Unlike the Democrats, the GOP are wasting no time.

[Disco Pickle]

How is redrawing the districts to reflect the real demographics a problem?

Wait.

You want to redraw districts based on what?  Income?  Race?  What?

all of the above is baiting.

the people who actually live there.  is that too difficult to understand?

Yes.  What's wrong with leaving the districts the way they are, if you're not actually adding any representatives?

fair enough.

every state is vastly under represented in congress based on population growth.

[EDIT]

well..  not EVERY state.

Gerrymandering isn't moving district lines to add representatives.

It's moving district lines to influence elections.

and it works both ways.

Oh, well, that makes everything okay.  So when you have a major, nation-wide shift in politics, it's okay for the victor to change districts across the board to keep the other party from ever having a fair chance of being elected again?

Nice. 

once again, way to shove words down my mouth.

In my state, this sort of thing has to be on the ballot as a separate amendment, so your milage may vary..

redrawing districts to reflect reality has been a contention here in NF for some 15 years so we may be talking about different oranges, or apples..  or kiwis...

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I think Pickle was commenting on the proper reason for redistricting rather than what it is usually used for.

If I recall, the first election I voted involved a redistricting (as a ballot question), but since no one really had any objection to it, it passed easily, and I think that's what he's thinking of.

[Cain]

Anyway, moving back to the OP...it looks like we're back to 2004 again.  I've been waiting for something similar in the UK, as the Tory Right (in particular, those who note down their verbal burping in the online rag The Telegraph) are also, by and large, very anti-global warming.  It's not a big electoral thing here in the UK (and probably isn't in the States either), but it does mean two UNSC nations now have people who don't believe in man-made global warming or global warming at all in charge of legislation.  And I don't know where France stands, but China sure as hell isn't going to let a little thing like environmental damage stand in the way of it's economic growth, and Russia doesn't care excessively either, beyond making sure it's old, ex-Soviet stockpiles don't leak over someone important.

So that's 4/5 of the most influential nations for international agreements who may now consider there to be no problem to worry about, or wont enforce existing agreements and treaties.  And when the big players start to defect from a system, you can sure as hell bet smaller players will follow if they gain from it...

[Telarus]

Cain, have you brought up us waffling on the cluster munitions treaties? I think I saw that here. Maybe elsewhere.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=53437

[Cain]

I haven't, but I've followed it, on and off.  That most of NATO already signed onto the Treaty means the US is just hurting itself by being obstinate about their use.

[Prince Glittersnatch III]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44630.html
Oklahoma bans Sharia law for some reason.
Thank god this country is finally headed in the right direction.

[Cain]

Next step: banning Phoenician Law.  No Human Sacrifice for Moloch in our Tennessee!

Oh man, that so needs to be a real campaign.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

How is redrawing the districts to reflect the real demographics a problem?

Wait.

You want to redraw districts based on what?  Income?  Race?  What?

all of the above is baiting.

the people who actually live there.  is that too difficult to understand?

Yes.  What's wrong with leaving the districts the way they are, if you're not actually adding any representatives?

fair enough.

every state is vastly under represented in congress based on population growth.

[EDIT]

well..  not EVERY state.

Gerrymandering isn't moving district lines to add representatives.

It's moving district lines to influence elections.

and it works both ways.

Oh, well, that makes everything okay.  So when you have a major, nation-wide shift in politics, it's okay for the victor to change districts across the board to keep the other party from ever having a fair chance of being elected again?

Nice. 

Yeah, it made me kinda ill when some of the 'get out the vote' arguments on the Dem side was 'If we're in power, we'll get to redraw the districts to favor us!!'

[Disco Pickle]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44630.html
Oklahoma bans Sharia law for some reason.
Thank god this country is finally headed in the right direction.

apparently, fear really IS the mind-killer.

There's been some stupid shit done over the last decade.  This is the most useless stupid shit in recent memory.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44630.html
Oklahoma bans Sharia law for some reason.
Thank god this country is finally headed in the right direction.

What the fuck?



I'm with Cain. We should get them to ban all sorts of stupid shit.

Banning Shariah Law.... FFS the Constitution already fucking does that...

[Disco Pickle]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44630.html
Oklahoma bans Sharia law for some reason.
Thank god this country is finally headed in the right direction.

What the fuck?



I'm with Cain. We should get them to ban all sorts of stupid shit.

Banning Shariah Law.... FFS the Constitution already fucking does that...

we should ban Murphy's Law (damn law gets me all the fucking TIME!)

and the second law of thermodynamics,  so I can finally build my perpetual motion machine.

[Cain]

Ban Babylonian Law: no more hewing off lips in Marduk's name.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Banning the Laws of Physics.... hmmm.....

Perhaps it could be phrased in such a way that would give it credibility or at least not raise too many eyebrows, like ban scientific bias in the patent office which prevents innovations in the area of energy efficiency, engineering and space propulsion technology. Devil can be in the details and we can infiltrate a bunch of science crank websites to get them to support it in the name of science.

[LMNO]

There is precedent.

In 1897, Indiana attempted to define Pi as 3.2.

[Requia ☣]

I'm pretty sure you can talk them into banning laws of physics as creationist/climate denier measures, without even bothering to make it make sense.