Standing in line.

[beej]

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.

I'm pretty sure they are already using software to get what they want. the question becomes, what parameters do you use to get what you want. do you gerrymander to put all black people in 1 or 2 districts? there are laws against using race for congressional districts. Do you use previous voting patterns for the basis? what voting patterns, local, statewide or federal?  Maybe one area went all in on Obama one year but voted for Trump a different year. how do you choose?  Almost any metric you use discriminates in some direction.

You can try to make all democrats in one district and all republicans in another district but then the minority parties in those districts feel like they have no voice. If you try to set paramters to make the district evenly blue and red, you end up with some REALLY REALLY weird looking districts. It's not easy to fix.

[neurosis]

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

Next thing you know, you'll have people never accepting the outcome of elections.   

[Incogneeto]

Next thing you know, you'll have people never accepting the outcome of elections.   

You always loved Hillary.

Get over it.

[mkd]

Lol

[Tim Johnson]

Here's how Michigan does redistricting starting this decade.

https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Michigan_after_the_2020_census

[YoDoug]

I'm pretty sure they are already using software to get what they want. the question becomes, what parameters do you use to get what you want. do you gerrymander to put all black people in 1 or 2 districts? there are laws against using race for congressional districts. Do you use previous voting patterns for the basis? what voting patterns, local, statewide or federal?  Maybe one area went all in on Obama one year but voted for Trump a different year. how do you choose?  Almost any metric you use discriminates in some direction.

You can try to make all democrats in one district and all republicans in another district but then the minority parties in those districts feel like they have no voice. If you try to set paramters to make the district evenly blue and red, you end up with some REALLY REALLY weird looking districts. It's not easy to fix.

I agree, it is probably near impossible to redistrict without negatively effecting a portion of the electorate. If I had to come up with the method I would probably specify a committee that is comprised of a number of members from each party based on the percentage of votes in the last election cycle. That way if third parties get enough votes they can be part of the redistricting process. I would also make the approval a large enough majority vote to make sure it requires some compromise. Maybe 2/3rds vote needed. I would probably have some sort of arbitration process defined and of course allow legal challenges.

[mkd]

The US Senate was once appointed by the states. Now it's by popular vote. Why can't you join with a district of YOUR choosing by your vote?

[Del.]

Next thing you know, you'll have people never accepting the outcome of elections.   

We wuz robbed.

[neurosis]

I'm trying to find it, but didn't the dems accuse the repubs of tampering with electronic ballot boxes at some point? 

[Tim Johnson]

The US Senate was once appointed by the states. Now it's by popular vote. Why can't you join with a district of YOUR choosing by your vote?

Changing districts would not change the value of one popular vote for a senator. What would be nice if each district had a single vote determined by the candidate receiving the most votes in that district. This process result would be similar to each representative having one vote and with the votes coming from the populous it would still be in line with the Seventeenth Amendment.

[YoDoug]

Changing districts would not change the value of one popular vote for a senator. What would be nice if each district had a single vote determined by the candidate receiving the most votes in that district. This process result would be similar to each representative having one vote and with the votes coming from the populous it would still be in line with the Seventeenth Amendment.

That is how I wish we would also decide the presidential races versus the current electoral college. By giving each district it's own single vote you get the closest to the actual desire of the people. It also makes it much harder to cheat because you would need to cheat in possibly a hundred districts to change the outcome, not just a handful of precincts in large cities. If Detroit, Milwaukee, Philly, Phoenix, etc. want to have their drop boxes in a couple metro locations it wouldn't matter how many ballots they fraudulently harvest, they would only still get one vote from that precinct.

[Smit]

That would make the gerrymandering very efficient indeed.

[beej]

I'm trying to find it, but didn't the dems accuse the repubs of tampering with electronic ballot boxes at some point? 

Yes, 2004 when Bush won the second time they thought he had rigged the voting machines. they said he stole the 2000 election too. And of course Stacy Abrams still thinks her election win was stolen from her.

[beej]

That would make the gerrymandering very efficient indeed.

agreed! sometimes, I think the founding fathers don't get enough credit for having thought all of this through and coming up with the an imperfect, but still the best, alternative.

[neurosis]

Yes, 2004 when Bush won the second time they thought he had rigged the voting machines. they said he stole the 2000 election too. And of course Stacy Abrams still thinks her election win was stolen from her.

I feel like every election from here on out is going to be challenged by the losing side with claims of fraud.

It's no wonder our fringes feel like our Country is headed toward a Civil War.