How we rigged the national election

[Row6]

This is from a report by the Republican State Leadership Committee on their success in winning back the House by gerrymandering. The organization bills itself as "the largest caucus of Republican state leaders in the country.."

"On November 6, 2012, Barack Obama was reelected President of the United States by nearly a three-point margin, winning 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney’s 206 while garnering nearly 3.5 million more votes. Democrats also celebrated victories in 69 percent of U.S. Senate elections, winning 23 of 33 contests. Farther down-ballot, aggregated numbers show voters pulled the lever for Republicans only 49 percent of the time in congressional races, suggesting that 2012 could have been a repeat of 2008, when voters gave control of the White House and both chambers of Congress to Democrats.

But, as we see today, that was not the case. Instead, Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans. The only analogous election in recent political history in which this aberration has taken place was immediately after reapportionment in 1972, when Democrats held a 50 seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives while losing the presidency and the popular congressional vote by 2.6 million votes.

To be sure, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) built on its strong recruitment and successful strategy that gave them a Republican majority in 2010 by going on offense over Democratic cuts to Medicare and by linking their Democratic opponents to President Obama’s most unpopular policy proposals.

However, all components of a successful congressional race, including recruitment, message development and resource allocation, rest on the congressional district lines, and this was an area where Republicans had an unquestioned advantage.
Today, nearly two months after Election Day, and one day after the 113th United States Congress took the Oath of Office on Capitol Hill, the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) is releasing this review of its strategy and execution of its efforts in the 2010 election cycle to erect a Republican firewall through the redistricting process that paved the way to Republicans retaining a U.S. House majority in 2012.
…"

http://rslc.com/_blog/News/post/REDMAP_2012_Summary_Report

[g8orbill]

we obviously didn't do good enough job as your prez got a do over

[MichiGator2002]

Is this more of that insipid "the House should track with national popular vote or it must be illegitimate" horsesqueeze? I will give it credit, it is well tailored to convince and outrage all sorts of people who don't know or care to think too hard about what the House of Representatives is or how it is elected. Which, I figure, is the point.

[Row6]

Is this more of that insipid "the House should track with national popular vote or it must be illegitimate" horsesqueeze? I will give it credit, it is well tailored to convince and outrage all sorts of people who don't know or care to think too hard about what the House of Representatives is or how it is elected. Which, I figure, is the point.

The House - unlike the Senate - is supposed to represent the popular will. It is the "People's House". Apparently you think rigging congressional districts for the benefit of one party is acceptable public policy - a fact which this report from the Republican horses mouth confirms is what happened - but I think you are rightly and thankfully in a distinct minority.

[MichiGator2002]

[QUOTE=Row6;6338101]The House - unlike the Senate - is supposed to represent the popular will. It is the "People's House".[quote]

Yes. Where the representative represents the people of their district and no other.

Meaning all blather and bile over what happens in other districts is irrelevant. The House is made up of 435 members and therefore represents 435 different popular wills. There is no aggregate or cumulative total that means dog testes.

[108]

if you can't beatem, change the rules

[Row6]

[QUOTE=Row6;6338101]The House - unlike the Senate - is supposed to represent the popular will. It is the "People's House".[quote]

Yes. Where the representative represents the people of their district and no other.

Meaning all blather and bile over what happens in other districts is irrelevant. The House is made up of 435 members and therefore represents 435 different popular wills. There is no aggregate or cumulative total that means dog testes.

The issue which apparently escapes you is how districts are determined. By your statements, you don't think it matters at all.

Again, you are fortunately in a small minority in this, and an even smaller minority than Republican voters in the last election.

[gatormoe1]

if you can't beatem, change the rules

Hard to beat an ever expanding amount of moochers who feel like the government needs to be mommy and daddy.

[108]

Hard to beat an ever expanding amount of moochers who feel like the government needs to be mommy and daddy.

so this is your justification for gerrymandering?

[MichiGator2002]

It matters how they are drawn. I just think the sweeping conclusion based on what is facially irrelevant -- a national popular vote -- that all GOP success is fraudulent is... just undignified. I can't actually fish for adjectives here, it is horrible. You aren't even putting on a pretense of individually alleging and assessing particular districts, you are just delegitimizing the House majority based on a national total that nobody who has clue one about our system of government could possibly think matters.

[gatormoe1]

so this is your justification for gerrymandering?

No, I have no dog in this fight. I'm simply saying the people that vote for Obama and/or politicians who agree with expanding programs that allow people to be coddled and fed from the government teet, are expanding at an alarming rate.

[Row6]

It matters how they are drawn. I just think the sweeping conclusion based on what is facially irrelevant -- a national popular vote -- that all GOP success is fraudulent is... just undignified. I can't actually fish for adjectives here, it is horrible. You aren't even putting on a pretense of individually alleging and assessing particular districts, you are just delegitimizing the House majority based on a national total that nobody who has clue one about our system of government could possibly think matters.

