By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
konnichiwa said:

To secure votes or have a clear winner in  districts obviously,

I was asking because I don't think SanAndreasX has even been talking about gerrymandering.  

konnichiwa said:

I don't really care that Democrats say they are not in favor they have done it aswell and I totally get it that they don't like it now when they are not in power but in general 'Gerrymandering' is wrong for me and I would hate it to see it happen it in EU.

Certain states have been gerrymandered in favor of Democrats, but Republicans have generally done far more of it. 

Out of the 11 most gerrymandered states, 9 of them are hugely in favor of Republicans. There is a massive difference in scale, and how they're weaponizing them, and acting like they're equivalent or worse somehow is dishonest.  

They are not remotely done at the same scale, and Democrats are more in favor of independent commissions to prevent gerrymandering, and there has been more pushback in Democratic gerrymandered states like Pennsylvania, where there is more push to redraw the maps.  This isn't particularly happening in the states that are Republican gerrymandered.



Around the Network
Machiavellian said:
konnichiwa said:

Hmm I stated in my first sentence people don't want a police state, don't want border controls, don't want to get checked up at the airport, don't want to get a drivers licence, don't want to open their bags for a security guard at a shop and so on but their are good reasons why you can't have that freedom.  We will see what happens but if between now and lets say 2028 in DC the crime rate went down, the homeless rate is down, murder rate goes down, drug addicts went down, and the number of teens only getting a probabtion for serious offenses went down....Is that a bad thing or not?  

@SanAndreasX  How is it talking shit? If I want to talk shit then I talk about how I don't understand how any country would accept Gerrymandering.  If you are in office and you believe that your policies are great why do you feel the need to Gerrymandering.

I did not ask about other people, I asked if you wanted a police state.  How much freedom are you willing to give up for security. How much does those items you list effect you the most and how much are YOU willing to give up for those problems to be fixed by more military intervention.  Interesting enough, I was in Columbia not to long ago.  Do you know that on every corner there is a military guard with a dog sometimes but crime is still rampant there why do you believe that is the case.  Because soldiers do not solve problems instead the problems just find ways around those measures.

Also the if you noticed what Trump and his administration says, they are not fixing the homeless problem, they are just relocating them somewhere else so no one sees them.  As to crime going down, it already was going down but putting more soldiers really doesn't solve crime as much as being a band aide.  Understanding why those crimes happen and fixing at the source probably would be a more productive solution as it will ensure the next generation also doesn't need to go down that route.  Also, soldiers do not fix drug addiction or primary most of the stuff you listed since that is not their job.

I feel the same way I don't want to give up my freedom of just driving to the Netherlands without getting controlled at the border but if their is more border related crime especially drug related I don't mind they have border controls and control me, it is annoying but I get why they do it.

Good example about Military intervention.. I am from Belgium and in Brussels we had terrorist attacks; heavy gang war in the 2010's.  From around 2015-2020 we had around 500 soldiers in the capital

People were against it at first but got used to it fast, during those years they also prevent some terrorist and crime attacks.  

The ones who disliked it the most were the soldiers because after some time the crime rate went down by a lot and they had not much to do.

A new political government became in power and voted the soldiers out and since then the crime went up

Typical similar issues you see in some USA cities,  people stop reporting thefts because the police can't help because of not enough resources, citizens avoid certain neighbourhoods, they wake up because of another shooting, they see another drug deal going on but don't report it because they will walk free again tomorow...and then you have a mayor who will gladly say crime is down by 10%!! meanwhile the citizens know very well that a ton of people just don't report stuff anymore. Next election a right winged candidate will probably gain the power or some power and politicians will be shocked and say silly stuff wow never expected their live so many white racist people in Brussels...

Curious will be Columbia be more safe if every military guard will leave the street..






the-pi-guy said:
konnichiwa said:

To secure votes or have a clear winner in  districts obviously,

I was asking because I don't think SanAndreasX has even been talking about gerrymandering.  

konnichiwa said:

I don't really care that Democrats say they are not in favor they have done it aswell and I totally get it that they don't like it now when they are not in power but in general 'Gerrymandering' is wrong for me and I would hate it to see it happen it in EU.

Certain states have been gerrymandered in favor of Democrats, but Republicans have generally done far more of it. 

Out of the 11 most gerrymandered states, 9 of them are hugely in favor of Republicans. There is a massive difference in scale, and how they're weaponizing them, and acting like they're equivalent or worse somehow is dishonest.  

They are not remotely done at the same scale, and Democrats are more in favor of independent commissions to prevent gerrymandering, and there has been more pushback in Democratic gerrymandered states like Pennsylvania, where there is more push to redraw the maps.  This isn't particularly happening in the states that are Republican gerrymandered.

