Jump to content






Photo

A Reason Republicans Don't Like Science

Republicans and Science Gerymandering

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Who_Do_You_Trust

Who_Do_You_Trust

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:30 PM

Over the past couple decades, something has happened in elections that’s left people scratching their heads.  The person, or party, receiving the most votes doesn’t win.  Some examples:

 

·         In Wisconsin, where the population is majority democrat, the state legislature is majority republican. 

·         In 2012, Democratic Party candidates managed to win only 201 of 435 US House of Representatives elections despite receiving an overall majority of the total combined           votes in nationwide House election races.

·         Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016 but lost the election.

 

Why is this happening?  For the most part, gerrymandering.  Gerrymandering is the dividing of election districts to give one political party a majority in many districts while concentrating the voting strength of the other party into as few districts as possible.  Analysts attribute the Republican majorities in the house and senate to highly successful Republican gerrymandering over the last two decades. 

 

There have been many court challenges but few have succeeded because most of the evidence presented has been subjective, hypothetical, or not supported by hard data.  Courts don’t make favorable rulings based on subjective, hypothetical, or lack of hard data.   

 

Enter science.  After the 2012 election, several academic research groups (mathematicians and statisticians) studied the complexities of gerrymandering and its effect on election outcomes.  They identified a very clear and solid relationship between them.  Solid enough that it’s now being used as evidence in court cases. 

 

In the last two years, 28 cases have been filed in federal courts, and in 24 of those cases, the district, county, or state has been ordered to abandon their voting district boundaries and redo them from scratch using non-partisan and non-racial guidelines. 

 

So, in the end, mathematics exposed the unfairness of gerrymandering.   A reason Republicans don’t like science. 



#2 2 Aces

2 Aces

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:37 PM

You're dumb if you don't understand the entire reason and concept of the *Electoral College*. Tell me, are you educated on the subject, because I am fully equipped to give you a little clinic on the topic. Otherwise, take your tripe and ignorance and hit the road. Willful ignorance is pathetic.



#3 UncleVinnys

UncleVinnys

    Just visiting this planet.

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom
  • Interests:Truth Prevails

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:46 PM

Yet another Half-Aced reply to a logical conversation.

 

I am SO glad I voted the way I did, knowing when the grandchildren come to me asking how we allowed the streams
to be polluted, how the vast aquifers below the earth got contaminated by fracking, and oceans and the bees and the
animals were crippled by pollution, I can honestly say the electoral process was compromised by narrow-minded
gerrymandering (GOP) congressional districts and hacking by the Russians, and manipulation by billionaires,
mostly for short-term corporate profits

2qtaidj.jpg

 


1 God: 1 World: 1 People     :peaceman: 


#4 2 Aces

2 Aces

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:48 PM

MORE LIES AND DRAMA QUEEN CRAP? MAN, GET A LIFE!! THE BEES??   :lol:

 

drama%2Bwarning.jpg



#5 UncleVinnys

UncleVinnys

    Just visiting this planet.

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom
  • Interests:Truth Prevails

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:54 PM

Still waiting for something positive to come from the Alt-Right.

 

33jstuh.jpg


1 God: 1 World: 1 People     :peaceman: 


#6 2 Aces

2 Aces

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:04 PM

CONSERVATIVES ALLOW DIFFERING THOUGHT AND OPINIONS. THE ALT-LEFT DOESN'T. BERKELEY? RIGHT, UNCLE-CHIHUAHUA? :)



#7 Chris

Chris

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,857 posts
  • Location:Folsom CA

Posted 23 April 2017 - 08:06 AM

Still waiting for something positive to come from the Alt-Right.

 

 

So funny, and from the two "antifas", you and who do, who are actually the real fascists....!  And the alt-right...?   You mean anyone who is not left of center and disagrees with you....?  Gonna be a long time for who_do as in the typical liberal fashion he has blocked anyone on the right who argues with him.   And you Vinny, can't argue with you....   You ignore any factual evidence presented and are off in the liberal La La land of your "safe room".  Must be nice to go through life stoned and in an alternate universe.   So you and who_do carry on talking to yourselves....!  The threads he started lately about "science" are hilarious in the fact that he blocks anyone here actually trained in science and can point out where he is wrong.  Classic...!


1A - 2A = -1A


#8 2 Aces

2 Aces

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 23 April 2017 - 09:26 AM

Science? Oh, you mean how corrupt, criminal Leftists and the Democrat Party have bastardized science over the years? Science is no longer science. It's an agenda. And just like a courtroom...if they lie about one thing, you are allowed to disregard ALL of their claims and testimony. Case dismissed. Need a reminder? OK, see below:

 

Settled-Science-600-LA.jpg



#9 Who_Do_You_Trust

Who_Do_You_Trust

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 12:03 PM

So funny, and from the two "antifas", you and who do, who are actually the real fascists....!  And the alt-right...?   You mean anyone who is not left of center and disagrees with you....?  Gonna be a long time for who_do as in the typical liberal fashion he has blocked anyone on the right who argues with him.   And you Vinny, can't argue with you....   You ignore any factual evidence presented and are off in the liberal La La land of your "safe room".  Must be nice to go through life stoned and in an alternate universe.   So you and who_do carry on talking to yourselves....!  The threads he started lately about "science" are hilarious in the fact that he blocks anyone here actually trained in science and can point out where he is wrong.  Classic...!

