- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Did Tennessee do it the wrong way?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:29 am
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:29 am
As you try to cut through all the racial and party arguments about who's wronging who, It wouldn't take much for a five year old to look at the current Louisiana district map and see a huge snake-like district wiggling diagonally through three-quarters of the state, knowing something seems odd. But did Tennessee take something fairly reasonable (From a purely geographical standpoint), and just create three snakes? (District 5 is quite bizzare). Is this hurting the same argument many of us are supporting? Anyone here with close ties to the region that can help us better understand?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:35 am to SlickRick55
Tennessee did the right thing.
When nature gets out of balance it rights itself ... it doesn't left itself.
Tennessee is a case, as is this entire issue, of nature righting itself.
When nature gets out of balance it rights itself ... it doesn't left itself.
Tennessee is a case, as is this entire issue, of nature righting itself.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:36 am to SlickRick55
Drive them out. Drive them all out.
Or deport them. Whichever is cheaper.
Or deport them. Whichever is cheaper.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:39 am to SlickRick55
The districts drawn are absurd on their face.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:40 am to SlickRick55
There has been at least one weird district in Tennessee since the 70s and it centers on Memphis/Shelby County. The 7th would stretch from Memphis all the way up to clarksville at the Kentucky border just north of Nashville. And.or it would go from Memphis to the south/southwest suburbs of Nashville.
The 8th would usually get parts of Memphis and take all of teh northwestern rural part of the state.
And the reason it was created that way in the 70s was to benefit Democrats by putting the suburban voters in Memphis and Nashville, that were trending Republican, into one district, thereby creating 3 or 4 safe Democrat seats : the 9th, 8th, 5th, and most likely the 6th.
Not calling you out, but the reason Democrats can get people all emotional about this stuff is because most people do not understand the history. They think this gerrymandering business just started with the men ole Republicans doing it. Which is, of course, absurd.
The 8th would usually get parts of Memphis and take all of teh northwestern rural part of the state.
And the reason it was created that way in the 70s was to benefit Democrats by putting the suburban voters in Memphis and Nashville, that were trending Republican, into one district, thereby creating 3 or 4 safe Democrat seats : the 9th, 8th, 5th, and most likely the 6th.
Not calling you out, but the reason Democrats can get people all emotional about this stuff is because most people do not understand the history. They think this gerrymandering business just started with the men ole Republicans doing it. Which is, of course, absurd.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:43 am to tatervol
I am sorry you aren’t taking it well! Good luck moving forward with your grieving
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:45 am to SlickRick55
The pragmatist in me wants geographic and culturally representative districts. If they happen to lean R or D, so be it. This comes from my belief in the philosophy of Utahism: that borders should reflect the geographical, demographic, cultural, and historical realities of the people living within them. Distinct populations should get to govern themselves. It’s the logical conclusion of nationalism plus balkanism.
The realist in me understands that the motivation of people drawing the districts will always be cynically partisan, and the only option will be either drawing everything red or everything blue. America has been in a cold civil war for over a decade now, and it’s going to get worse before it gets any better. The courts opened pandora’s box, and they will need to make a lot more rulings before we reach anything remotely logical or stable.
The realist in me understands that the motivation of people drawing the districts will always be cynically partisan, and the only option will be either drawing everything red or everything blue. America has been in a cold civil war for over a decade now, and it’s going to get worse before it gets any better. The courts opened pandora’s box, and they will need to make a lot more rulings before we reach anything remotely logical or stable.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:50 am to SlickRick55
Yes. This is a “they started it first” situation though. Democrats have been creating crazy districts in blue states for quite some time to maximize democrat votes from large metro areas. IL is a prime example as well as what they were trying to do in VA. In response, red states are doing the exact opposite cutting Democrat enclaves into multiple pieces to dilute that vote.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:50 am to JimEverett
quote:
They think this gerrymandering business just started with the men ole Republicans doing it. Which is, of course, absurd.
The Dems did it years ago. The current status quo is changing and they are crying foul. How else it is possible that 7 states had 40% of the vote go to Trump and they have ALL dem reps in the house and senate.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 10:51 am to kingbob
quote:
The pragmatist in me wants geographic and culturally representative districts. If they happen to lean R or D, so be it. This comes from my belief in the philosophy of Utahism: that borders should reflect the geographical, demographic, cultural, and historical realities of the people living within them. Distinct populations should get to govern themselves. It’s the logical conclusion of nationalism plus balkanism.
