01-19-2017, 02:30 PM
(01-19-2017, 10:31 AM)David Horn Wrote:(01-18-2017, 03:09 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:(01-18-2017, 12:17 PM)David Horn Wrote:(01-18-2017, 08:19 AM)Odin Wrote: Things are too polarized on a national level for coherent action on a federal level, I think most of the action is going to happen on the state level.
Democrats have a demographics problem that makes state-level solutions very hard. Most states maintain a bias toward the suburban and rural, which is not the Dems strong suit. Every election cycle, Virginia tallies more votes for Democrats vying for Federal House and state Legislature seats, but the GOP still maintains dominance over both. Based on nationwide results, this is not uncommon.
Is this because of gerrymandering?
How can gerrymandering be eliminated in VA?
If you kill gerrymandering, the bias gets better but remains in place. Mostly, it's due to the distribution of Progressive voters. Most pile-up in urban areas, so the votes are a lot like California: too many in too few places.
I thought I responded to this, maybe on another thread?
It could be true in VA, though not in CA itself. Gerrymandering does not have the same effect as the federal electoral college. But I thought the margin in VA was so close that one resignation has shifted the balance of power. Not so?
I'm not sure how that works without gerrymandering either. Are urban areas where all the progressives are, although conservatives are spread throughout the state? Or vice versa?
Also, I'm still wondering what your take on VA Gov. McAuliffe is. Would he make a good presidential candidate in your eyes?
(he probably has the best horoscope score of any potential Democratic candidate now)