I'm not surprised that you are running out of hyperbole by know, given your typical comments, but thanks for retreating from your previous implication that how districts are drawn is of no consequence or importance. One may choose to not attempt to deligitimize a House majority if was not an exact mirroring of national voting, if that House majority was also thin, a result of random occurrences, and if the party fortunate enough to win that majority did not insist on crowing about a mandate. In this case the strong Republican House majority is miles from the national vote and - as demonstrated by the memo put out by the guys who pulled it off and posted above - is the result of purposeful gerrymandering. Hopefully for all citizens, and especially fair minded voters of all parties, this practice will be history sometime in our lifetime.

[gatorev12]

so this is your justification for gerrymandering?

You do realize that Democratic State Legislatures have done the exact same thing, right?

And here in Florida, the primarily Democratic Black Caucus made a deal with the Florida Republicans to give them the necessary votes to pass the gerrymandered districting scheme in place today.

[exiledgator]

Both parties are guilty and it's nothing to sneeze at. With every line redrawn, ideologies are entrenched, divisiveness calcified, and dialogue harder to find.

[manigordo]

You do realize that Democratic State Legislatures have done the exact same thing, right?

And here in Florida, the primarily Democratic Black Caucus made a deal with the Florida Republicans to give them the necessary votes to pass the gerrymandered districting scheme in place today.

It is the pleasure of the Republicans to do so. Gerrymandering is also known as Cracking and Packing; the process of diluting the vote and giving up a district (Corrine Brown) in order to seal the strength of several distircts. (Put them all in one odd district.) Yes, it has been done for years; and yes, the DBC is guilty. But the Republicans have made it an art form beyond all proportion.

Not all crimes are equal.

I see it clearly and have been a registered Republican for years.

[LittleBlueLW]

I personally would love for the WH and both the house and senate in Dem control. They are so smart, they'd have everything fixed in no time at all.

[wygator]

This is why control of state legislatures is so important.

Ironically, while Obama won the presidency, republican governorships rose to 30 and that has nothing to do with gerrymandering.

[MastaG8r]

This is why control of state legislatures is so important.

Ironically, while Obama won the presidency, republican governorships rose to 30 and that has nothing to do with gerrymandering.Wait, but that's impossible - 0bama won so according to Liberal Logic that means Democrats should've won every election! :crazy: All those gubernatorial races must've been rigged!

[egator1245]

if you can't beatem, change the rules

You mean like the Senate rules?

[gatorev12]

It is the pleasure of the Republicans to do so. Gerrymandering is also known as Cracking and Packing; the process of diluting the vote and giving up a district (Corrine Brown) in order to seal the strength of several distircts. (Put them all in one odd district.) Yes, it has been done for years; and yes, the DBC is guilty. But the Republicans have made it an art form beyond all proportion.

Not all crimes are equal.

I see it clearly and have been a registered Republican for years.

Thank you for your reply--and please understand: I agree with a lot of what you're saying. Personally, I don't like the concept of either party gerrymandering districts.

But for Democrats to pretend like gerrymandering is solely done by Republicans is stretching the truth a bit too much. The reality is: Democrats do it as much as Republicans do when they have overwhelming leads in State Legislatures they control...and, in many instances, different Democratic caucuses have actively voted with Republicans to guarantee their own job security.

[gatorev12]

Both parties are guilty and it's nothing to sneeze at. With every line redrawn, ideologies are entrenched, divisiveness calcified, and dialogue harder to find.

+1. A lot of the stalemate in Congress today is because elected representatives are too wedded to a rigorous ideological stance that may fit their constituency--but is toxic in terms of being able to find common ground with people outside their constituency.

[manigordo]

+1. A lot of the stalemate in Congress today is because elected representatives are too wedded to a rigorous ideological stance that may fit their constituency--but is toxic in terms of being able to find common ground with people outside their constituency.

That, and self-interest disguised as ideology.

[corpgator]

The response is always but the other side does it too! But only one side made it their strategy to gain control of one of the chambers of congress by doing so.

It happened in '96 as well by the way, also by Republicans.

[mocgator]

This is from a report by the Republican State Leadership Committee on their success in winning back the House by gerrymandering. The organization bills itself as "the largest caucus of Republican state leaders in the country.."

"On November 6, 2012, Barack Obama was reelected President of the United States by nearly a three-point margin, winning 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney’s 206 while garnering nearly 3.5 million more votes. Democrats also celebrated victories in 69 percent of U.S. Senate elections, winning 23 of 33 contests. Farther down-ballot, aggregated numbers show voters pulled the lever for Republicans only 49 percent of the time in congressional races, suggesting that 2012 could have been a repeat of 2008, when voters gave control of the White House and both chambers of Congress to Democrats.

