If we can move the debate to an acknowledgement of that basic fact (which I get into in my articles), I have done my job. 100% of left-leaning commentary on gerrymandering refuses to acknowledge it & refuses to acknowledge the states where Ds draw gerrymanders.
My point is, you want Republicans to end gerrymandering only because you think it's a net benefit to your side. You'd be unwilling to trade anything that is a net loss - even a trade explicitly on anti-gerrymander principles.
-
-
You’re the cynic, not me. You love all this stuff because it’s the only way your minortarian party can win. But I would happily, say, eliminate the filibuster and let you all enact every pernicious law you could. Have at it and take it to the people.
-
You’ve got nothing to say about entitlements but, “Help us do it!” As if….so much for *your* principles. Run on that, take power, and do it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And further: why would anybody agree to your convoluted proposal rather than just non partisan commissions? In Iowa, Rs now have three out of four seats, despite commission. Commission doesn’t necessarily favor either party. It’s *equitable.* Which is exactly what you hate.
-
You want an edge! An edge via obviously inequitable means. That’s the only way you can imagine winning. Even Iowa, now a solidly R state, doesn’t appeal to you.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.