- 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
re: SCOTUS rules on Callais
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:30 am to LSUFanHouston
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:30 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The problem is how the minority population is spread out.
A second district is going to have a wild spread shape to pick up enough minority voters.
This has primacy over districts being racially representative, at least up to the point of gerrymandering them. A state can create multiple minority districts, but the more they have to gerrymander them the more likely they are to get tossed due to Callais. So if a state has multiple minority districts it's going to be more due to their population patterns allowing for those districts without gerrymandering.
0
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:32 am to scrooster
quote:quote:
Probably bigger in terms of the future of the country.
Agreed, without a doubt when we take into account the potential repercussions and reverberations.
Repercussions for the left, long term, this really demolishes their entire foundation of power on a federal level, in federal elections ... that have been in place since 1965.
The next question is: when? In other words, will States be pressed to address claims before the upcoming mid-terms or will allowances be made to delay redistricting to be completed by 2028 elections?
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:36 am to Pezzo
Not unless its based on race, but if Districts are made line fingers, as in Va. it could be called a violation, down the road when someone challenges, but in Calif. they have enough libs throughout the state, they do not have to draw crazy districts like Va. and Ill.
BUT, the 2030 Census will, IMHO, not count all these illegals, if the VP wins in 2028.
BUT, the 2030 Census will, IMHO, not count all these illegals, if the VP wins in 2028.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:38 am to scrooster
quote:
Jackson is claiming, "the consequences are going to be grave ... minority citizens are going to be cracked out of the process."
I'm not familiar with the term. What does "cracked out of the process" mean?
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:39 am to scrooster
quote:
Jackson is claiming, "the consequences are going to be grave ... minority citizens are going to be cracked out of the process."
No one is taking our right to vote. WTF is she talking about?
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:39 am to L.A.
It's not a white term. Remember, in 'hood lingo a 'cracker' is a white person. So, I guess, it means minorities will be taken out of the picture by whitey. Can't take the hood out of the broad! 
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:40 am to scrooster
fricking huge. holy shite thats huge
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:41 am to LordSaintly
Who knows what 'crack' she might be on?!?!
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:42 am to conservativewifeymom
quote:
It's not a white term. Remember, in 'hood lingo a 'cracker' is a white person. So, I guess, it means minorities will be taken out of the picture by whitey. Can't take the hood out of the broad!
Good Lord, that would be low even for her
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:42 am to pbro62
quote:
Please do not summon the village idiots
Don’t worry. They are too busy trying to make the Comey arrest a nothing burger.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:42 am to LSUbest
quote:
Reps + 20
Sorry for the question, but I do not follow this type of prediction. You talking shite, or is this a realistic number?
in advance.Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:46 am to scrooster
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:52 am to scrooster
Can we get a sticky on this thread.
This just changed the trajectory of the country.
This just changed the trajectory of the country.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:54 am to scrooster
quote:
Looks like if only Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson dissented
Jackson was 100% dissenting regardless. She's so dumb.
Sotomayor was about an 85% chance to dissent regardless.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:56 am to scrooster
And the USA Today online headline for this story?
“Supreme Court sides against Black voters in blow to landmark civil rights law”
And no, I’m not joking.
“Supreme Court sides against Black voters in blow to landmark civil rights law”
And no, I’m not joking.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:57 am to scrooster
Future generations are going to think it's absolutely insane that Sec. 2 was ever allowed in the first place
Posted on 4/29/26 at 10:58 am to Screaming Viking
quote:
Sorry for the question, but I do not follow this type of prediction. You talking shite, or is this a realistic number?
You don't think it's realistic?
How many do you think is realistic?
What do you think is the best and worst possible outcome for the reps?
What's your prediction of the most likely outcome?
Posted on 4/29/26 at 11:00 am to loogaroo
quote:
Can we get a sticky on this thread.
This just changed the trajectory of the country.
Done
Posted on 4/29/26 at 11:02 am to LSUbest
quote:
You don't think it's realistic? How many do you think is realistic? What do you think is the best and worst possible outcome for the reps? What's your prediction of the most likely outcome?
I have no clue. Hence the question. Sorry to have bothered you.
Posted on 4/29/26 at 11:02 am to loogaroo
quote:
Can we get a sticky on this thread.
This just changed the trajectory of the country.
Potential 24 seat swing in our beloved South alone.
It's definitely a historic decision.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News