- 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: Supreme Court rules in favor of Black voters in Alabama redistricting case
Posted on 6/8/23 at 11:58 am to SquatchDawg
Posted on 6/8/23 at 11:58 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
So representation needs to be based on the amount of melanin you have in your skin? What about other groups?
What is next on your voter registration card they will ask if you’re gay so one day there will be a gay district in Congress to represent that minority.
What about prohibiting asking anyone racial, ethnicity, and sexual preferences on voter registration forms, census forms or any government official documents?
While we are at it, ban asking or registering as a Democrat or Republican when registering to vote. Candidates can run in jungle primaries. If parties want to select a party candidate, they can hold their own primary convention and select a representative candidate on their own dime.
0
Posted on 6/8/23 at 11:58 am to BigJim
Terrible decision. SCOTUS rips up the constitution with this ruling.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:02 pm to The Maj
quote:Did the consultant not explain to him that the Hispanics took the district over the 50% statutory requirement, or was he too intimidated to explain the law to this yahoo?
he clearly does not understand the case law.quote:
He didn't
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:04 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
It's a fair ruling. African Americans currently only have 14% representation in the state when they are almost 27% of the population.
based on a fundamentally racist concept that only black people can represent black people and only white people can represent white people
SO now they will gerrymander the shite out of the state to get 2 black districts.
The Cook Partisan Voting Index says the 7 current districts are:
R+16
R+17
R+19
R+33
R+17
R+18
D+14
LINK
So now what they will have to do is gerrymander it a lot more to get a second black seat when the first black seat is already closer to even than any of the 6 Republican seats.
That is ALL based on race, without any hint of "discrimination" in the results but maybe the dems can get another seat.
They would NEVER be able to carve out a second seat except for the fact that back people are racist voters and they are easy to identify.
I guess all of the remaining 5 Republican seats will need to be +25 at least to be "fair".
What a fricking racket.
This post was edited on 6/8/23 at 12:05 pm
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:04 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
It's a fair ruling. African Americans currently only have 14% representation in the state when they are almost 27% of the population.
Drawing lines based on race is racist.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:08 pm to The Maj
So did the 51% get figured out to appease the racist?
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:10 pm to tarzana
quote:
The Court's ruling is likely to affect the identity of the newly-drawn district boundaries by political party, not by the racial identification of the winning candidate.
which will result in severe gerrymandering if it does (see my post above)
What absolute fricking bullshite
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:12 pm to rhar61
got 2 people who are anti-math already, which fits, because it too has been deemed racist now 
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:14 pm to LSU Grad Alabama Fan
quote:
It's a fair ruling. African Americans currently only have 14% representation in the state when they are almost 27% of the population.
when the frick did this become a requirement for a rep? does this mean that half of representatives must be women? what about other ethnic groups? a certain percentage of gays? what the frick are you talking about?
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:16 pm to BigJim
Judge me by the color of my skin?
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:20 pm to teke184
quote:
They couldn’t make a second one in the 90s without making Cleo Fields into Zorro, representing from Shreveport to Monroe to Baker to Bogalusa.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:20 pm to BigJim
I'd like to see what it would be like to create districts based not on geography, but based solely on socioeconomic status. The richest group would be say District 1, second richest group, be District 2, etc all the way down to the poorest group is the last district.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:22 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
I'd like to see what it would be like to create districts based not on geography, but based solely on socioeconomic status. The richest group would be say District 1, second richest group, be District 2, etc all the way down to the poorest group is the last district.
So the half that don't pay taxes automatically get half the seats?
That'll go well I am sure.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:25 pm to tarzana
quote:
The Court's ruling is likely to affect the identity of the newly-drawn district boundaries by political party, not by the racial identification of the winning candidate.
But would still require drawing lines based on race, which is racist.
Alabama districts will look absolutely retarded if they are drawn in keeping with this. Many people will have no representation at all.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:27 pm to Bham4Tide
quote:
I am in favor of justices going with their true, legal beliefs rather than find a way to lean to their respective parties.
Roberts and Kavanaugh both try to placate the left too much. Roberts is so worried about what the media thinks is a biased court that he goes out of his way to show that the court isn’t too far right. Instead of just ruling on the law and facts of the cases which would be what you say you want.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:29 pm to Bham4Tide
quote:
I am in favor of justices going with their true, legal beliefs rather than find a way to lean to their respective parties.
There is no legitimate justification for this ruling. Congrats, we're giving the country over to communism.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:32 pm to notsince98
quote:
Well that is racist. That means only blacks can be representative for blacks?
Not only that. By implication it also means only whites can represent whites.
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:43 pm to ryanlsu
quote:
Roberts is so worried about what the media thinks is a biased court
I think it's simer than that. Bush appointed SCJ is a RINO
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:44 pm to TIGERHOLD
quote:
Read through the Thomas dissent. The majority opinion is absolutely unhinged. What got into Kavanaugh?
I'll give you a chance to clarify.... you read the dissent, noted. Did you read the opinion of the court as well or are you calling something unhinged without reading it?
quote:
Terrible decision. SCOTUS rips up the constitution with this ruling.
Be honest, how much of the opinion did you read?
This post was edited on 6/8/23 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 6/8/23 at 12:53 pm to thejuiceisloose
quote:
Be honest, how much of the opinion did you read?
All of it. Thomas is correct. Either the VRA is unconstitutional, or it does not require drawing maps based on race.
To comply with this ruling, Alabama should create two 50.1% black majority districts (which would likely result in no Dem seats from Alabama) and force this to go back through the court system.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News