this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
538 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3950 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (4 children)

I mean... People live in regions. Those regions have representatives. How are those regions defined? Maps. Nothing uniquely American about it as far as I can tell.

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 38 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Maps generally aren't strange. District maps are fucked. "Regions" takes on a whole different meaning in the US.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This and absolutely this. We've completely ignored the idea of geographical regions having a common interest and bastardized the concept of districts into

  1. shoving all of your opponents into one district that only gets one vote

  2. slicing up areas that are dominated by friendlies into as many districts as possible

  3. in competitive areas, try to shove your opponents into districts that are already lost to you and create narrow bridges through opposing districts linking friendly districts. Essentially, go on a walkabout through the state collecting votes.

There's even a game you can play where you control redistricting for a hypothetical area. Given the same population, you can draw the maps such that election winners roughly match the proportions of voters, then to give full control to one side, then to give full control to the other side. The idea is to show you how the people who draw the maps can make voting irrelevant.

[–] Geobloke@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

In democracy voters pick the politicians. In the USA politicians pick the voters

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"Corporate Managed Democracy" might more accurately describe the US.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm liking this phrase. It's mine now. I stole it.

Capitalism baby!

[–] remotelove@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 months ago

Eh. It's not a very good phrase. I'll buy it from you for a dollar.

(Think fast. I have already printed 1000 tee-shirts.)

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

Anything to keep power out of the hands of black people and/or poor people who are "woke".

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

So does my country, but we don't change how the regions are distributed every election to benefit one party. Once the region/district is set we leave it alone.

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 8 points 8 months ago

The redistricting every 10 years is because there is a (Constitutionally-mandated) census, and regions/districts change their population, so you have to adjust the representation they get or people will not be fairly represented. You can't keep the same borders of a city that has grown 30% or the people will be getting less representation per person.

States used to do some dumb stuff like the Nevada State Senate had a district with less than 600 people and a different district with 120k+ and they counted the same. We got rid of that thanks to a Supreme Court ruling in 1964 (Reynolds v Sims).

[–] L3mmyW1nks@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The unique thing is that, depending on the layout, votes matter differently. I don't know of any other democratic country that makes it possible to change election results by changing districts.

[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes, we bastardize the districts, but when the upstream comment said "Election maps seems wild to me" (not any map in particular, just the idea of a map) I brought up my point.

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

No just the idea of a "map". Election maps that changes because a party wants the advantage is wild to me.

[–] corgi@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Technically correct, but there are systems that don't have to rely on maps per say. For example, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party-list_proportional_representation where representatives are assigned proportionally based on the votes. You don't have "your own representative".

Obviously there are downsides to this, but at the same time it requires no districts and manipulation in that regard is not possible.