Christie is in. Does he have a constituency?

I wonder if the small faction of traditional Repubs Christie represents will break off the the POT and form a third party?

 

Congratulations Elias & Co. and Alabama.
Marc E. Elias
@marceelias
·
45s

Today's must read.



democracydocket.com
U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Alabama Congressional Map, Upholds Voting Rights Act


Steven Mazie
@stevenmazie
·
1h
Another word: the superb presentations by Abha Khanna and Elizabeth Prelogar defending Section 2 of the VRA may also have swayed Roberts & Kavanaugh. We often say oral arguments are pro-forma affairs that make little difference. This might be an exception.
Show this thread

33.9K

 

I don't believe that's a smart political move. What they need to do is grow some balls and take back their party!

 

This is clearly wishful thinking on your part.

Additionally, Christie, an unconventional Republican that was able to win the governorship in Liberal New Jersey, is FAR from being a "Traditional Republican". The point being, if he were in fact a traditional Republican, he would not have won the governorship in New Jersey.

 

Congratulations Elias & Co. and Alabama.

Supreme Court upholds Voting Rights Act in Alabama redistricting case The Supreme Court has ruled against Alabama's defense of an electoral map drawn by the state's Republican-dominated legislature. Black voters had challenged the law as racially discriminatory.3 hours ago

Supreme Court upholds Voting Rights Act in Alabama ... - NPR



Steven Mazie
@stevenmazie
·
1h
Another word: the superb presentations by Abha Khanna and Elizabeth Prelogar defending Section 2 of the VRA may also have swayed Roberts & Kavanaugh. We often say oral arguments are pro-forma affairs that make little difference. This might be an exception.
Show this thread

 

The vote reported was for Congress, not President.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election

A fair redistricting would at this point help Democrats because Republicans have gerrymandered so many seats given their control of state legislatures. If no states were gerrymandered, I think Republicans might have a natural advantage for the reasons you advanced plus the fact they they're strongest is lower population states.

 

Which is why my statement "we are talking about congressional districts" is right on point.

It is hard to say how a fair redistricting would impact exactly without going over every single house seat. Obviously, Democrats control Democrat states, and Republicans control Republican states. Since there is a mostly 50/50 split among the electorate and house seats are apportioned by population, that would tend to indicate that redistricting of all house seats has been controlled by a fairly similar number for each side. Having more states does not matter if those states control the same number of seats as the other side. California controls 52 house seats and Idaho controls 2. Just because Republicans are in control of districting for more states does not mean they are in control of more federal house seats for redistricting. I am not sure where to find that exact number without going and adding up all the seats in states controlled by each party, but one thing is for sure, looking at just the number of state legislatures controlled does not give you that answer. I am confident that the answer is not as much in Republicans favor as you are probably thinking if just looking at the number of states.

 

And they're not going to beat him anyway, but at least Republicans will hear from their own what we've been telling them for years.

 

Chris Christy is a man of little to no principle. He gravitates to where he anticipates the power will be and brown noses to be a part of it. After Trump was first elected....he was all shouldering up to Trump--groveling to be a Trump Man. It was embarrassing to watch.

 

Republicans have despised Chisty ever since he cozied up to and hugged Obama a couple days before the 2012 election when the hurricane hit. There was momentum going toward Romney in the late stages of that campaign, and after the hurricane that momentum reversed.

I am not saying that he cost Romney the election (although it is plausible), but Christy's actions were seen as traitorous to Republicans, and it even hinted at him trying to position himself for 2016 rather than trying to get a Republican elected in 2012 which would have ruined his plans for 2016. This is why he had such a poor showing in 2016, where he put all his eggs in campaigning in New Hampshire, spending all of his time there, only to come in 6th or 7th place in that state. Republicans see Christy as a traitor.

The notion of him being a serious candidate is not grounded in reality. He has no constituency at all.

To make matters worse, if he ever did have a chance, the picture below alone would sink any chances of that. This makes Dukakis in a tank look like Brad Pitt.



One has to wonder what he was thinking. Were there not any mirrors in that locker room?

 

why shouldn't ALL of louisiana's districts be competitive? shreveport has many blacks but shares a congresscritter with the rest of nw la.

 

I cant speak for Lousiana, but if your complaint is that the black voting districts are not divided up into unrecognizable pieces in order to make districts competitive, I would say you are arguing for gerrymandering as opposed to against it.

Conceptually, districts are supposed to be drawn without paying any attention to how voters in that district vote. Breaking them up by how they vote is gerrymandering.

 

Which is what I was talking about--the vote for House members.

There are a number of issues involved from the size of states to the imbalance of party support in what we might decide are reasonable districts, so I agree it's complicated and requires a detailed look. Overall, my impression is that Republicans have a natural advantage.

 

Me too, which makes me question why you said it is about the house despite the reality that I very specifically said it is about the house.

Id agree that Republicans have a natural advantage as I outlined regarding black districts geographically compact and highly populous districts that vote 90% + for Democrats.

 

Wrong as usual that our policies disagree with yours does not mean they don't exist. Sanity is what we haven't seen out of the party of the left and our flabby democracy sense Trump announced the first time

 

The guy has a long history of similar stunts and I think the Romney business might not have been as significant if it had been a one-off.

Will Christie hurt Trump? I doubt it.

 

Not sure how any of that is relevant to my point. I expect fat shaming from the "EVIL" right but I expect better from the ALL INCLUSIVE left. I guess I was wrong. Another (one of 1000s i've provided in here) example of the left following a rules for thee but not for me philosophy

SHAMEFUL!!!

 

I wasn't talking about the vote for President and you bringing up the Presidency left me with an impression you thought I was.

There are a lot of solid Republican districts, but few are as one-sided as black Democratic districts. The other potential advantage, one I think may favor Republicans, would be how many people Republicans represent on average vs. how many Democrats represent.

I always taught my history students about gerrymandering because it's nothing short of vote stealing. My career bridged times where Democrats had the advantage to times when Republicans had it.

 

Honestly, I dont think there is any way to legitimately stop it, no matter whom it favors in a given year. When either side has an advantage in a particular state, they are going to leverage that advantage.

 

They undermine the country when they corrupt the system by gerrymandering.

 

Not enough Neocons and Bushies to make that a worthwhile endeavor. And most of what's left are my age and older. By the way the 24 carrot surrender monkeys you call traditional Republicans are on the outs because they never had any balls to begin with, expecting to grow some at this late date is like asking rabbits to dine on wolves.