Anonymous #1 3w

Maybe New York’s mid decade attempt would have been a better example. But don’t act like you’re so against gerrymandering 😂

-3

Anonymous #2 3w

Stfu

-4

Anonymous #2 3w

Own that stupid rightoid 👏

17

Anonymous OP 3w

I’m for a national ban yeah! But if right states are going to do it, and left states don’t, then the government will be biased right. At least this way it’s less biased right, even if these states are biased left

6

Anonymous #2 3w

You had the opportunity to stick to your morals and at the first possible chance you threw them aside and stomped on them like the spineless cowards that you are 😂

-6

Anonymous #3 3w

I owned your mother last night. Tonight too

-6

Anonymous #1 3w

So why didn’t Dems freak out when New York tried mid decade redistricting? In fact… why do most people not even know about that?

-1

Anonymous OP 3w

Bc it failed

4

Anonymous OP 3w

Hmmm sounds like you don’t actually want to ban gerrymandering

12

Anonymous OP 3w

"oh no! the person i've punched in the face repatedly got tired of it and hit me back for once 🥺😢"

11

Anonymous #1 3w

False. It never got put to a vote because SCOTUS reverses the New York supreme courts ruling. But again, Dems were celebrating when they thought they were gonna get to redistrict

1

Anonymous #2 3w

No I do, but Dems don’t

-2

Anonymous OP 3w

That sounds like the effort failed to me.

1

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

Punch? We laugh at you. You shoot us in response

-2

Anonymous OP 3w

Weird that dems are the ones who have introduced multiple federal bills that would ban gerrymandering and the republicans blocked them.

9

Anonymous #1 3w

Well yeah I guess. But again, since all you Dems hate gerrymandering so much, why were you not coming out in droves to condemn this measure when it was being proposed?

1

Anonymous #1 3w

Oh buddy, you wanna go there? 😂 Trust me, comparing who riots more is not a smart move

-1

Anonymous OP 3w

Wasnt it like 2 seats?

1

Anonymous OP 3w

I’d call this a coup, not a riot

9

Anonymous #1 3w

4 actually I believe

1

Anonymous #1 3w

But regardless, if we redrew Texas to only take 2 seats that would be okay?

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Word. I mean yeah, I’d agree im glad the Supreme Court stepped in to stop it. Just wish they did it in TX, NC, VA, FL too

1

Anonymous OP 3w

The Republican Party is the party of political violence If you disagree, you’re wrong.

10

Anonymous #3 3w

True!

3

Anonymous OP 3w

It’d be better than what they did, not ok, but less bad yeah

1

Anonymous #1 3w

And I wish they did in Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, and New Mexico. But here we are

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Right… because we’re the ones who killed a commentator, tried three times to kill the president, and destroyed Minneapolis about 5 separate times now. Go to hell

-2

Anonymous OP 3w

Yep. Here we freaking are. Although I’d like to point out, if you compare left-gerrymandered and right-gerrymandered seats - there’s like 30 some more gerrymandered districts in favor of republicans than in favor of Dems. So of all gerrymandered districts were changed, the control of power would switch to Dems anyway

1

Anonymous OP 3w

My bigger concern personally is that there’s like 20 competitive seats left. There’s like 400+ seats which are pretty much perpetually locked to their parties

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Trumps assassin was right wing. It’s suspected Kirk’s assassin was too

19

Anonymous OP 3w

Republicans are delusional 🤭 room temp iq

12

Anonymous #1 3w

That’s just straight up false. The three biggest states (Cali, NY, and Illinois) would bet Republicans about 10-15 seats alone. Dems would only get a handful from the south

1

Anonymous #1 3w

False. Just because you don’t agree doesn’t make it true

-1

Anonymous #5 3w

Your moms cooch was room temp too

-1

Anonymous OP 3w

It’s not. Yes, reps would get more seats from Cali, NY, and IL than Dems would get from any individual red state (besides maybe TX, they’re like 45% dem). But Dems should get seats in like 40 of the 50 states. Reps would gain in like 10

1

Anonymous OP 3w

The black rock kid is pretty well confirmed. Kirk’s kid is still in court so we need to wait for the case to develop

1

Anonymous #1 3w

What other states would Dems gain from aside from Florida, Texas, Tennessee and maybe Wisconsin? The others are way too red or too blue tbh

1

Anonymous #1 3w

I could maybe see you getting a seat from Oklahoma too. But even that would be a swing seat

1

Anonymous #1 3w

nobody buys the victim act, bro. it's public knowledge that conservatives have committed mass sh**tings and b*mb*ngs of govt buildings, synagogues, schools, etc for decades. If you forgot about all that, then your memory must be shorter than the amount of time it took Erika Kirk to hit a rebound. all that's changed is that you're learning the 2nd Amendment and political violence are double edged swords, and that you lack a monopoly on violence.

