Media Bias

So to save John Roberts she sacrificed the constitution and the country, brilliant ........fucking brilliant.:bs:Actually after I read that one I saw this, apparently Roberts had said he would not break a tie in response to a question Schumer posed so even if she had put him in a position to break the tie, Justice Roberts felt it was not his constitutional duty.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chief-justice-john-roberts-impeachment-tiebreaker

Schumer began by asking Roberts if he was aware that Chief Justice Samuel Chase cast tie-breaking votes during President Andrew Johnson's impeachment trial in the 1860s.
"I have a parliamentary inquiry," Schumer said. "Is the chief justice aware that in the impeachment trial of President Johnson, Chief Justice Chase, as presiding officer, cast tie-breaking votes on both March 31 and April 2, 1868?"
Roberts said he was aware of Chase's actions but explained that the issues he sought to resolve were minor. He also said he did not believe Chase's votes were enough to establish a firm precedent for him to act on.
“The one [vote] concerned a motion to adjourn. The other [vote] concerned a motion to close deliberations," Roberts replied. "I do not regard those isolated episodes 150 years ago, as sufficient to support a general authority to break ties." ... "If the members of this body, elected by the people and accountable to them, divide equally on a motion -- the normal rule is that the motion fails," he added.
"I think it would be inappropriate for me, an unelected official from a different branch of government, to assert the power to change that result so that the motion would succeed.”

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

GZCxF7PWmHI&feature=emb_title

Veteran journalist suggesting gerrymandering the senate...

Actually after I read that one I saw this, apparently Roberts had said he would not break a tie in response to a question Schumer posed so even if she had put him in a position to break the tie, Justice Roberts felt it was not his constitutional duty.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chief-justice-john-roberts-impeachment-tiebreaker



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

So either she was lying or wasn't paying attention to Roberts.

Veteran journalist suggesting gerrymandering the senate...

LOL, it worked for republicans .



chico , you still don't get it. Everything the republicans have done or are doing is going to come back at them ten fold! Stop the phony outrage .


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/11/20857934/republican-gerrymandering-north-carolina-michigan

https://www.businessinsider.com/partisan-gerrymandering-has-benefited-republicans-more-than-democrats-2017-6

The AP scrutinized the outcomes of all 435 U.S. House races and about 4,700 state House and Assembly seats up for election last year using a new statistical method of calculating partisan advantage. It’s designed to detect cases in which one party may have won, widened or retained its grip on power through political gerrymandering.

The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts.

Yet the data suggest that even if Democrats had turned out in larger numbers, their chances of substantial legislative gains were limited by gerrymandering.

“The outcome was already cooked in, if you will, because of the way the districts were drawn,” said John McGlennon, a longtime professor of government and public policy at the College of William & Mary in Virginia who ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat in the 1980s.

LOL, it worked for republicans .



chico , you still don't get it. Everything the republicans have done or are doing is going to come back at them ten fold! Stop the phony outrage .

G1, you can’t gerrymander the senate...the point is this journalist is a moron.

G1, you can’t gerrymander the senate...the point is this journalist is a moron.

LOL,........sure chico,sure.:stop:

So either she was lying or wasn't paying attention to Roberts.Or, since she knew the position he would take, AND his reasons why, she still didnt want to put Roberts in the position of having to take that action and thus risk polarizing the Supreme Court in the media. Him saying his position on the floor, allowed her to make her vote with an eye to the larger good of not dragging the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court into an immensely political decision.

Consider the headline if her vote makes it 50-50 and Roberts allows the vote to fail. Roberts decision would be blared across the headlines positively and negatively on a partisan basis. Instead her vote kept the partisan headlines focused where they ought to be, On the Senators.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

LOL, it worked for republicans .







chico , you still don't get it. Everything the republicans have done or are doing is going to come back at them ten fold! Stop the phony outrage .





https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/11/20857934/republican-gerrymandering-north-carolina-michigan



https://www.businessinsider.com/partisan-gerrymandering-has-benefited-republicans-more-than-democrats-2017-6



The AP scrutinized the outcomes of all 435 U.S. House races and about 4,700 state House and Assembly seats up for election last year using a new statistical method of calculating partisan advantage. It’s designed to detect cases in which one party may have won, widened or retained its grip on power through political gerrymandering.



The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts.



Yet the data suggest that even if Democrats had turned out in larger numbers, their chances of substantial legislative gains were limited by gerrymandering.



“The outcome was already cooked in, if you will, because of the way the districts were drawn,” said John McGlennon, a longtime professor of government and public policy at the College of William & Mary in Virginia who ran unsuccessfully for Congress as a Democrat in the 1980s.G1 you live in Md, a gerrymandered state for the Dems. Both parties have done that on the House level.

As for Gerrymandering the Senate (a fairly impossible thing) we ought to repeal the direct election of senators and move back to the state legislatures appointing them.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

MD is gerrymandered but I think rational people can agree that the Republicans have abused the trick much more and more often than Democrats.

The census is coming up and new districts will be drawn based on census numbers. That is why Trump and Republicans wanted the "citizenship" question on there, so that minorities would be less likely to respond, thus under reporting in traditionally democratic areas so those areas will have less House Reps. The census is used to determine how many people live in the US per district and is not designed to measure how many voters per district.

District drawing should be non-partisan, using natural land barriers or other objective ways. To allow a R or D state controlled legislature to draw maps for the specific purpose of watering down the other parties votes seems so unconstitutional to me.
------------
The 2012 election provides a number of examples as to how partisan gerrymandering can adversely affect the descriptive function of states' congressional delegations. In Pennsylvania, for example, Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives received 83,000 more votes than Republican candidates, yet the Republican-controlled redistricting process in 2010 resulted in Democrats losing to their Republican counterparts in 13 out of Pennsylvania's 18 districts.[32]

In the seven states where Republicans had complete control over the redistricting process, Republican House candidates received 16.7 million votes and Democratic House candidates received 16.4 million votes. The redistricting resulted in Republican victories in 73 out of the 107 affected seats; in those 7 states, Republicans received 50.4% of the votes but won in over 68% of the congressional districts.[33] While it is but one example of how gerrymandering can have a significant effect on election outcomes, this kind of disproportional representation of the public will seems to be problematic for the legitimacy of democratic systems, regardless of one's political affiliation.

In Michigan, redistricting was constructed by a Republican Legislature in 2011.[34] Federal congressional districts were so designed that cities such as Battle Creek, Grand Rapids, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Lansing, and East Lansing were separated into districts with large conservative-leaning hinterlands that essentially diluted the Democratic votes in those cities in Congressional elections.[citation needed] Since 2010 not one of those cities is within a district in which a Democratic nominee for the House of Representatives has a reasonable chance of winning, short of Democratic landslide.[citation needed][clarification needed]

-------
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/JGVO3JNKHU4RZLA3TK4WRGF7QE.png&w=767

Or, since she knew the position he would take, AND his reasons why, she still didnt want to put Roberts in the position of having to take that action and thus risk polarizing the Supreme Court in the media. Him saying his position on the floor, allowed her to make her vote with an eye to the larger good of not dragging the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court into an immensely political decision.

Consider the headline if her vote makes it 50-50 and Roberts allows the vote to fail. Roberts decision would be blared across the headlines positively and negatively on a partisan basis. Instead her vote kept the partisan headlines focused where they ought to be, On the Senators.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
LOL, ...............:funnypost....you're a good story teller.