in need of culling from the herd. So long as folks give congress critters an approval rating below a roadkill sandwich but return them to office at above a 90% rate then we are screwed. Each congress critter promises us the moon and just delvers more rotten cheese - always claiming that they were blocked by some immovable outside (in the other party) force. We have had red batches, blue batches and purple batches of congress critters yet each just grows the power and expense of the federal government.
 
trouble13 said:
How would you fix that?

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The only way that I could see working is via a ballot initiative to require that no district can contain more than a part of one county.

Here is "my" congessional district:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas's_35th_congressional_district

It contains no entire county yet parts of 5 counties and parts of two big cities. Basically a single guaranteed blue seat in exchange for a few guaranteed red seats. The republicants in Texas are masters of the art (game?) of gerrymandering.
 
Chomsky said:
In general, I don't like or vote for most Republicans.

But if somebody like Kasich started a viable third party, I'd be on it like flies to crap. I'd do anything, to get away from the nightmare of the current two-party system!

Can we really sustain another match-up, like Clinton-Trump?

Marone! :doh
Click to expand...

It does appear that the two party system is doomed to be locked in a match of elder ruling dynasties for years to come. After all, the Bush's, Clinton's, Kennedy's and now Trump's have a lot of family ties. There's even always that rumor about Michelle Obama.

Just imagine if the last election was Bush-Clinton. Again.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
The only way that I could see working is via a ballot initiative to require that no district can contain more than a part of one county.

Here is "my" congessional district:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas's_35th_congressional_district

It contains no entire county yet parts of 5 counties and parts of two big cities. Basically a single guaranteed blue seat in exchange for a few guaranteed red seats. The republicants in Texas are masters of the art (game?) of gerrymandering.
Click to expand...
I am well aware of the problems associated with gerrymandering. Republicans use to complain about it when the Democrats controlled congress. They rigged it in their favor too. That's why it was such a big deal when the GOP had sweeping wins during a redistricting year. This is something that has been going on for as long as we have been a nation. It is why our states are shaped the way they are too. I've thought about this before and I have not found a good solution yet.

I really don't know that the left understands all the ramifications associated with forcing ACA into law. They may of cost themselves a congressional majority for the next 50yrs or more.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
It does appear that the two party system is doomed to be locked in a match of elder ruling dynasties for years to come. After all, the Bush's, Clinton's, Kennedy's and now Trump's have a lot of family ties. There's even always that rumor about Michelle Obama.

Just imagine if the last election was Bush-Clinton. Again.
Click to expand...
Say what we may, but I'd take a Bush in the Oval Office over the Trump Family Cabal anyday!

Here's what this idiot's been Tweeting this morning:

"“I told Rex Tillerson, our wonderful Secretary of State, that he is wasting his time trying to negotiate with Little Rocket Man...,” Trump said in a tweet. “...Save your energy Rex, we'll do what has to be done!”"

""Being nice to Rocket Man hasn't worked in 25 years, why would it work now? Clinton failed, Bush failed, and Obama failed. I won't fail," Trump wrote."

Source: NBC News: ‘Save Your Energy, Rex’: Trump Tweet Undermines Sec. of State Tillerson on North Korea Talks

Hell, I'd 25th Amendment him - if I it was my choice!
 
trouble13 said:
I am well aware of the problems associated with gerrymandering. Republicans use to complain about it when the Democrats controlled congress. They rigged it in their favor too. That's why it was such a big deal when the GOP had sweeping wins during a redistricting year. This is something that has been going on for as long as we have been a nation. It is why our states are shaped the way they are too. I've thought about this before and I have not found a good solution yet.

I really don't know that the left understands all the ramifications associated with forcing ACA into law. They may of cost themselves a congressional majority for the next 50yrs or more.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Do not underestimate the stupidity of the republicants - with PPACA repeal being impossible (without 60 votes in the Senate) the republicants are still apt to ram some half-baked PPACA "replacement" plan (TrumpCare?) through that is as bad or even worse than PPACA to simply say that they had kept a campaign promise.
 
Last edited:
trouble13 said:
I am well aware of the problems associated with gerrymandering. Republicans use to complain about it when the Democrats controlled congress. They rigged it in their favor too. That's why it was such a big deal when the GOP had sweeping wins during a redistricting year. This is something that has been going on for as long as we have been a nation. It is why our states are shaped the way they are too. I've thought about this before and I have not found a good solution yet.