That is not pragmatic. What that produces is what we have been witnessing - extremism. How is it pragmatic to have a state full of congressional districts that are +50, +40, +55, etc. for one party over another.
Tennessee is roughly +30 Republican. To have as many districts that are just +20 Republican as Tennessee now has is very pragmatic. More balanced. Much more likely to counter any extreme voices as opposed to +50 or more like some of those districts were.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:01 am to Rip Torner
quote:
I am sorry you aren’t taking it well! Good luck moving forward with your grieving
.....One in every thread. Informative stuff here.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:02 am to JimEverett
Utahism allows consituents to vote with their feet. When states have arbitrary borders, they inevitably lump together groups of people who have very different philosophies on life, values, wants, and needs. This leads to a zero sum game between competing factions. Look no further than Louisiana. New Orleans and Shreveport barely belong on the same planet let alone the same state. Philly and Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania is another such example.
Europe has borders that make sense because they were fought over. Their regional governments have boundaries that are rarely arbitrary, giving their regions distinct identities. This allows those regions to have representation that actually fits their identity.
One flaw in the American system is our arbitrary borders, imo. These borders create states where the residents have little to nothing in common with one-another even down to their more granular local governments. As a result, it is easier to nationalize politics because of the lack of anything unifying local constituents.
Redrawing state borders is, at this stage, impossible and impractical. However, we could achieve some semblance of this without redrawing state borders by ensuring congressional maps reflect the internal cultural and geographic divisions of a state as much as is practical. That way, the politicians elected to represent those districts are more likely to be recognizably identifiable as being of that district than merely being the political equivalent of professional athletes in free agency moving around wherever the money takes them.
Europe has borders that make sense because they were fought over. Their regional governments have boundaries that are rarely arbitrary, giving their regions distinct identities. This allows those regions to have representation that actually fits their identity.
One flaw in the American system is our arbitrary borders, imo. These borders create states where the residents have little to nothing in common with one-another even down to their more granular local governments. As a result, it is easier to nationalize politics because of the lack of anything unifying local constituents.
Redrawing state borders is, at this stage, impossible and impractical. However, we could achieve some semblance of this without redrawing state borders by ensuring congressional maps reflect the internal cultural and geographic divisions of a state as much as is practical. That way, the politicians elected to represent those districts are more likely to be recognizably identifiable as being of that district than merely being the political equivalent of professional athletes in free agency moving around wherever the money takes them.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:07 am to SlickRick55
Coming from someone who thinks political parties would come together and create fair, non partisan districts
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:15 am to SlickRick55
13% of the population should have 13% of the representation. No more. No less.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:16 am to SlickRick55
quote:
Is this hurting the same argument many of us are supporting?
What argument is that? That democrats have gerrymandered all Republican seats out of existence in blue states and that red states should do the same?
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:24 am to Riverside
It’s the faux conservatives not having the backbone to ever fight back: “meh it’s too hard and the media will outrage” argument
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:27 am to SlickRick55
quote:No.
Did Tennessee do it the wrong way?
As VA demonstrated, these redistricting efforts are wars between the states. Unfortunately, no one said anything when CA, IL, MA, CT, MD, etc gerrymandered the GOP out of seats for years. They did so at the same time Southern States were forced to gerrymander in ways also favoring Dems.
Now, finally there comes the "equal and opposite" reaction.
GOP states unilaterally disarmed for years while the Dems proceeded on a "by any means necessary" basis. Based on the VA attempt, there can be no question as to where Dems intend to go.
Would I prefer compact more representative districts? Absolutely!
Would I prefer compact, representative districting unilaterally done in GOP states, thereby ceding 12-15 US House seats to Dems? Absolutely NOT!
This post was edited on 5/11/26 at 11:29 am
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:32 am to eitek1
quote:
The Dems did it years ago. The current status quo is changing and they are crying foul. How else it is possible that 7 states had 40% of the vote go to Trump and they have ALL dem reps in the house and senate.
The timing is perfect as well. To so many, as proved by the democrat voters defecting countrywide to the GOP, it is obvious the policies created by those elected due to gerrymandering are killing the American way of living and life.
Posted on 5/11/26 at 11:32 am to NC_Tigah
Good take. It’s a shame, but yes, don’t fall on your own sword as long as the swords are out.
Popular
Back to top
9










