United We Stand - uwsboard.com

drawn Pennsylvania congressional districts. The districts were revised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in response to what they considered gerrymandered districts put forth by the Pennsylvania legislature.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/articl ... strict-map

ElbertoHokie wrote:drawn Pennsylvania congressional districts. The districts were revised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in response to what they considered gerrymandered districts put forth by the Pennsylvania legislature.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/articl ... strict-map

ok

All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

So then why didn't the Supreme Court, a conservative leaning one, elect to do anything about it?

And just because it has always been done that way, that doesn't mean it is the right way. Most expensive words in business, "That's how we've always done it."

cwtcr hokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:drawn Pennsylvania congressional districts. The districts were revised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in response to what they considered gerrymandered districts put forth by the Pennsylvania legislature.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/articl ... strict-map

ok

I agree MK.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ElbertoHokie wrote:

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

So then why didn't the Supreme Court, a conservative leaning one, elect to do anything about it?

And just because it has always been done that way, that doesn't mean it is the right way. Most expensive words in business, "That's how we've always done it."

Conservative leanings??? WTF are you talking about?

Democrats hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court.

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch ... cision?amp

And if people don’t like the “gerrymandering” from the legislature they can vote them out at the ballot box. These judges are clearly overstepping the separation of powers and they are not beholden to the electorate.

These are partisan Democrat activist judges abusing their power. Nothing more nothing less. And to suggest their actions are nonpartisan is laughable.

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

You think NC and PA are cray-cray? Have you not seen the gerrymandering committed by both parties in VA?



This was the VA 3rd. Bobby Scott has had it since 1993.

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

So then why didn't the Supreme Court, a conservative leaning one, elect to do anything about it?

And just because it has always been done that way, that doesn't mean it is the right way. Most expensive words in business, "That's how we've always done it."

Conservative leanings??? WTF are you talking about?

Democrats hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court.

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch ... cision?amp

And if people don’t like the “gerrymandering” from the legislature they can vote them out at the ballot box. These judges are clearly overstepping the separation of powers and they are not beholden to the electorate.

These are partisan Democrat activist judges abusing their power. Nothing more nothing less. And to suggest their actions are nonpartisan is laughable.

Didn’t they determine that the district - that the democrat won - was improperly gerrymandered in favor of Republicans?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

So then why didn't the Supreme Court, a conservative leaning one, elect to do anything about it?

And just because it has always been done that way, that doesn't mean it is the right way. Most expensive words in business, "That's how we've always done it."

Conservative leanings??? WTF are you talking about?

Democrats hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court.

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch ... cision?amp

And if people don’t like the “gerrymandering” from the legislature they can vote them out at the ballot box. These judges are clearly overstepping the separation of powers and they are not beholden to the electorate.

These are partisan Democrat activist judges abusing their power. Nothing more nothing less. And to suggest their actions are nonpartisan is laughable.

The federal supreme court refused to hear the case. Not the state. Federal.

This is adorable. How do you vote people out at the ballot box if your district has been gerrymandered?! That's the whole f$%^ing point. They stack and pack districts to minimize opposition representation in the legislation. The only reason the impeachment they're suddenly attempting of 4 judges may have a chance is because...drumroll...the state's districts are gerrymandered. The last impeachment in Pennsylvania was in 1994 when a judge was impeached for committing a felony. Like it should be done.

ElbertoHokie wrote:

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

UpstateSCHokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:

Major Kong wrote:All States should have independent, non partisan committees draw new congressional districts. Arizona does this.

Agreed.

It was a spoken strategy by Republicans to retake state legislatures after 2008 in order to be able to draw the district lines after the 2010 census. It worked for the most part until they went a little cray cray in NC and Pennsylvania. Now let me balance it and say democrats do the same thing when they're in power.

Non-partisan committee should do it. Not the party in power.

Just so we're all clear here, the PA Supreme Court's redistricting was anything but non-partisan. And the fact of the matter is, the state legislatures get to draw the districts every 10 years. Whatever party is in power has always had that power. This is the first time when a partisan court has stepped in just because they did not like the districts that were drawn by the opposition party.

So then why didn't the Supreme Court, a conservative leaning one, elect to do anything about it?

And just because it has always been done that way, that doesn't mean it is the right way. Most expensive words in business, "That's how we've always done it."

Conservative leanings??? WTF are you talking about?

Democrats hold a 5-2 majority on the state Supreme Court.

http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch ... cision?amp

And if people don’t like the “gerrymandering” from the legislature they can vote them out at the ballot box. These judges are clearly overstepping the separation of powers and they are not beholden to the electorate.

These are partisan Democrat activist judges abusing their power. Nothing more nothing less. And to suggest their actions are nonpartisan is laughable.

The federal supreme court refused to hear the case. Not the state. Federal.

This is adorable. How do you vote people out at the ballot box if your district has been gerrymandered?! That's the whole f$%^ing point. They stack and pack districts to minimize opposition representation in the legislation. The only reason the impeachment they're suddenly attempting of 4 judges may have a chance is because...drumroll...the state's districts are gerrymandered. The last impeachment in Pennsylvania was in 1994 when a judge was impeached for committing a felony. Like it should be done.

Oh you were talking about the FEDERAL supreme court? Good grief, okay then the "conservative leaning" federal court actually followed the Constitution in this case. They recognized that they had no jurisdiction here. Why would you even think that the federal SCOTUS should be able to do something about this????

We're talking about the actions of the state supreme court. And if gerrymandering means that you can never vote a party out of power, then how did the Republicans ever win back the congress in the first place? The GOP did not invent gerrymandering.

ElbertoHokie wrote:drawn Pennsylvania congressional districts. The districts were revised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in response to what they considered gerrymandered districts put forth by the Pennsylvania legislature.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/articl ... strict-map

you may have missed the point, in general the US SC does not mess with the states deal in districting, they leave that to the states so the scotus not hearing it is not at all surprising

cwtcr hokie wrote:

ElbertoHokie wrote:drawn Pennsylvania congressional districts. The districts were revised by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in response to what they considered gerrymandered districts put forth by the Pennsylvania legislature.

http://www.readingeagle.com/news/articl ... strict-map

you may have missed the point, in general the US SC does not mess with the states deal in districting, they leave that to the states so the scotus not hearing it is not at all surprising

Agree. But the state supreme court should have stayed out of it as well. Redistricting is a political process, not a legal one. The courts have no business sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong. They interjected solely for political reasons.

I laugh when leftists assume gerrymandering is an R thing.

RiverguyVT wrote:I laugh when leftists assume gerrymandering is an R thing.

I laugh at all leftists assumptions.