I really don't know that the left understands all the ramifications associated with forcing ACA into law. They may of cost themselves a congressional majority for the next 50yrs or more.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The reason we have gerrymandering as we know it today was to fix the perceived problems of Gerrymandering of yesterday. That ought to tell you something.

The only way I see to fix it is to have a computer divide each state into districts without regard to anything other than head count as compact as possible. Presently districts are drawn to give some voters a leg up or a leg down. There is no Constitutional reason to justify that.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do not underestimate the stupidity of the republicants - with PPACA repeal being impossible (without 60 votes in the Senate) the republicants are still apt to ram some half-baked PPACA "replacement" plan (TrmpCare?) through that is as bad or even worse than PPACA to simply say that they had kept a campaign promise.
Click to expand...
They will still control the gerrymandering

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
They will still control the gerrymandering

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Gerrymandering can help to save the House republicants if they face no primary challenge but Senators are elected statewide and are also subject to primary challenges.
 
Chomsky said:
Say what we may, but I'd take a Bush in the Oval Office over the Trump Family Cabal anyday!
Click to expand...

Me 2, but literally no one else would like it. People wanted exciting change. Trump is exciting.
 
jimbo said:
The reason we have gerrymandering as we know it today was to fix the perceived problems of Gerrymandering of yesterday. That ought to tell you something.

The only way I see to fix it is to have a computer divide each state into districts without regard to anything other than head count as compact as possible. Presently districts are drawn to give some voters a leg up or a leg down. There is no Constitutional reason to justify that.
Click to expand...
Iv esss considered something like that. It would unbias but not necessarily yielding the optimal resilts for the electorate and that imo should be the goal.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
jimbo said:
The reason we have gerrymandering as we know it today was to fix the perceived problems of Gerrymandering of yesterday. That ought to tell you something.

The only way I see to fix it is to have a computer divide each state into districts without regard to anything other than head count as compact as possible. Presently districts are drawn to give some voters a leg up or a leg down. There is no Constitutional reason to justify that.
Click to expand...

https://www.debatepolitics.com/gene...x-gop-else-post1067690872.html#post1067690872

Just what you asked for.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Gerrymandering can help to save the House republicants if they face no primary challenge but Senators are elected statewide and are also subject to primary challenges.
Click to expand...
Yip it helps them in the house only not the senate.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Kasich would have been the candidate I could have not only voted for but actually supported and felt good about doing so if he had received the nomination.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
I like the compactness concept but would prefer county lines as the basis. It is less of a PITA to have a single sample ballot layout for federal, state and county candidates and ballot initiatives.
Click to expand...

Very true. Could simply take his model and condense or expand it to nearest boundaries.
 
trouble13 said:
Im not sure how i feel about his program what criteria does he use to draw a district isnt clear to me.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ten minute TED talk on it by him.

 
trouble13 said:
Iv esss considered something like that. It would unbias but not necessarily yielding the optimal resilts for the electorate and that imo should be the goal.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Trouble is, voting is not about government deciding the outcome of an election before the vote, which is what gerrymandering is all about.

My district was broken up for the last election because we were too white. Now my representative is someone in inner city Richmond. Tell me how that represents me.
 
poweRob said:
Very true. Could simply take his model and condense or expand it to nearest boundaries.
Click to expand...

Of course, we still have the VRA and whacky judges to be dealt with - even if the long odds of either major party agreeing to lose their magical and mystical gerrymandering powers is overcome. The next toughest nut to crack, after gerrymandering, is the huge advantage that the incumbents have - they can campaign, name stuff after themselves, hold town halls, "inform" the voters, travel and "make news" on the taxpayer's dime while their mere mortal challengers have no such self-granted publicly funded perks.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Of course, we still have the VRA and whacky judges to be dealt with - even if the long odds of either major party agreeing to lose their magical and mystical gerrymandering powers is overcome. The next toughest nut to crack, after gerrymandering, is the huge advantage that the incumbents have - they can campaign, hold town halls, "inform" the voters, travel and "make news" on the taxpayer's dime while their mere mortal challengers have no such self-granted publicly funded perks.
Click to expand...

True. Although Im a huge opponent of thinking money is speech therefore billionaires sponsor their own candidates against other billionaires' candidates. I think publicly funded elections could fix all that mess. It's been done before and it works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom