Republicans are hypocrites

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[JimC]

Politicians should not be in charge of deciding electoral boundaries, just like vampires shouldn't be in charge of blood banks. In Oz, the Electoral Commission supervises elections at all levels of government, and controls electoral boundaries at the state and federal level.

[Coito ergo sum]

This might not fall under the "Republicans are hypocrites" category so much as the "Republicans are slimier than used-car salesmen" category:

Virginia Republicans Redistrict While Civil Rights Leader Attends Inauguration

In what has to be one of the sneakiest moves by a state legislature since Tom Delay had Texas redraw its congressional districts in 2003, the Virginia state Senate redrew the boundaries of the state Senate districts yesterday, while long-time civil rights activist, state senator Henry L Marsh III was in D.C. attending President Obama's inauguration. Currently the Virginia state senate is split evenly, with 20 Democrats and 20 Republicans. As we learned after the 2010 elections, when one party controls all the levers of power in state government, it can gerrymander all districts to its hearts' content, pass laws making it harder for people to vote, and more. With the state senate split evenly between the parties, it was impossible for Republicans to pass openly partisan laws, even though they control the state house and the governor's mansion.

So the Republican state senators waited until one of their members, Marsh, was out of state, and then rammed through new state senate district lines yesterday by a vote of 20 to 19. The plan was a tightly held secret. Even the governor didn't know about it and has said he has to think about whether to sign it or not. If he signs it, Republicans will have a good shot at taking back the state senate in 2014. But the downside of signing it is that the Democrats in the current state senate are likely to block everything in the current session of the legislature and blame the Republicans.

To make things more complicated, Virginia will elect a new governor in Nov. 2013, as Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) is term limited. Likely Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Terry McAuliffe, is almost sure to use this sneaky redistricting as a weapon to say that Republicans don't accept election results unless they win. As Virginia becomes bluer and bluer, that could help him. The likely Republican nominee is state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who is a conservative firebrand. Thus the move by the state senate yesterday could easily spill over into the gubernational race in this key swing state. Whichever party wins the governor's mansion in November, will no doubt use that to the fullest in 2016.

This kind of thing is slimy, but it is no slimier than when Democrats do it, which is often.

Democrats' revenge in 2012: a radical Illinois gerrymander
Illinois' redistricting plan is poised to turn half a dozen Republican seats Democratic and could help Democrats retake the House in 2012.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opi ... errymander

House Democrats released a new congressional redistricting plan on May 27, 2011.[40] When the GOP first got a look at the plan, their congressional delegation released a joint statement calling it “little more than an attempt to undo the results of the elections held just six months ago.”[41]
Three days after releasing their plan, House Democrats approved a revised version on May 30, passing the bill 63-54. State Rep. Mike Fortner (R) said the changes were made two hours before a vote was taken, and that the public had no chance to review the map.[42] House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie said the plan was, "A good map, a solid map and certainly an eminently fair map."[43]
The Senate passed the map on May 31 by a margin of 34-25. [44] Gov. Pat Quinn signed the map on June 24, and issued a statement saying, "This map is fair, maintains competitiveness within congressional districts, and protects the voting rights of minority communities."[45]
According to an analysis by Politico, the new map threatened to cost the GOP up to five U.S. House seats. In the new districts, freshman Republicans Adam Kinzinger, Robert Dold and Bobby Schilling were drawn into Democratic-leaning districts, while Joe Walsh and Randy Hultgren could have been pitted against each other, and Tim Johnson was put into a newly competitive district in the southern Illinois. GOP consultant David From said of the map, “It’s kind of a work of art, in the wrong direction. There’s a lot of creativity. Whether you agree with it or not, Speaker Madigan has always been a smart politician.”[41]
Illinois GOP Chairman Pat Brady called on Gov. Quinn to veto the maps. In a press release Brady quoted three statements from Quinn in which he pushes for a fair, open redistricting process and competitive districts. Brady said if Quinn was to live up to his words he must veto the maps.[46] Quinn signed the map into law on June 24, stating, "This map is fair, maintains competitiveness within congressional districts, and protects the voting rights of minority communities."[47] Republicans and the League of Women Voters both filed lawsuits, alleging the districts were unfairly redrawn in favor of Democrats.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/R ... n_Illinois

Redistricting a big factor in Democrats' wins -- http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/11/07/ ... -illinois/

Democrat redistricting schemes pay off in California: http://www.propublica.org/article/in-ca ... y-paid-off

There is definitely an equivalence in sliminess here. They all take their opportunities when they come.