But, as we see today, that was not the case. Instead, Republicans enjoy a 33-seat margin in the U.S. House seated yesterday in the 113th Congress, having endured Democratic successes atop the ticket and over one million more votes cast for Democratic House candidates than Republicans. The only analogous election in recent political history in which this aberration has taken place was immediately after reapportionment in 1972, when Democrats held a 50 seat majority in the U.S. House of Representatives while losing the presidency and the popular congressional vote by 2.6 million votes.

To be sure, the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) built on its strong recruitment and successful strategy that gave them a Republican majority in 2010 by going on offense over Democratic cuts to Medicare and by linking their Democratic opponents to President Obama’s most unpopular policy proposals.

However, all components of a successful congressional race, including recruitment, message development and resource allocation, rest on the congressional district lines, and this was an area where Republicans had an unquestioned advantage.
Today, nearly two months after Election Day, and one day after the 113th United States Congress took the Oath of Office on Capitol Hill, the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) is releasing this review of its strategy and execution of its efforts in the 2010 election cycle to erect a Republican firewall through the redistricting process that paved the way to Republicans retaining a U.S. House majority in 2012.
…"

http://rslc.com/_blog/News/post/REDMAP_2012_Summary_Report

Two words...

Corrine Brown

[OaktownGator]

Two words...

Corrine Brown
:eek:

... but proves the point of how ugly this gerrymandering can get.

[JerseyGator01]

Oops ... I thought this was a Voter I.D. not required thread.

[GatorJeff]

We've come to expect disgraceful, unscrupulous tactics from Pubs. Reminds me of when Dick Dastardly had to throw ball bearings on the race track to beat Penelope Pitstop.

[mocgator]

We've come to expect disgraceful, unscrupulous tactics from Pubs. Reminds me of when Dick Dastardly had to throw ball bearings on the race track to beat Penelope Pitstop.

Say what?? The democrat party and the liberal government medial complex is despicable on every level.

[gatorev12]

The response is always but the other side does it too! But only one side made it their strategy to gain control of one of the chambers of congress by doing so.

It happened in '96 as well by the way, also by Republicans.

Is what they did illegal?

If not, then it's a perfectly legitimate strategy. Obama's pandering to Hispanic votes 5 months before the election by saying "we're not going to enforce our immigration laws" is of far more questionable legality--but was most certainly a part of his campaign strategy to be re-elected.

[gator996]

Is what they did illegal?

If not, then it's a perfectly legitimate strategy. Obama's pandering to Hispanic votes 5 months before the election by saying "we're not going to enforce our immigration laws" is of far more questionable legality--but was most certainly a part of his campaign strategy to be re-elected.


And have we heard the end of the bitching about Obamacare?

That's been ruled "legal" too...


Roe/Wade?


And those are simply policy...


What you have here is the subversion of the actual representation system.



Obama is the threat to freedom?


The GOP is being run by people who are truly "Un-American".
:sick:

[gatorev12]

What you have here is the subversion of the actual representation system.


That's BS and you know it. Don't whine that the GOP did it better than your "team".

And to be clear here, I don't support gerrymandering by either party. But Democrats getting all up in arms about Republicans doing it is the height of hypocrisy considering 1.) they do it too and 2.) Democrat representatives have been a part of the deals with Republican legislatures in several states in order to make gerrymandered districts possible

[gator996]

That's BS and you know it. Don't whine that the GOP did it better than your "team".

And to be clear here, I don't support gerrymandering by either party. But Democrats getting all up in arms about Republicans doing it is the height of hypocrisy considering 1.) they do it too and 2.) Democrat representatives have been a part of the deals with Republican legislatures in several states in order to make gerrymandered districts possible


So, my point is stop defending this effort.


Call yourself an "American" before party...prove it...


Gerrymandering Virginia so if the vote was the same as 2012 that Romney would end up with more electoral votes than Obama is subversion of the will of the people no matter how you slice it....


You wanna go straight popular vote?
The republicans lose...

They want to go popular vote wherever it benefits them..and nowhere else...



To support that is sick...and I have nothing else....

:fuming:

[sappanama]

Two words...

Corrine Brown

Two more

TERM LImits!!!!!

[gatorev12]

So, my point is stop defending this effort.

Call yourself an "American" before party...prove it...

Gerrymandering Virginia so if the vote was the same as 2012 that Romney would end up with more electoral votes than Obama is subversion of the will of the people no matter how you slice it....

You wanna go straight popular vote?
The republicans lose...

They want to go popular vote wherever it benefits them..and nowhere else...

To support that is sick...and I have nothing else....


