In a recurring scenario in American politics?
Democrats ‘do the right thing’….
And fuck themselves over and OVER….
And Republican smile and steal the bread….
Democrats argue that the once-a-decade process of redrawing political maps shouldn’t be a partisan cage match. In the name of good government and balance, they’ve pushed for independent commissions to do the work of rebalancing population changes into congressional districts.
They’re about to feel the consequences of their focus on fairness.
In Democratic-controlled Colorado, Virginia and Oregon, new congressional maps drawn by commissions or bipartisan power-sharing agreements are unlikely to give the party the sort of political advantages it could have otherwise enjoyed.
Republicans, meanwhile, haven’t given up their power, controlling the process in 20 states, including Florida, Texas and North Carolina.
The imbalance could come with major consequences. Democrats currently control the House of Representatives by just an eight-seat margin.
Choosing not to seize advantages in redistricting could cost Democrats the House….
…
To be sure, not all Democratic states have sacrificed power for reform. Democratic-controlled states like Illinois and Maryland are heavily gerrymandered. And Democratic-controlled state legislatures can overrule commissions in New Mexico and especially New York, where the party could erase several GOP House seats if it controls the map.
But given the narrow margins, the commission states matter….
…
“I give Republicans a lot of credit — they play a ball game and if they lose they change the rules,” said Wellington Webb, a former Denver mayor who has objected to using the commission. “Democrats, we normally always fall on the category of let’s be fair.”…
Dave Wasserman
@Redistrict
Not saying parties “should” do anything, that’s not my job. The fact I’m highlighting is that blue states have embraced redistricting reform more than red ones. As a result, Dems now have fewer opportunities to offset aggressive GOP gerrymanders with their own.
Quote Tweet
Kelly Burton
@kellycward
· Dec 9
There are so many problems with this:
1) It assumes parties should gerrymander
2) It assumes Dems want to gerrymander & missed an opportunity
3) It devalues competitive districts
4) Most of all, it ignores the voters
Dems aren’t scared of voters & don’t have to cheat to win. twitter.com/Redistrict/sta…
I’ve read several political analysts who claim that Republicans can win next years Congressional elections on redistricting alone ,regardless of Bidens Approval ratings or any other issue.
Well known Conservative columnist David Brooks left the Republican Party this week with some fairly brutal words for his former party.A few excerpts…
“The rich philosophical tradition I fell in love with has been reduced to Fox News and voter suppression.”
“What passes for worldview of them ‘right’ is a set of resentful animosities ,a partisan attachment to Donald Trump or Tucker Carlson and a sort of mental brutalism.”
“…to be a conservative today ,you have to oppose much of what the Republican Party has come to stand for.”
“The Trumpian cause is held together by hatred…”
I looked at the column. It’s very long. He calls himself a “Burkean conservative.” Nowhere does he say he is “leaving” the Republican Party or that he ever considered himself part of the Republican Party.
He says that he applauds his friends who are trying to make the Republican Party conservative again and that America needs two responsible parties.
The idea that David Brooks whom nobody beyond political/news junkies knows, would have ever called himself a member of the Republican Party is a bit of a stretch.
None of these conservative (whether they truly are or not) east coast intellectual type writers ever claimed to be “Republicans.” They were always “above” party labels. I do not think William F. Buckley ever even claimed he was personally a Republican.
Long before Trump. Brooks was calling himself a “moderate” and saying Republicans as a party should be more moderate.
So, he personally, has been all over the place.
Brooks did leave Judaism some time ago to “explore Christianity.”
Well you should know all about that type of ambivalence ,seeing as how at various times you have said you “weren’t much of a Republican.,”denounced the Republican Party, Then defended it, got angry when I referred to “you Republicans.” Labelled it “pretty much a cult”,Made quite an issue of taking a license plate off your car that said “GOP” made us all aware that you no longer attended Republican meetings.
Indeed ,you and Brooks would seem to have a lot in common.
So exactly what is your view of what Brooks said?
Do you agree or disagree.
You seem overly concerned with labeling me. I think I always have been a conservative and still am one. Brooks is the one who has said he was not and who was finding great fault in the pre-Trump party and was flirting with Obamaism back then. It is not accurate to suggest that he has “this week left the Republican Party.” He has never belonged to the Republican Party. I have talked about how I was involved in the party and very much identified with it. So, I do not see much in common in those regards.
Brooks is not saying much about Trumpism that I have not said or thought. I agree that we need two responsible parties, but right now, neither party is very responsible. His criticizing Trumpism is not new or newsworthy.
Indeed Brooks had some very fawning columns and words about Obama back in the day, which very much differentiates me from him, as somebody here who “broke” with the party over Trumpism.
It is hard to really know what Brooks is or how much of what he writes is genuine. He has been famously mocked on the right for years for how he talked about Obama’s “perfect pants cleat” and how much he agreed with Obama on issues back then.