[Tero]

Er, fine. I would rate both as politician tricks. I don't think Democrats get punished as much for hypocricy. The Republican slimyness always supports the millionaires. And reduces their tax. It's all about tax. Fetuses, guns, pipelines: all reduce to small Fed gubment and less taxes for all. Well, the taxes on the poor could not be less. Insignificant to them. They only meet the poor as servers.

[Coito ergo sum]

Er, fine. I would rate both as politician tricks. I don't think Democrats get punished as much for hypocricy. The Republican slimyness always supports the millionaires. And reduces their tax. It's all about tax. Fetuses, guns, pipelines: all reduce to small Fed gubment and less taxes for all. Well, the taxes on the poor could not be less. Insignificant to them. They only meet the poor as servers.

If only they'd get the fetuses out of their heads, and settled for some reasonable gun control, all that sounds good. Less taxes sounds good, pipelines are awesome, smaller federal government sounds good in principle.

[Seth]

This might not fall under the "Republicans are hypocrites" category so much as the "Republicans are slimier than used-car salesmen" category:

Virginia Republicans Redistrict While Civil Rights Leader Attends Inauguration

In what has to be one of the sneakiest moves by a state legislature since Tom Delay had Texas redraw its congressional districts in 2003, the Virginia state Senate redrew the boundaries of the state Senate districts yesterday, while long-time civil rights activist, state senator Henry L Marsh III was in D.C. attending President Obama's inauguration. Currently the Virginia state senate is split evenly, with 20 Democrats and 20 Republicans. As we learned after the 2010 elections, when one party controls all the levers of power in state government, it can gerrymander all districts to its hearts' content, pass laws making it harder for people to vote, and more. With the state senate split evenly between the parties, it was impossible for Republicans to pass openly partisan laws, even though they control the state house and the governor's mansion.

So the Republican state senators waited until one of their members, Marsh, was out of state, and then rammed through new state senate district lines yesterday by a vote of 20 to 19. The plan was a tightly held secret. Even the governor didn't know about it and has said he has to think about whether to sign it or not. If he signs it, Republicans will have a good shot at taking back the state senate in 2014. But the downside of signing it is that the Democrats in the current state senate are likely to block everything in the current session of the legislature and blame the Republicans.

To make things more complicated, Virginia will elect a new governor in Nov. 2013, as Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) is term limited. Likely Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Terry McAuliffe, is almost sure to use this sneaky redistricting as a weapon to say that Republicans don't accept election results unless they win. As Virginia becomes bluer and bluer, that could help him. The likely Republican nominee is state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who is a conservative firebrand. Thus the move by the state senate yesterday could easily spill over into the gubernational race in this key swing state. Whichever party wins the governor's mansion in November, will no doubt use that to the fullest in 2016.

Yeah, like the Democrats wouldn't do exactly the same thing if they could. Anyone care to remember the Obamacare "negotiations?" What negotiations you say? Well, that's the point. The Dems, in control of both houses, passed Obamacare without allowing any debate on the floor, much less letting the public see the legislation before it passed (remember Nancy Pelosi saying "we have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in the bill..."). They didn't even let any Republicans in to the secret meetings they held to "consider" the law.

Talk about slimy.

[Ian]

Cry me a river, Seth. Republicans had all the invitation and opportunity in the world to involve themselves in that law, and chose to try and obstruct it instead. It went through anyway, and now you whine about how their voices weren't heard. Boo hoo. Besides, in the end I think they had too much influence. The ACA would probably have a much simpler and more efficient single-payer system were it not for negotiations with a certain Senator from Maine...


Anyway, I never said Democrats would never resort to gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is a major influence upon the partisanship that is crippling our government today, and both sides are guilty of it because they both have incentives to try and use it to their advantage when they can.

