The single greatest threat to the republic

It's almost as if the reason these mechanics exist in our system is the same reason congress is divided into the house and senate.

You can't run a country by just the rule of the majority. Literally why country was set up the way it is and following your logic is WHY liberals keep promoting illegal immigration to support their agenda.

it really isn't

well, when the Dems keep pouring in hordes of niggers into traditionally white areas, cause white flight away from the cesspools you might need to redraw some districts.

>let's let hordes of low IQ people decide the fate of the country!

Truly the dumbest idea on the planet.

Our founding fathers had it right, only white male land owners should be able to vote.

Attached: 0BZ52aUvi.jpg (581x767, 92K)

what you both describe =! gerrymandering

the state lines were already drawn when the creation of congress occurred

70% of voter participation is white
whites vote 60% rep 40% dem

fuckin saged
propose an alternative or piss off with this shit bait

3rd option is still more representative than the 2nd option.

> There were already plans for how to draw the California districts when congress was created even though there were only 13 colonies.
lol

if you're getting out-smarted like you're a rat in a maze with nothing but electric shock for incentive, you deserve to lose

not at all what I said or was implying, but sure, argue with yourself

>half the blue squares represent illegal mexicans living in america

Are you the same dumb leaf who got blown the fuck out earlier today?

>parasites clump up
>hosts roam for sustenance

Can we please just give people in Mexico the franchise and welfare? At least then we wouldn't have to live next to them.

Leaf, your pic does highlight that only 35 seats were up for election and they won most of those. I'd speculate that if one of our autists took a look at it, the Dems won more Senate seats that were open in this election than their percentage of the vote should have allowed - per your idiotic argument.

it was her turn

Attached: Screen-Shot-2016-11-11-at-3.56.33-PM-1.jpg (400x433, 32K)

You're right, minority districts should be banned.

>give Mexico franchise
Why limit it to Mexico, when all of South America should have right to vote- since they're likely to come immigrate.

Literally the prisoners running the prison.

>1/2

Nani???

correct, it's a republic, and it's slowly healing itself despite the democrats' best efforts.

Most of the blue votes are from california and their illegals.

checks and balances. Every county and district deserves equal representation under the law, majority does not always win unless it's a true majority. Half is not majority, two thirds is. This prevents places like Los Angeles or New York from dominating politics and enforcing tyranny on others who are less in number.

Gerrymandering is different. Adjusting districts or seats for populations sakes is different.

The US House votes for national issues for higher populations and it's there for their national concerns. It's not winner take all unless agreed upon.

Cities and districts need to use the House as it was intended, for political issues for those large population areas, not trivial impeachment preceedings because one quarter disagrees with another quarter.

Direct democracy is impossible a nation out size. Your county and state can do what it pleases without controlling another.

It's called liberty. Let it ring.

GOP shills always pick the 1 D state that's gerrymandered and ignore the dozen GOP states

Attached: gerrymandering tx.jpg (712x530, 72K)

Those are some plump cherries you picked. Good job

The single greatest threat to the public is the average voter even being allowed to vote at all

popular vote for the senate is retarded.

Attached: opinion_discarded.jpg (612x612, 87K)

Literally what the founding fathers had in mind when they made this, they feared the cosmopolitan vote as you're lot are always the traitors.

Because there was

2 senators per state is retarded

Then get the FUCK out.

You lost

Attached: 139837033059.png (500x500, 332K)

wrong

Attached: MADAM SPEAKER.jpg (400x312, 36K)

You think it's only 1 dem state that does that?

Districts are drawn for each census year (every ten years) by the governor of the state. I'm afraid I must claim that you don't know what you're talking about

actually the founding fathers fought against gerrymandering and tyranny of the minority

is that younger Pelosi ? I like the boob crack

it's only republicans that win by getting less votes

>if you lose you win

drawn by the state legislature, governor can veto

america is the only country in western world where politicians pick their voters

Imagine being this retarded.

Undocumented immigrants don't/can't vote. You need to register to vote, and we kind of have thing against registering non-citizens. Blue squares represent voting citizens

Direct democracy is dangerous. It was never the intent of the founding fathers. They chose representative democracy, in which the statesmen represent cultures and ways of life. Just because a bunch of niggers and spics are packed in sardine cans in the cities doesn't grant the government the right to completely override the interests of the rest of the nation.

Attached: ce85983a471a7c5081fe3ff143bfc148.jpg (850x400, 33K)

*Democratic* Republic

Tell me who brainwashed you. I can help

Many more safe Democrat seats were up for re-election this year.