Well he said I was talking shit basically choose to talk shit about USA.  If I wanted to talk shit about USA it would not be hard to do so and as an example I named gerrymandering, I think it is undemocratic and it seems you are now defending it with 'but Republicans did it more' I don't get it, it should not have been done by anyone.  The fact the population accept it is ridiculous.  I accept that the Republicans do it (I hate it that they do it) but they can do it because they won the vote, because they listened to the population.   Why did the Dems not try to win the vote?  Why do they not come up Policies that will make them win the state so they don't have to worry about the Gerrymandering?






konnichiwa said:
Machiavellian said:

I did not ask about other people, I asked if you wanted a police state.  How much freedom are you willing to give up for security. How much does those items you list effect you the most and how much are YOU willing to give up for those problems to be fixed by more military intervention.  Interesting enough, I was in Columbia not to long ago.  Do you know that on every corner there is a military guard with a dog sometimes but crime is still rampant there why do you believe that is the case.  Because soldiers do not solve problems instead the problems just find ways around those measures.

Also the if you noticed what Trump and his administration says, they are not fixing the homeless problem, they are just relocating them somewhere else so no one sees them.  As to crime going down, it already was going down but putting more soldiers really doesn't solve crime as much as being a band aide.  Understanding why those crimes happen and fixing at the source probably would be a more productive solution as it will ensure the next generation also doesn't need to go down that route.  Also, soldiers do not fix drug addiction or primary most of the stuff you listed since that is not their job.

I feel the same way I don't want to give up my freedom of just driving to the Netherlands without getting controlled at the border but if their is more border related crime especially drug related I don't mind they have border controls and control me, it is annoying but I get why they do it.

Good example about Military intervention.. I am from Belgium and in Brussels we had terrorist attacks; heavy gang war in the 2010's.  From around 2015-2020 we had around 500 soldiers in the capital

People were against it at first but got used to it fast, during those years they also prevent some terrorist and crime attacks.  

The ones who disliked it the most were the soldiers because after some time the crime rate went down by a lot and they had not much to do.

A new political government became in power and voted the soldiers out and since then the crime went up

Typical similar issues you see in some USA cities,  people stop reporting thefts because the police can't help because of not enough resources, citizens avoid certain neighbourhoods, they wake up because of another shooting, they see another drug deal going on but don't report it because they will walk free again tomorow...and then you have a mayor who will gladly say crime is down by 10%!! meanwhile the citizens know very well that a ton of people just don't report stuff anymore. Next election a right winged candidate will probably gain the power or some power and politicians will be shocked and say silly stuff wow never expected their live so many white racist people in Brussels...

Curious will be Columbia be more safe if every military guard will leave the street..

People usually get use to being controlled, that is why dictators know once they take control, you will fall in line and the next generation will only know control so its all you will ever know.  Once freedom is gone, it never comes back.  Always remember once you give up something, you can believe there is no incentive to give it back and once you become adjusted as you say, then it's your life from then on.



Machiavellian said:

People usually get use to being controlled, that is why dictators know once they take control, you will fall in line and the next generation will only know control so its all you will ever know.  Once freedom is gone, it never comes back.  Always remember once you give up something, you can believe there is no incentive to give it back and once you become adjusted as you say, then it's your life from then on.

I'll add to this by saying that once you've been convinced to give something up in the name of "safety" and "security," it's easier for a regime to take away something else in the name of "safety" and security."

China is often used as a boogeyman by right-wing governments, while they implement many of the same social controls that China has. 



Around the Network

Rumours have it that the new book on Prince Andrew (Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York) was supposed to contain some unpleasant truth bombs about Melania Trump, among other things that she had sex with Jeffrey Epstein before meeting Donald.
Apparently the publisher got cold feet and removed the part shortly before release. However, supposedly the edit happened so late that the hardcover edition had already been printed, I will check of I can get hold of it to confirm.



I'm sure this tweet sums up the opinion most of us have on gerrymandering in general, and on the tit-for-tat that Greg Abbott and Gavin Newsom are engaging in at this present time.

Part of the problem is that gerrymandering will continue to exist as long as the USA keeps tying congressional representation to winner-takes-all geography, instead of apportioning out representatives according to percentage of votes. And since I don't see that ever changing short of the whole country getting a factory reset, that's the reality we need to deal with. 

When I lived in Oklahoma, I effectively had no representation in Congress throughout almost all of my adult life there. Oklahoma has five seats in the house. Thirty percent of the state still votes Democratic. They have a solid red delegation in Congress. If seats were apportioned fairly, there would be at least one Democratic Representative for Oklahoma. At the state level, Republicans are likewise overrepresented in Oklahoma City. And you talk about people holding contempt for people who don't vote like them, Oklahoma Republicans regularly insult their Democratic constituents and tell them to leave Oklahoma if they don't like it there. And when people oblige them and leave, they get even pissier about it. 

Last edited by SanAndreasX - on 20 August 2025