But, uh... the fact that Republicans are trying to gerrymander Virginia is not what I was posting the story for. I was posting it because it was a brazenly despicable stunt and incredibly undemocratic (do I really need to spoon-feed what should be obvious to you guys?). When Coito responds to a stunt like this with "well, I'm sure Democrats gerrymander and do partisan stuff too... let me do a quick internet search here..." it's just sad. How about saying a word against those VA state senators for how unethical they are? That apparently hasn't occurred to you guys.

[Gerald McGrew]

When Coito responds to a stunt like this with "well, I'm sure Democrats gerrymander and do partisan stuff too... let me do a quick internet search here..." it's just sad. How about saying a word against those VA state senators for how unethical they are? That apparently hasn't occurred to you guys.

That raises a point I had considered posting in this thread, but (at the time) elected to forgo. Now however...

Psychological profiles of self-identified liberals and conservatives typically reveal that conservatives place a significantly higher value on loyalty than do liberals, and liberals place a significantly higher value on objectivity than conservatives. This seems to make it more likely that conservatives are more prone to hypocrisy than liberals, i.e. blind loyalty to a party or ideology being more favored than objectively evaluating each situation independently.

I can think of many examples of conservative/Republican hypocrisy in recent years (outrage over deficits under Obama vs. lack of concern under W. Bush, opposition to insurance mandate under Obama even though it was directly modeled after a conservative-generated framework, claiming to be for "freedom" yet being opposed to gay civil rights and reproductive choice, claiming to be for States' rights except when it's on issues they don't like (medical marijuana, euthanasia), virtually worshiping Reagan while denying much of his history).

And sure, I can also think of examples of liberal/Democrat hypocrisy (going along with drone strikes, warrantless wiretapping, executive privilege, etc. under Obama but bitching about them under W. Bush), but I have absolutely no trouble finding a host of very prominent liberals decrying the Obama administration on all those issues, some even to the point of refusing to support or vote for him (something I rarely--if ever--heard from conservatives under W. Bush).

So when I say "conservatives are more prone to hypocrisy", I don't mean that no liberals are ever hypocrites or that all conservatives always are (that would be black/white thinking), but rather than it's a matter of increasing tendency directly stemming from the very psychological basis of both conservatism and liberalism.

[Seth]

Cry me a river, Seth. Republicans had all the invitation and opportunity in the world to involve themselves in that law, and chose to try and obstruct it instead.

The fuck they did. They were deliberately and explicitly excluded from the closed Democrat committee hearings and the other secret meetings between the George Soros-funded leftist groups and the Democrats where the bill was originally drafted (which was absolutely NOT done by the Democrats in Congress). The Democrats even refused to honor their own pledge to put all bills on line for three days so the public could view them before taking votes.

It went through anyway, and now you whine about how their voices weren't heard. Boo hoo. Besides, in the end I think they had too much influence. The ACA would probably have a much simpler and more efficient single-payer system were it not for negotiations with a certain Senator from Maine...

Because they weren't. They were completely ignored, as was about 60 percent or more of the public who disfavored Obamacare (it's even higher now that people have discovered, just as the Republicans told them, that their medical insurance premiums are going UP not down.

But that's okay, when the Republicans take back the House and Senate in two years, after the Democrat party commits suicide by throwing itself on the live third-rail of gun bans like it did in 1994, they can repeal it.

Anyway, I never said Democrats would never resort to gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is a major influence upon the partisanship that is crippling our government today, and both sides are guilty of it because they both have incentives to try and use it to their advantage when they can.

I believe that's what I said...

But, uh... the fact that Republicans are trying to gerrymander Virginia is not what I was posting the story for. I was posting it because it was a brazenly despicable stunt and incredibly undemocratic (do I really need to spoon-feed what should be obvious to you guys?). When Coito responds to a stunt like this with "well, I'm sure Democrats gerrymander and do partisan stuff too... let me do a quick internet search here..." it's just sad. How about saying a word against those VA state senators for how unethical they are? That apparently hasn't occurred to you guys.

