I haven’t been up on this gerrymandering argument, but the idea that any partisan gerrymander violates the constitution (one person-one vote? I guess?) would seem to require the Supreme Court to continually solve an NP-complete problem to create perfect ‘constitutional’ districts
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @soncharm
Premise: Democrats are supposed to win every election, forever - if they don't the other side cheated Observation: They seem to lose sometimes Conclusion: The other side cheated using <shuffles deck, takes out card> ... gerrymandering Only ensuring permanent (D) wins fixes this
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon
and of course there’s tacit understanding that gerrymandering that favors Ds (e.g. Maryland) is fine
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Replying to @soncharm
Covfefe Anon Retweeted Seth Moulton
Example, btw - this guy is complaining about "gerrymandering" in a state-wide race:https://twitter.com/sethmoulton/status/1144257787222003715 …
Covfefe Anon added,
Seth MoultonVerified account @sethmoulton
Make no mistake: the partisan gerrymandering SCOTUS just allowed is also racial gerrymandering—a modern-day Jim Crow. Just look at what happened with Stacey Abrams last cycle in Georgia. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/07/opinion/stacey-abrams-election-governor-georgia.html …
Show this thread
12:01 PM - 27 Jun 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.