Eric Cantor Ousted By Tea Party

When pigs fly.

Congressional districts are not drawn up by the Congress. Each state draws up its own congressional districts. Winning the House would not change how the states are districted. To change that, the Democratic Party would have to win the statehouse in each state.

Hungry? Douchenozzle.

They would also have to wait until the 10 year census is completed.

I am already aware that congressional districts are drawn up by each state. I was merely stating the reason the Dems are going to have a very difficult time taking back the House this upcoming November. I hope they can. The Dems could end up getting more House votes than the Republicans just like the last election and still not be able to get back the House. I hope I am wrong.

This they had more votes crap is just that crap. You realize that not all districts are the same? Places like CA are going to have have more people then say others like CO. It's about population and population density. Simply stating that because they had more total votes in the House that they should have won is a leap of logic that can't be followed.

I suppose it is only fair when Dems draw up the voting districts? Doesn't matter if they draw them to their advantage, it must be fair because they did it. Just like elections. When the Dems win, it was a fair election. When GOP wins an election it had to be cheating?

In my previous posts I don't recall ever stating that jerrymandering was right or wrong. I merely giving a specific reason to why I feel that it will be very difficult for Dems to take back the House. Yes, I do hope the Dems take back the House. I just think due to how the districts are drawn up, that it will be unlikely for that to happen.

So you would like to draw the districts so that it makes it easier for Dems to win?

What needs to take place is the census needs to be specific about who is and is not a citizen. The House is determined and the voting districts are determined by population. It should be done by citizen population not population over all. Places where there is a high level of illegal immigration are going to get more Reps simply due to population instead of citizen population. This is the first start in making the process better. Then we can look at making the voting districts more fair to all instead of the party who happens to be in control.

Really? I wasn't aware that she was even that interested in politics.


Or were you perhaps attempting to show a level of intelligence (albeit self-perceived ), and spelled WARREN incorrectly?

Small wonder why your views on political matters are met with a snickering.


As to the Cantor 'defeat', I fear it may merely be the ease of voting in Virginia, where the Democrat can vote in the Republican primary. Sure this knocks out a candidate; however, will the Democrats truly have someone in November who appeals to the voting populace of their region, or will Brat manage to squeeze through a win. He could win by many methods, including (but not limited to) Democrats figuring that nobody would be crazy enough to actually vote Brat into a seat. Another being of the mistaken belief that enough other Dems. will be voting so why bother showing up at the polls themselves...a method which often leads to a candidate having not only a loss but an abysmal showing at the polls for all candidates.

To answer your question would I like the districts drawn to benefit the Dems? My answer is yes. I would be lying to you if I said no. Now, is there a more fair way to draw up these district. I'm not sure that's even possible. In the past the Dems have also practice jerrymandering when they had control. Currently these districts are drawn up by whichever party has control of each state. If you are the party in power in each state, it only makes sense to jerrymander these congressional districts to benefit your own party. Unless you take this authority away from the state legislators, you will always have jerrymandering. Only question is, if you took this authority of drawing up congressional districts away from the state legislators, who would that authority be passed on to?

Too a 10 man commission made up of an equal number of dems and repubs.

That does sound like a good idea. Equal number of both political parties sounds like the fairest method. I wonder if the state legislators throughout the nation would ever go for that, especially if they are the party currently in power.

The Reps may benefit from getting rid of this idiot. He recently said that he didn't go along with certain important legislation because he was dissed by Obama. About a year ago, both he and Boehner said that didn't vote for an important bill because they were dissed by Pelosi.

The poor delicate flower will vote against the interests of othe nation because some Dem dissed him. Some leader!

The courts, who appoint committees. We are pretty much at the point where the courts could validate a computer program that does all of the work. This is how housing subdivisions are laid out now, the data is plugged in to a program where desired the lot size, subdivision traverse times, and street busyness have been pre set. The computer then comes up with the optimal design.

This is pretty much how districts are already laid out, the only big change is that the courts decide the program, and they decide what to tell it to do.

The Tea Party is amazing.

Cantor fought Obamacare almost to the death. He tried to make Medicare a voucher system. He basically shot down immigration reform.

Despite this, the Tea Party thought he is too liberal.

the tea party showed almost no interest in this race, something that you should have noted because this info has been presented in this thread already. Canter is gone because he did not take care of his district, he was a terrible politician, it had little to do with his actual politics.

Romney thought that too. You can hope one way, but I wouldn't bet against a solid wall of data.

the national interest
June 11, 2014 9:27 a.m.
Everybody Hates Eric Cantor: A Roundup
By Jonathan ChaitFollow @jonathanchait
2k Shares
Share 1.8kTweet 171Share 3Share 2792EmailPrint
Don't take this the wrong way, but you're a jerk and everybody hates you. Don't take this the wrong way, but you're a jerk and everybody hates you. Photo: Brendan Hoffman/2011 Getty Images

A fact that keeps popping up in stories about the shocking defeat of Eric Cantor is that, apparently, everybody hated him. Everybody. “Cantor was never well liked,” reports Jon Ward, “especially by conservatives, who considered him a fraud.” It’s certainly true that conservatives detested Cantor, and not just those who clashed with him professionally. Erick Erickson reports that the loathing extended well into Cantor’s professional network:

One conservative recently told me that Cantor’s staff were the “biggest bunch of a**holes on the Hill.” An establishment consultant who backed Cantor actually agreed with this assessment. That attitude moved with Cantor staffers to K Street, the NRSC, and elsewhere generating ill will toward them and Cantor. Many of them were perceived to still be assisting Cantor in other capacities. After Cantor’s loss tonight, I got a high volume of emails from excited conservatives, but also more than a handful of emails from those with establishment Republican leanings all expressing variations on “good riddance.”

Yet Cantor hate appears to be more than a mere intra-Republican phenomenon. It stretches far and wide. The Obama administration regarded him with a special loathing. (“Behind the scenes, aides would describe Cantor as an opportunist or devoid of substance and only out to antagonize the president and whip up tea party support for his own gain.”) Jewish Democrats found him “a supremely annoying figure.”

Anywhere professional politicians gathered last night, the Cantor news led to spontaneous, Berlin Wall–type rejoicing. “An informal dinner party at the Georgetown apartment of Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader,” reports the New York Times, “turned into a celebration.” At a conservative dinner party, reports BuzzFeed, “Bozell described the group’s mood as ‘ebullient.’”

A new poll of Cantor’s district finds that Cantor’s own constituents despised him, disapproving of his performance by a 63-30 margin.

So the ranks of Cantor haters include tea party Republicans, mainstream Republicans, all Democrats, Jewish Democrats in particular, and Cantor’s neighbors. That’s everybody, right? Anybody left? Apparently, the remaining demographic slice still loyal to the soon-to-be-former majority leader is Jewish Republicans. Alex Burns reports that Matt Brooks, head of the Republican Jewish Coalition — “coalition” might be overstating things; really more of a Republican Jewish guy — is appropriately devastated at the loss, calling the upset “one of those incredible, evil twists of fate that just changed the potential course of history.”

Funny....the staff that thought they would prob be working for the speaker very soon are now looking for work, after they have been jerks to everyone.

OOPS!

Measuring the drapes before you have the place has always been one of the worst political mistakes to make.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/eric-cantors-pollster-blames-democrats-131901793.html

One problem with this is that I was reading a national R who went to the district to talk to local R's to see what happened, and what he got told was that Cantor was never well liked or much trusted, rarely came "home", and that he had recently been caught more than once telling one thing to locals right around the time he was saying something else on the Hill. His actions confirmed the prejudice that he is not a solid guy.