Standing in line.

[neurosis]

At least he has a chance. (An observation: if the people vote for a whacko in the primary what does that say about them? They must like what they hear?)

lOL. He doesn't stand a chance. That's the point. The Dems interfering in this election worked in this case.  In Washington State, a Trump supporting politician is less likely to get elected just because he supports Trump. There are enough of those voters (Trump - everyone else is a RINO) to fuck up the primary, but the moderate Republican voters won't support this twit. He's running in my district and I wouldn't vote for him. He's crazy. 

Meanwhile, across the aisle, in a red state the Republicans would just gerrymander the districts so their candidate would win and they wouldn't give one tiny shit if a good Democrat who would be a better representative of the district didn't make it to office because of it.

Haven't Democrats adopted gerrymandering in to their arsenal?  And quite effectively in some cases?

It's really sad to see what's happening in politics today. Nobody seems to give a shit what's good for the Country anymore.

[YoDoug]

Haven't Democrats adopted gerrymandering in to their arsenal?  And quite effectively in some cases?

I have never liked the "gerrymandering" cries from either party because they both do it. When you have to change up districts because of population change it is almost always going to be better for one party over the other. Both do it. Why wouldn't the party in control try to steer the map towards their benefit. You'd have to be stupid to draw a map that benefits your opposition and hurts you.

As long as the census data is accurate I'm ok with a little nudge either way depending on which party controls the state legislature. What I have a problem with is the dirty trick the Dems have been trying for the last few decades. They over count/count illegal aliens in the census in the high density urban areas. Then they say they need another district but try to siphon enough off off the normally red leaning suburban areas around the urban metros to flip a district or two. 

[Smit]

There are enough of those voters (Trump - everyone else is a RINO) to fuck up the primary, but the moderate Republican voters won't support this twit. He's running in my district and I wouldn't vote for him. He's crazy. 

Republicans, by definition, are Trump voters, extremists, and election deniers. Moderates are RINO's.

Also, that is the reason why partisan primaries are so messed up.

Haven't Democrats adopted gerrymandering in to their arsenal?  And quite effectively in some cases?

To a much smaller degree than the Repugs do but yeah, they do it too.

It's really sad to see what's happening in politics today. Nobody seems to give a shit what's good for the Country anymore.

Nobody can agree what is good for the country.

[Jim at Gentex]

Meanwhile, across the aisle, in a red state the Republicans would just gerrymander the districts so their candidate would win and they wouldn't give one tiny shit if a good Democrat who would be a better representative of the district didn't make it to office because of it.

Sorry if that doesn't sound sympathetic.
 

That's the exact case in the county where I live, except the D's are the ones doing the gerrymandering and they don't give one tiny shit about the opposition either.

The shitty stick has two shitty ends, so no matter which end you grab you get the same shit.

If it's useless to vote as a Democrat then moderates should join the Republican party and demand candidates who represent them. If enough people do this they can send the extremists back to the fringe where they belong and the entire country would benefit.

I couldn't agree more. 
The key words you used are "JOIN THE...PARTY", either one, depending on where you live.

Your 'demand candidates who represent them' statement supports my point about open primaries being counterproductive to both parties.

One party CANNOT 'demand candidates who represent them' and expect that demand to be met if the other party is allowed to manipulate the results by gaming the system.

When D's can ONLY vote for D's in the Primary, and R's can ONLY vote for R's in the Primary, BOTH parties will come as close to meeting that demand as possible. 

Then the seat is decided in the General Election where everyone can vote for anyone they wish, and if they don't like anybody on the ballot, they can do a write-in.

That's the way the system was designed to work, and it does work as long as neither side can have an effect on who the opposing party nominates.

[beej]

Meanwhile, across the aisle, in a red state the Republicans would just gerrymander the districts so their candidate would win and they wouldn't give one tiny shit if a good Democrat who would be a better representative of the district didn't make it to office because of it

You say that like Democrats don't gerrymander. In Illinois where, Madigan perfected gerrymandering and trained young apprentices the trade, they carved Rodney Davis's house and only his house out of the district he represented to pit him against another republican congresswoman. He lost the primary. and now a democrat will have his old seat.

[beej]

Regardless, until Republicans start showing remorse for widespread gerrymandering, crying about fraud when they lose,

New York's gerrymandered map ruled unconstitutional.
https://nypost.com/2022/05/16/special-master-cervas-releases-new-ny-congressional-lines/

Democratic efforts to gerrymander New York's congressional districts in their favor backfired spectacularly on Monday — forcing the party to eat its own for survival.