You're ranting is impressive--but, again, nothing the Republicans did was illegal AND they did it with active cooperation from many within the Democratic party. Yet, somehow, your rant is focused entirely on Republicans and laughably claiming that you're not the one playing partisan politics here.

Something you seem to have trouble understanding: Congressional elections are about the will of the people localized within that *district* and NOT inherently designed to be reflective of what the national popular vote is.

It's as ridiculous an argument as Republicans putting up the map of all the counties and how they voted--with the overwhelming majority being "red"--and the only "blue" counties were primarily in heavily-populated cities. Well, that's the breaks. If our democratic republic measured national elections in terms of how many counties Romney had instead of electoral votes, then Obama would be out of office right now.

You're just mad that the Republicans did something better than the Democrats and whining that their political strategy paid some dividends. Which you're obviously free to do--but forgive me for being so bold to point out that the Republicans could have never accomplished their strategy without Democratic help and your one-sided rants smack of hypocrisy when you fail to acknowledge that.

[Row6]

More shenanigans that even gagged the republican governor (let's see if he signs it):

"It presented itself on Inauguration Day, when Virginia Democrats basked in their second straight presidential win and one in particular traveled to Washington to witness President Obama’s swearing-in: Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond).

With the civil rights lawyer, who decades ago argued school desegregation cases and served as Richmond’s first black mayor, away in the District on Monday, Republicans saw their chance. They took up a bill that had been on the calendar for days, only to be passed over every time, and gave it the legislative equivalent of an extreme makeover.

Left over from last year, the original bill called for “technical adjustments” to House district boundaries. On Monday, without hearings or notice, Republicans amended it on the floor so that it also called for far-reaching changes to state Senate districts. The debate on the 36-page amendment was limited to 30 minutes.

The bill, approved 20 to 19, concentrates minority voters in a new Southside district and changes most district lines. Democrats said the new map would make eight districts, six of them held by Democrats, more heavily Republican. The map, which now goes before the Republican-controlled House, also puts senators R. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) and Emmett W. Hanger Jr. (R-Augusta) into one district. It also adds more Democrats to three already deeply blue districts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-politics/va-republicans-move-on-redistricting-draws-criticism/2013/01/22/f7645ee8-64b9-11e2-9e1b-07db1d2ccd5b_story.html

[Row6]

Is what they did illegal?

If not, then it's a perfectly legitimate strategy. Obama's pandering to Hispanic votes 5 months before the election by saying "we're not going to enforce our immigration laws" is of far more questionable legality--but was most certainly a part of his campaign strategy to be re-elected.

While I appreciate your otherwise fair mindedness on this issue, I don't get how a president or presidential candidate exercising his first amendment rights is a legal issue, or even remotely equal to the successful attempts at disenfranchising other citizens through various legislative tricks like redistricting (among others also being pursued).

[gatorpa]

so this is your justification for gerrymandering?

You mean the reason Corrine Brown has a house seat?

http://www.wrhammons.com/florida-3rd-district.htm

[corpgator]

More shenanigans that even gagged the republican governor (let's see if he signs it):

"It presented itself on Inauguration Day, when Virginia Democrats basked in their second straight presidential win and one in particular traveled to Washington to witness President Obama’s swearing-in: Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond).

With the civil rights lawyer, who decades ago argued school desegregation cases and served as Richmond’s first black mayor, away in the District on Monday, Republicans saw their chance. They took up a bill that had been on the calendar for days, only to be passed over every time, and gave it the legislative equivalent of an extreme makeover.

Left over from last year, the original bill called for “technical adjustments” to House district boundaries. On Monday, without hearings or notice, Republicans amended it on the floor so that it also called for far-reaching changes to state Senate districts. The debate on the 36-page amendment was limited to 30 minutes.

The bill, approved 20 to 19, concentrates minority voters in a new Southside district and changes most district lines. Democrats said the new map would make eight districts, six of them held by Democrats, more heavily Republican. The map, which now goes before the Republican-controlled House, also puts senators R. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) and Emmett W. Hanger Jr. (R-Augusta) into one district. It also adds more Democrats to three already deeply blue districts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-politics/va-republicans-move-on-redistricting-draws-criticism/2013/01/22/f7645ee8-64b9-11e2-9e1b-07db1d2ccd5b_story.html

This is headed straight to the DOJ since Virginia is covered by the voting rights act.

[gatorpa]

While I appreciate your otherwise fair mindedness on this issue, I don't get how a president or presidential candidate exercising his first amendment rights is a legal issue, or even remotely equal to the successful attempts at disenfranchising other citizens through various legislative tricks like redistricting (among others also being pursued).

He is in charge of the executive branch, the one who's responsibility it is to enforce the laws of the US. By saying "we'll just ignore" these laws on the books, you don't see a legal issue there? Perhaps if he chose to ignore laws permitting abortion it might be an issue?