The Mapping Buckeye

I’m not a partisan hack, you are.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

Here are some important quotes from the Callais ruling that people need to read, as well as the new Gingles test:

“If a plaintiff cannot disengage race from the state’s race-neutral considerations, including politics, then section 2 cannot impose liability.”

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@lion_politics No, his ego is too big

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@walkeri141 Red through and through

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@Prolemasses @nickyphorus117 No, no it isn’t. The vast majority of what elected officially do, especially at the federal level, is work on constituent issues.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@DashPaxt1n @NilesGApol What? I genuinely cannot think of a single instance of a Republican being THAT scandal ridden(other than Trump) and not at the very least having a severe underperformance. Yet, Dems do it all the time. Literally elected a guy who wants to shoot children.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@BasedIllinoisan Only if they generate their own power/do not cause rates to rise for nearby residents.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@Uncrewed Thank you for reminding me just how gerrymandered the Wisconsin map is(yes it was a gerrymander before too)

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru And the only difference there was race. They held the same partisan affiliation, and both were represented by white democrats. The race of the voters was the only distinction.

Ask yourself, why should a district of one race have received protection but not a district of another?

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru And this is a very important distinction, otherwise one race would have protections that another does not.

For example: the previous interpretation (which did not make that distinction) prohibited the Memphis district from being drowned out, but not the Nashville one.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru And while you did not use the word “outcome” specifically, that is the result of your belief. A group exists, therefore it must be in a district that elects a candidate of their preferred party.

Section 2 was designed to protect against RACIAL discrimination, not partisan.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru Correct, it does prohibit laws that would prevent them from electing a candidate of their choice…but only if it’s done for racial reasons, as was on the Jim crown south (black dem vs white dem). There is no special partisan protection.

Also, it’s equal opportunity not outcome

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@BasedIllinoisan And fucking golden

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@BasedIllinoisan And he shouldn’t have. He was innocent

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru Here is a direct quote from the Callais opinion that should lead you in the right direction:

“Gingles arose in the context of a one-party system in which black and white voters had starkly different voting patterns despite their affiliation with the same party”

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@OPoliticsguru It means voters will vote for a candidate of their own race, over a candidate of another race, regardless of party affiliation.

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@EarthoOS Mike Pence, if he has the courage

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@rep_favorite Hope she loses tbh

[The Mapping Buckeye @Mapping_Buckeye]

@AbolishTedCruz @EarthoOS If it was 2016, then there is absolutely no way that Delaware goes blue. It wouldn’t even be within 10. Frankly I don’t even know if Erie county would go blue