Usually anons' autism helps them analyze data really well, but sometimes they are way more retarded like this

>you're

>districts
90% of which are red, not blue.

tyranny of the minority is cancerous and even more dangerous

his 2nd sentence is literally "we have government by the majority"

The founders fought against tyranny, period. The idea was never to appoint representatives with the same proportions of opinions as the people. The reason we separate government powers at all is so that we have conflicting factions in power; senators elected one way, congressmen elected another way, and hopefully they agree on nothing except what's widely accepted as good governance.

the founding fathers were very much in favor of majority rule

>we kind of have a thing against registering non-citizens
nigger, you not only register non-citizens, you register and vote with DEAD non-citizens.

thedailybeast.com/democrats-hate-gerrymanderingexcept-when-they-get-to-do-it

tranny friends dead at 30 etc

Explain the electoral college.

Careful now, if you have any more than 2 senators per state, the democrats will never win again and the midwest will determine American destiny :^)

I love how that graphic implies Republicans are the only ones that do it. Look at any state's congressional districts. The only ones without wiggity-whack borders have none at all.

it was a compromise they made for the slave states in fucking 1790. we're now in 2018

explain why u retards want to use all the conveniences of modern technology while clinging to shit from 1790

actually im all for a non partisan elections body like Elections Canada and like they have in cali

Democrats had the majority of votes and also won the majority of seats up for election.
But Democrats know their base is stupid and will throw a tantrum over not getting the seats that weren't up for election. Kinda interesting.

Look at the 2008 DNC primary and ask yourself why a democrat (that wasn't impeached) hasn't been elected since the 80s, and after him, every state except for one voted republican.

I think he's implying states like California should have more because people. And ironically doesn't understand the houses at all.

>senate has anything to do with gerrymandering

Senators are elected by the state. How the fuck is the senate affected by gerrymandering?

Clinton was elected twice, Obama was elected twice, and Democrats have won 6 of the last 7 popular votes

who investigates the investigators?

the 2nd pic is for GOP gerrymandering

What? It's completely unrelated to the slavery issue. Why does every State get 2 free electors? Why is Congress bicameral at all?

every other western country has this

only a backward country like america lets politicians pick their own voters

you stated that only republicans win without popular vote. Obama won without popular vote. Therefore Obama is a republican by your logic. Clinton got impeached.

Why can't you answer the question?

ALSO HOW TO STEAL ELECTIONS: IMPORT TEN BILLION SHITSKINS TO VOTE LEFT EVERY ELECTION FOREVER
FUCK YOU KIKE

Every other western country is a choice between one leftist or the other. You're not helping your case.

Have mathematicians come up with a widely accepted definition of a gerrymander yet? Or an algorithm that draws district lines fairly?

Everyone gerrymanders. If you're a democrat, it's "redistricting". If it's a republican, it's "gerrymandering".
I don't even understand the problem. There's no objective solution.
Do you want to separate the rural areas from the cities? Then you'll always have a Republican house.
Do you want to evenly distribute them? Then you'll always have a Democrat house because cities overwhelmingly vote democrat and they contain most of the population.

The fuck are you talking about? Obama won the popular vote in both his elections.

Because we don’t want our elections to be decided by the largest cities alone. You’re a faggot retard.

Attached: 9D633FDD-D5BE-4AE1-8324-73A8B7B909C7.jpg (300x223, 37K)

that's not true at all

every western country has liberal and conservative parties

who investigates the politicians who pick their own voters?

That district in your picture is a Democrat district you fucking tit.

Why not send 100,000 White people to Mexico city and have them run all the critical positions in that society, like make it a requirement you have to be of the purist Aryan blood to be a manager of any position that has more than 100 people under it. Courts, transportation, housing, finance, manufacturing and basically every important position so that their society gets better and they return to their homelands and stay out of ours. Move 100,000 there rather than 30,000,000 here.

Sure. Just require every district to have a square shape.

As someone from this area that is fucking hilarious.
>Hey, San Antonio and Austin are so close together we can lump all the democrats from both cities into one district!
The right are terrified of a fair fight and will do everything they can to give themselves every advantage because "fuck the people, we know better."

There is literally no way to organize districts and not have some sort of gerrymandering in place.

Imagine being this retarded

Attached: 1481676204541.jpg (640x628, 40K)

that's the point u fucking retard, they pile all the Dem voters into 1 district

this

Attached: gerrymandering nc.png (915x915, 101K)

>There's no objective solution.
make districts equal population pie slices radiating from the geographic center of the state

Republicans won 50.3 percent of NC’s votes for Congress. They took 10 of 13 seats.
newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article221282920.html

Okay.

Don't count Illegal Aliens as part of your population metrics.

Gerrymandering is just something for the losing side the cry about. Both sides do it when they can. It more or less is a wash. I hate how Dems act like "banning" gerrymandering would finally give them the supermajority rule that they are entitled to but republicans rigged away from them. Its already "banned" via laws that try to regulate but you can't just magically make something so subjective magically fair. What does a "fair" district even look like? You can always find some group that feels marginalized. The reality is that drawing districts is inherantly political and literally always has been.