Good Government Types in Ohio Try Again

[tw]1806088483934711843[/tw]

So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering. I get it why you would approve.

Zurn wrote:So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering.   I get it why you would approve.

Was thinking that this effort is probably to build a balanced redistricting commission such as the ones in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, and Washington.

What makes you believe it will favor one party?

The redistricting by the commission in Michigan was analyzed and shown to slightly favor the Republicans in a "neutral" election. 2022 with abortion on the ballot was not a neutral election, however.

It's probably not possible for any method to always create a neutral map due to population densities, geography & populations shifting year to year so the most that can be expected is as neutral as possible.

Zurn wrote:So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering.   I get it why you would approve.

This really shouldn't be that hard.  There's no reason that people who want a representative democratic republic can't agree on this issue.  Do you want government of the people, by the people and for the people or not.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-maps/ohio/#Compact

There are all kinds of these calculators.

Zurn wrote:So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering. I get it why you would approve.

So you don’t want fair elections?

Rick Saunders wrote:

Zurn wrote:So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering. I get it why you would approve.

This really shouldn't be that hard. There's no reason that people who want a representative democratic republic can't agree on this issue. Do you want government of the people, by the people and for the people or not.

They want government of the conservative people, by the rich people, and for the straight white church people.

Motown Spartan wrote:

Zurn wrote:So replace GOP gerrymandering with Democrat gerrymandering. I get it why you would approve.

So you don’t want fair elections?

Of course I do and I'm sure that you and I (despite our obvious differences) could sit down with a population map of Michigan and draw out 13 districts in Michigan that fairly respect geography and governmental boundaries. That isn't what GOP or democrat controlled governments do and isn't what these supposedly "non-partisan" commissions do either.

Zurn wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:

So you don’t want fair elections?

Of course I do and I'm sure that you and I (despite our obvious differences) could sit down with a population map of Michigan and draw out 13 districts in Michigan that fairly respect geography and governmental boundaries.    That isn't what GOP or democrat controlled governments do and isn't what these supposedly "non-partisan" commissions do either.  

If only it were as easy as taking a map and drawing lines.

But it isn't.

There are some rules that have to be followed (federal laws) and those laws are not clear cut.

The commission, and we as potential district delineators, also will want to "stack the districts" so the number of Democratic leaning ones & Republican leaning ones matches the general popular vote totals for each party.  If the Republicans have been getting 55% of the vote, statewide, in the last 10 years, (just made that up, btw, I think the percentages are very close to 50/50) then with 13 US districts we would want 7 that lean red and 6 that lean blue.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Zurn wrote:

Of course I do and I'm sure that you and I (despite our obvious differences) could sit down with a population map of Michigan and draw out 13 districts in Michigan that fairly respect geography and governmental boundaries. That isn't what GOP or democrat controlled governments do and isn't what these supposedly "non-partisan" commissions do either.

If only it were as easy as taking a map and drawing lines.

But it isn't.

There are some rules that have to be followed (federal laws) and those laws are not clear cut.

The commission, and we as potential district delineators, also will want to "stack the districts" so the number of Democratic leaning ones & Republican leaning ones matches the general popular vote totals for each party. If the Republicans have been getting 55% of the vote, statewide, in the last 10 years, (just made that up, btw, I think the percentages are very close to 50/50) then with 13 US districts we would want 7 the lean red and 6 that lean blue.

You make my point.

The "non-partisan" commission wants to gerrymander the districts to meet some pre-conceived notion of vote totals.

As I said, Motown and I could do better in a couple of hours.

Zurn wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

If only it were as easy as taking a map and drawing lines.

But it isn't.

There are some rules that have to be followed (federal laws) and those laws are not clear cut.

The commission, and we as potential district delineators, also will want to "stack the districts" so the number of Democratic leaning ones & Republican leaning ones matches the general popular vote totals for each party. If the Republicans have been getting 55% of the vote, statewide, in the last 10 years, (just made that up, btw, I think the percentages are very close to 50/50) then with 13 US districts we would want 7 the lean red and 6 that lean blue.

You make my point.

The "non-partisan" commission wants to gerrymander the districts to meet some pre-conceived notion of vote totals.

As I said, Motown and I could do better in a couple of hours.

Your wrong there. What they want to do is probably online somewhere, but what I posted was what you & I want to do, to provide fair representation for all the voters in the state.

My preference is really to make all Districts statewide & after the vote split the Representatives by party based on the percentage in the statewide vote, but that is way radical, and no one would buy into it.

[tw]1836111194895323220[/tw]

Trapper Gus wrote:[tw]1836111194895323220[/tw]

Brilliant use of *ichigan in Ohio. Ohio not going to bite though, they are happy with their stacked deck

Trapper Gus wrote:[tw]1836111194895323220[/tw]

I will be surprised if there isn't a lawsuit filed by the cheaters and best.

I'm hoping you are wrong on that...

They voted down an amendment to make it harder to change their Constitution & then passed an amendment making abortion legal, so their "redness" may be more based on voter suppression and gerrymandering than you give it credit for...

Also, I think this ad really hits home for over 80% of their population.

Sixty percent of Ohioans plan to vote “yes” in favor of Issue 1, while 20% plan to vote “no” and 20% are not sure, according to a new poll by Bowling Green State University’s Democracy and Public Policy Research Network. The nonpartisan poll, with a margin of error +/- 3.6 percentage points, surveyed 1,000 likely Ohio voters online from Sept. 18 to 27.

https://michiganadvance.com/2024/10/21/michigan-independent-redistricting-commission-members-on-opposite-sides-of-ohio-issue-1/

So, this proposal failed.

Pundits are saying it was the wording, and with Ohio being a majority Republican state I think it is just as likely that the voters wanted to keep the Republican districts intact.