Approval of measure could determine if Republicans keep full control of government in next year’s midterm elections
It was a decisive victory for Democrats in deep-blue California, who had raced to counter a gerrymander in Texas, engineered at the US president’s behest, to carve out new safe Republican districts. The Associated Press declared Proposition 50 had passed almost instantly when polls closed statewide.
In approving the measure, voters chose to toss out the work of California’s independent redistricting commission and temporarily adopt maps drawn by the state legislature to help Democrats pick up five additional seats in the US House of Representatives.
Newsom and Democrats framed the measure as a way to safeguard US democracy from Trump’s “wrecking ball” presidency. By contrast, opponents offered a mixed message, with Republicans alternatively attacking Newsom and praising the work of the independent mapmaking panel.
“Thing is, the Republicans are lying.” Yes.
“So when you quote their excuse and put them on the same level of truth and representation, you are spreading propaganda.” Well, it is propaganda, but I did not say that it is the truth, nor did I frame it that way. If Elon Musk said he wants to scan your genitals for world peace and I quote him saying that, does that make me think it is the truth?
“Republicans are not doing gerrymandering to…” Yes.
“…they are saying the same thing on the surface…one side…is lying…” Yes, that is what my comment was about.
“and if you wanted to spin it as “they both make the same claim…””
Well they are, one side is lying. Republicans say they want to cancel out the gerrymandering of the Democrats, which is bullshit.
You see, this is why I speak of nuance.
I say something along the lines of “Republicans and Democrats say the same thing about the other party gerrymandering.”.
From a reasonable person, I would expect a repsonse like “Yes, but one side is lying.”. Instead I get absolutely blasted. Are you aware that talking about issues is the first step to solving them? That talking about someone making up a political act is not the same as justifying a political act? How am I expected to talk about issues when the second I do there is not a single person wanting to talk about said issue and just tell me how wrong I am about an objectively right thing that has hapoened and is documented by both sides? Both said the same thing. That’s it. There is nothing more to it.
Americunt.
No, you don’t. You “observe” that both sides are “saying the same thing.” You remove all nuance. And then you piss around complaining about being misunderstood and misinterpreted. And it turns out everyone sees through you because everyone already knows the “just asking questions” “just observing (very vague surface level vacuities)” stereotype.
I’m not American, dumbass.