Three imperiled Republican seats appear to no longer be in jeopardy and one of two powerful New York Democrats will be out of a job, under new district maps unveiled Monday by a court-appointed expert.

US Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-Staten Island, Brooklyn) saw her district redrawn by special master Jonathan Cervas of Carnegie Mellon University to no longer include the heavily Democratic area of Park Slope, former Mayor Bill de Blasio's Brooklyn neighborhood.

Two other districts upstate that were configured by Democrats in what Republicans dubbed Gov. Kathy Hochul's "Hochulmander" were also redrawn by Cervas to remain more GOP-friendly.

And in a stunning move, Cervas redrew two districts represented by entrenched Democrats in a way that now pits House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-Manhattan, Brooklyn) and House Oversight Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-Queens) against each other.

Meanwhile in Missouri, republicans could have easily written out 1 of the 2 democrats that represent the state in Congress, by making our district map a 7-1 republican to democrat map rather than the existing 6-2 which is what they settled on. Even though there were a handful of Republicans trying as hard as they could to push for that 7-1 map, the republican led legislature resisted and held the district map to 6 and 2.  I can't help but wonder if Democrats would also have been as fair.

[Smit]

Here is an interesting link showing the newest redistricting.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/kansas/

[beej]

Here is an interesting link showing the newest redistricting.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/kansas/

does it frustrate you that democrats are giving up on rural states? They could still win in my county if they tried, as I've said, it is a pro-union county. But at the DNC level they are pulling out of areas like ours. I've heard democrats like Bustos and others who represent rural areas complaining about it, and I've recently heard that they are thinking of abandoning Iowa now.  Granted they might have to move more to the center to get a foothold again, but at the national level they are making a choice to leave democrats like you orphaned.

[BrianP.]

That's the exact case in the county where I live, except the D's are the ones doing the gerrymandering and they don't give one tiny shit about the opposition either.

The shitty stick has two shitty ends, so no matter which end you grab you get the same shit.

Exactly. Until people stop pointing out only one side it will continue on as it has. I understand the point of view and do the same thing to a degree myself. Which ever party controls the state is the one that gets the most blame. But I am always happy to point out policy or the direct actions of the Democrats that color my opinion.

One for instance that is going there right now.

Our state collected more in taxes than expected. Revenue for the state has been high for a little while. Well there is a 1986 law that states if the revenue goes beyond a certain point then they must refund that money to the taxpayers. Right now that law kicked in to the tune of 3 billion dollars. Although the state is sitting on billions in rainy day funds and unused federal money they are working as hard as the can to either ignore,change or find a work around that will allow them to keep our money. These are the same POS that in 2017 voted themselves 18 million in annual raises over the veto of the governor and then stood on the state house steps and said we need more money for education. Why ANY working tax paying person would vote for any of these hacks is beyond me.

Believe me there are plenty more.

[pmartin]

Gaming the system to your advantage is poor sportsmanship, period. Gerrymandering is gaming the system and should be abolished. A computer program could be written to use a non-partisan method of defining districts.

[Jim at Gentex]

Gaming the system to your advantage is poor sportsmanship, period. Gerrymandering is gaming the system and should be abolished. A computer program could be written to use a non-partisan method of defining districts.

Agreed.
However we run into the same problem as we have in the term limits argument.

Those whom it would negatively impact are also those who would need to vote to pass it, so realistically it ain't happening...ever.

[YoDoug]

I live in Lonsdale MN, In our primary next week we are voting for a special election for the current district to replace the rep that passed away a couple months ago. In the general election our district switches and we are in the only swing district. The Dems currently hold the seat (Angie Craig) but that has not been long. It may swing back the other way this time.

[YoDoug]

Gaming the system to your advantage is poor sportsmanship, period. Gerrymandering is gaming the system and should be abolished. A computer program could be written to use a non-partisan method of defining districts.

Who gets to write the code? You let either party hire the programming source and it will just be a fancy gerrymandering algorithm to benefit one party over the other.

[So not a Guru]

And THAT is exactly why open primaries are a bad idea.

Too much like democracy?

[Jim at Gentex]

Too much like democracy?

True democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.

We have a REPRESENTATIVE democracy for that reason, mkay?