What's "undemocratic" about it? The state laws are set up that way, and presumably the absentee Senator knew the rules and decided to go celebrate in Washington instead of attending to his sworn obligations at the statehouse. Perhaps he is a secret Republican mole who stayed away at a critical time to allow the Republicans a victory.

Nothing wrong with operating by the letter of the law and the letter of the rules of the legislature. It's the fault of dimwits who decide to celebrate their "victory" rather than doing their job by being in the statehouse when the legislature is in session. Hoist on his own petard I say. And good for the Republicans. I hope it happens again and again.

[Tero]

But that's okay, when the Republicans take back the House and Senate in two years, after the Democrat party commits suicide by throwing itself on the live third-rail of gun bans like it did in 1994, they can repeal it.

That was the end of republicans as we know them. They will have to go left of center to get votes now. Or rezone us in a really wacky way.

[Coito ergo sum]

But, uh... the fact that Republicans are trying to gerrymander Virginia is not what I was posting the story for. I was posting it because it was a brazenly despicable stunt and incredibly undemocratic (do I really need to spoon-feed what should be obvious to you guys?). When Coito responds to a stunt like this with "well, I'm sure Democrats gerrymander and do partisan stuff too... let me do a quick internet search here..." it's just sad. How about saying a word against those VA state senators for how unethical they are? That apparently hasn't occurred to you guys.

I noted quite clearly that it was slimy.

However, what is sad is that you know that they both do it, but the only thing you care to post about is incidents of Republicans doing it. I was providing balance to the imbalance. Not vice versa.

It's not that I had to do a "quick internet search" -- although that is all it takes, and that small effort was something you either didn't think to do or didn't want to do. Democrats have been gerrymandering the hell out of districts for decades that I can remember -- long salamander-like districts that go down along highways and stretch and twist and turn, all with the view of solidifying democratic control over more districts.

That is slimy. And, yes what the GOP was doing in VA was slimy and is slimy.

[Coito ergo sum]

When Coito responds to a stunt like this with "well, I'm sure Democrats gerrymander and do partisan stuff too... let me do a quick internet search here..." it's just sad. How about saying a word against those VA state senators for how unethical they are? That apparently hasn't occurred to you guys.

That raises a point I had considered posting in this thread, but (at the time) elected to forgo. Now however...

Psychological profiles of self-identified liberals and conservatives typically reveal that conservatives place a significantly higher value on loyalty than do liberals, and liberals place a significantly higher value on objectivity than conservatives. This seems to make it more likely that conservatives are more prone to hypocrisy than liberals, i.e. blind loyalty to a party or ideology being more favored than objectively evaluating each situation independently.

Good thing I'm not a conservative. That's probably why I had no problem calling the Republicans slimy. But, have the Democrats been called slimy yet for their gerrymandering? Are they slimy for doing it?

[Gerald McGrew]

In the Virginia case it's not the gerrymandering that makes the Republicans slimy. It's the fact that they waited until a Democrat was gone to attend the inauguration to do it. That the Democrat was a civil rights leader who was attending the inauguration of our first black POTUS makes it even more disgusting.

[Blind groper]

You Americans could take a tip from little ol' New Zealand (Australia too, I think).

We have an independent Electoral Commission which sets the electoral boundaries. It is totally out of the hands of those bloody politicians. We have another commission which sets the salaries of politicians, which is also totally independent of political control.

New Zealand has been listed as the least corrupt nation on Earth, and it is no coincidence that we take power out of the hands of politicians, when that power leads to corruption.

[Seth]

In the Virginia case it's not the gerrymandering that makes the Republicans slimy. It's the fact that they waited until a Democrat was gone to attend the inauguration to do it. That the Democrat was a civil rights leader who was attending the inauguration of our first black POTUS makes it even more disgusting.

You snooze, you lose. As I said, the Democrats wouldn't hesitate for one second to do exactly the same thing if they get the chance.

And how about the Democrats in Wisconsin, Indiana and Texas who physically abandoned their posts and fled the states to prevent the legislature from having a quorum to vote on bills the Democrats didn't like?

Slimy enough for you?