 

Chris - to see if you are providing constructive comments to the conversation, I looked at this post.  Sadly, it's laced with personal attacks and nothing relating to the subject of the thread. But was interested in your comment about my "science" efforts being "hilarious".  So let's discuss it (emphasis on discuss).  You're not on ignore any more.

 

We can start with this very thread about how innovative mathematics has exposed gerrymandering as an unconstitutional practice and is eliminating this tool from the Republican strategy.  Please provide a rationale and factual evidence (your words) why this is "hilarious".   

 

So you know - At the first instance of personal attacks, name-calling, or ad hominem characterizations, you'll be back on ignore. 



#10 2 Aces

2 Aces

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,403 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 23 April 2017 - 12:12 PM

Chris, he doesn't have ANYONE on ignore. Trust me. How do I know? Leftists have a NEED to know who is criticizing them, what they're saying, how often, etc. The *ignore* BS is a tactic they attempt to use in order to show some weird *superiority*, but they are lying/bluffing. It's a strange dynamic, but Leftists are strange people. Oh, and they abhor the truth. And just remember: Who-Dung, who started this thread, said a couple weeks ago that America should be a *Sanctuary Country*, just so you know the mentality of some people on this forum. :lol:

#11 The Average Joe

The Average Joe

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,155 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 12:12 PM

This really is beneath you WHodo. To assign a party to the gerrymandering is partisan tripe. I could point out that CA (dem controlled) has gerrymandered  it's districts that assure all 55 electoral votes go dem. We actually voted for a citizen commission to redistrict (which I applied for). It seems, like the CBO, the redistricting commission is given certain criteria that assures a meaningless outcome.  The relevant phrase is "garbage in, garbage out."

 

As for the party of "science." <eye roll>  When the eco-nazis co-opted science for their green agenda, it damaged the credibility of all science for an expedient political agenda. When "scientists" adopted the fascist shut down of any conversation that dared questioned a THEORY, that was not science, that was politics. It is not the right that has diminished science, it is the left, and scientists themselves that have abandoned scientific method and Socratic logic for feelings. The damage the ecowarriors have done to scientific credibility will take decades to repair.

 

It is just another aspect of what we see on college campuses where violent "antifa" (anti-fascists) prevent ANYONE right of the middle from speaking. They do this by threats and actual violence and by redefining anything THEY don't agree with as hate speech, which in their sick minds justifies violating other's rights.

Who are the fascists again?


"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive" -- C.S. Lewis

 

If the only way to combat "global warming" was to lower taxes, we would never hear of the issue again. - Anonymous

 

"Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one" — Thomas Paine, 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘰𝘯 𝘚𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦 (1776)

 


#12 Chris

Chris

    Hopeless Addict

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,857 posts
  • Location:Folsom CA

Posted 23 April 2017 - 07:44 PM

 

Chris -   You're not on ignore any more.

 

Well that's mighty "tolerant" of you....!    I feel like I'm on some kind of liberal-progressive probation now....?   Gotta tread softly or my marbles will be taken away again........?   I probably won't pass this test in the long run....   I have too much common sense and say what's on my mind....   All bad traits in this politically correct environment we find ourselves in now a days in this country.  

 

And on gerrymandering if you must go there..   I have always hated it, really hated it in California when both the dems and the reps made "safe zones" for each other by mutual agreement.  Foxes in charge of the hen house so to speak.   I think we would do better if we gave the assignment to make districts to a class of 8th graders somewhere in Fresno or Bakersfield.   Let them decide the districts and then we have to live with it.  They would do a much better job than the politicians because they have way more common sense.   They might even take into account geography and natural borders....?   And don't be so hard on Republicans being successful in their gerrymandering efforts in the last 20 years or less.  They had a good teacher, and for many decades, the democrats....!  The Republicans got their behinds handed to them for decades if not the last century, all over the country, because the democrats were adept at screwing over the Republicans anyway they could when they controlled the process of making the districts, gerrymandering.  It's just the other way around now.  The Republicans learned their lesson well from a good teacher and are now doing it to you guys and you don't like it....!  You left that part out of your initial post, the whole history. Here is something I found to add to your story, it's about how the dems controlled gerrymandering for a century or so....

 

http://www.americant..._whirlwind.html

 

and a quote from another article:

 

"The creation of a raft of these majority-minority districts took place after the 1990 census and the result was the beginning of the end of a 60-year-period of Democratic dominance in the House that stretched from the Great Depression to the Clinton presidency. It was accomplished by creating bizarre districts that ignored traditional boundaries as well as geography. These districts gave new meaning to the term gerrymandering but they accomplished exactly what the courts intended for them to do. The numbers of African-Americans and Hispanics in the House grew exponentially. It was only after this process began that some on both the left and the right realized that the fallout from the new districts was the end of many competitive districts as well as the completion of a long period of decline for the Democrats in the south."