3

Anonymous OP 3w

Kansas, Idaho (from cities), Maine, like 4 in NC, 3 in SC, MS, LA, IN, OH, PA (my district in PA was gerrymandered to include me with Amish people several counties over instead of my county’s city 20 miles away), NV, along with the ones you mentioned

1

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

I’d list out all the things that liberals have done, but YikYak would either ban me or tell me I don’t have enough characters. But honestly, it’s not like you’d listen to me anyway so what’s the point?

-2

Anonymous OP 3w

It’s almost like the issue isn’t the political ideologies of citizens but the system of power distribution we have

1

Anonymous #1 3w

Okay well we’d get seats from CT, MA NJ, OR, and WA too. Also Maryland. And you would not get a seat from Maine. Maine’s map is already far. Northern Maine is super rural and mostly conservative

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Oh and you can’t forget Utah! The citizens voted for independent redistricting, only for republicans 3 years later to say “actually we know better we’re canceling this vote” and then gerrymandering it themselves

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Maine would be like 2-2 not 3-1

3

Anonymous #1 3w

And Utah was just told to draw in a Democrat. So were Alabama and Louisiana? But Illinois? Nothing. Because Dems aren’t held accountable

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Like I said bro if you sit down and tabulate every state, the net would be like 30-40 gerrymandered in favor of republicans. This is out of like 200 gerrymandered seats so yeah a lot each way

1

Anonymous #1 3w

Also Maine only has two districts

1

Anonymous OP 3w

You won't do it because it would reveal how disproportionately your side has wrought violence. And no, I'd listen to you. I listen to everybody, even freaks like Fuentes and Yarvin and Jones. What you want is to be treated with seriousness, something you haven't earned.

3

Anonymous OP 3w

Shit yeah u right, I probably was thinking Kansas

1

Anonymous #1 3w

Also, your original claim was that banning gerrymandering would essentially guarantee permanent Dem control of the house. I’m pointing that you’ve successfully gerrymandered a hell of a lot more than you think you have

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Oh nah I’m sorry for not being clear - my point is that the current house would be flipped if all districts matched the states’ respective party affiliations. Not permanently

1

Anonymous #6 3w

shoe's on the other foot and they don't like it

2

False. But okay

-1

Anonymous #1 3w

Ahhh I see. Well thanks for at least explaining that calmly and not screaming at me incessantly like most people do on here

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Denial is a just stage of grief. You'll get past it.

4

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

Sorry I didn’t mean to say that in this string.

4

Anonymous #7 3w

False. But okay

-1

Anonymous OP 3w

You’re chilling dawg, like 70% of our countries problems could be solved by people realizing their opposition is just victim to their preferred medias bias and not inherently evil or smn

1

Anonymous OP 3w

quit the fake polite act bruh you were just talking about #5s ma and her pussy 😭 yall so corny i keep thinking its time for harvest

1

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

Damn you really blocked me and then followed me over here?

0

Anonymous #1 3w

Sometimes I believe that. But sometimes being snarky is so much fun 😂

1

Anonymous OP 3w

u can't block somebody then keep chatting with them. what's next? will i be seeing thru walls?

1

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

Well then I guess #5 blocked me. Probably jealous her moms smelly cooch is better than hers

-1

Anonymous OP 3w

I get it lol

1

Anonymous OP 3w

if 5 blocked you, you would still be able to see the thread. 5's replies would just be gone. i'd tell u to keep up but that would just be asking too much

1

Anonymous full.metal.everything. 3w

Look man, I’m actually having civil conversations now. If you wanna join, be my guest. If not, you’re free to leave

0

Anonymous OP 3w

Going from insulting people to demanding respect when you're insulted yourself? You really are a conservative at heart. If you want me to stop getting on your nerves, there's always the block button, once you finally figure out how it works.

1