1A - 2A = -1A


#13 Who_Do_You_Trust

Who_Do_You_Trust

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 11:12 PM

This really is beneath you WHodo. To assign a party to the gerrymandering is partisan tripe. I could point out that CA (dem controlled) has gerrymandered  it's districts that assure all 55 electoral votes go dem. We actually voted for a citizen commission to redistrict (which I applied for). It seems, like the CBO, the redistricting commission is given certain criteria that assures a meaningless outcome.  The relevant phrase is "garbage in, garbage out."
 
As for the party of "science." <eye roll>  When the eco-nazis co-opted science for their green agenda, it damaged the credibility of all science for an expedient political agenda. 
 
It is just another aspect of what we see on college campuses where violent "antifa" (anti-fascists) prevent ANYONE right of the middle from speaking. 

 
Joe - beneath me?   :)  Let's look at some facts:
 
1) "I could point out that CA (dem controlled) has gerrymandered  it's districts that assure all 55 electoral votes go dem."   Actually, you can't.  California joins 47 other states in assigning electoral college votes on a "winner take all" basis to the candidate who wins a majority in the state.  Gerrymandering has nothing to do with it.
 
2)  "...the redistricting commission is given certain criteria that assures a meaningless outcome."  It actually looks like the California Citizens Redistrict Commission is doing a fair job.  Here are some numbers:
 
                               Category                                         Republicans    Democrats
 
Calif registered voters who declare a party affiliation             38%              62%
California House of Representatives                                       31%              69%
California Senate                                                                    33%              67%  
Calif Representatives in US Congress                                    28%              72%
 
There seems to be a few more dems than electorate in these bodies, so I will concede there might be a little gerrymandering going on, but it's not as bad and many would have you believe.  If the California legislature was predominantly democrats and the electorate was predominantly republican, then I would agree with you wholeheartedly.  But it's not the case.  It is the situation in other states, however..  The USSC will be hearing gerrymandering cases from Alabama, Wisconsin, and No. Carolina later this year.
 
As for your "science" comments, it seems you're condemning the entire scientific community because of the activity of a few bad apples.  I'm pretty certain most research scientists try to work in an ethical and honest manner and report their findings as unbiasedly as possible.  I've interviewed and spoken with 100's on scientists over the past 40 years, and find that 99.5% of them are dedicated to producing credible results without any political motives or agenda.  Sadly, corporations, politicians, and lobbyists manipulate and contort those results for short term monetary gain.  The tobacco industry wrote the playbook for this in the 1960's.  And for whatever reasons, republican motives often seem to align with corporate motives.  Just look at how recent executive orders seem to align with fossil fuel interests.
 
Regarding your comments about college campuses,  I agree with you 105%.



#14 camay2327

camay2327

    GO NAVY

  • Moderator
  • 11,481 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 23 April 2017 - 11:45 PM

Over the past couple decades, something has happened in elections that’s left people scratching their heads.  The person, or party, receiving the most votes doesn’t win.  Some examples:

 

·         Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 but lost the election.

·         In 2012, Democratic Party candidates managed to win only 201 of 435 US House of Representatives elections despite receiving an overall majority of the total combined           votes in nationwide House election races.

·         Hillary Clinton won the popular vote in 2016 but lost the election.

 

Why is this happening?  For the most part, gerrymandering.  Gerrymandering is the dividing of election districts to give one political party a majority in many districts while concentrating the voting strength of the other party into as few districts as possible.  Analysts attribute the Republican majorities in the house and senate to highly successful Republican gerrymandering over the last two decades. 

 

There have been many court challenges but few have succeeded because most of the evidence presented has been subjective, hypothetical, or not supported by hard data.  Courts don’t make favorable rulings based on subjective, hypothetical, or lack of hard data.   

 

Enter science.  After the 2012 election, several academic research groups (mathematicians and statisticians) studied the complexities of gerrymandering and its effect on election outcomes.  They identified a very clear and solid relationship between them.  Solid enough that it’s now being used as evidence in court cases. 

 

In the last two years, 28 cases have been filed in federal courts, and in 24 of those cases, the district, county, or state has been ordered to abandon their voting district boundaries and redo them from scratch using non-partisan and non-racial guidelines. 

 

So, in the end, mathematics exposed the unfairness of gerrymandering.   A reason Republicans don’t like science. 

 

Yes, and the Dems here in California do it quite well, don't they?


A VETERAN Whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to "The United States of America" for an amount "up to and including their life". That is HONOR, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it. -Author unknown-

#15 Who_Do_You_Trust

Who_Do_You_Trust

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 843 posts

Posted 24 April 2017 - 06:25 AM

 

Yes, and the Dems here in California do it quite well, don't they?

 

Camay,  if you read my most recent post above, it shows that in California, the party line make-up of the state legislature represents the population pretty well.  There is a small preponderance toward democratic advantage, but it's not large.  We certainly don't have a situation where the state legislature is from one party when the bulk of voters are from the other party.  some states actually have this situation.  Wisconsin, Alabama, and No. Carolina are notable examples.    






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users