DI Wiki Epstein Archive ATS Archive PDF Archive North Korean TV
 

Gerrymander based on ideology instead of race
(05-21-2026, 06:54 PM)DBCowboy Wrote: I enjoy this entire gerrymandering drama.

It has exposed the left for the segregationists that they are.

And the ultimate irony, they STILL think that people with certain skin colors think and vote the same way.

How racist is that!

Well technically, yeah, they want the black districts.  But now the black people want the black districts. So the southern black caucus wants their own political segregation for stronger political representation. 

So it's invert-o-world, where the large majoroty of black people in the south still oppose the large majority of white people it the south, just Satan wants to see how much irony it can inject into society before it rains fire.
[Image: 107a51d8a80e0f254dc6a5020be80ef3.jpg]
(05-21-2026, 07:03 PM)IdeomotorPrisoner Wrote: Well technically, yeah, they want the black districts.  But now the black people want the black districts. So the southern black caucus wants their own political segregation for stronger political representation. 

So it's invert-o-world, where the large majoroty of black people in the south still oppose the large majority of white people it the south, just Satan wants to see how much irony it can inject into society before it rains fire.


If white people wanted white-only districts, the left would be screaming racism.

But when some black leaders want all black districts, the left is cool with segregation.

Edit to add, when is the left going to promote separate drinking fountains?
You must develop the ability to be disliked in order to free yourself from the prison of other people's opinions.
(05-21-2026, 07:13 PM)DBCowboy Wrote: If white people wanted white-only districts, the left would be screaming racism.

But when some black leaders want all black districts, the left is cool with segregation.

Edit to add, when is the left going to promote separate drinking fountains?

Heres my dry statistics based equality thing with that:

Percentage of each state population that is black: 

Louisiana = 33% 
Mississippi = 38% 
Alabama = 26%
Georgia = 33%

Percentage of each states population that is white:

Louisiana = 62%
Mississippi = 54%
Alabama = 63%
Georgia = 48% 

Under current racist districting, the % (fraction) of black majority districts: 

Louisiana = 33% (2/6)
Mississippi = 25% (1/4)
Alabama = 14% (1/7)
Georgia = 35% (5/14) 

And after redistricting:

The percentage of districts that will be majority white after projected redraw maps: 

Louisiana = 84.5% (5/6)
Mississippi = 100% (4/4)
Alabama = 100% (7/7)
Georgia = 78% (11/14)*

So my two-part question is, Why did the percentage of black districts never exceed the percentage of black population, and why does the percentage of white districts far exceed the white population in the redrawn districts?

Which is outwardly less equal?
[Image: 107a51d8a80e0f254dc6a5020be80ef3.jpg]
(05-21-2026, 03:36 PM)andy06shake Wrote: America should go back to building impressive, beautiful, big things imho, Harte.

The fourth reich impression is not a good look.

You don't need Cuba but you do need integrity and trust...

You mean like the Trump Arch that's under construction in DC?
LMFAO

Harte
"A wise man will enjoy the goods of which there is a plentiful supply, and of intellectual rubbish he will find an abundant diet, in our own age as in every other.“   Bertrand Russell
(05-21-2026, 07:50 PM)IdeomotorPrisoner Wrote: Heres my dry statistics based equality thing with that:

Percentage of each state population that is black: 

Louisiana = 33% 
Mississippi = 38% 
Alabama = 26%
Georgia = 33%

Percentage of each states population that is white:

Louisiana = 62%
Mississippi = 54%
Alabama = 63%
Georgia = 48% 

Under current racist districting, the % (fraction) of black majority districts: 

Louisiana = 33% (2/6)
Mississippi = 25% (1/4)
Alabama = 14% (1/7)
Georgia = 35% (5/14) 

And after redistricting:

The percentage of districts that will be majority white after projected redraw maps: 

Louisiana = 84.5% (5/6)
Mississippi = 100% (4/4)
Alabama = 100% (7/7)
Georgia = 78% (11/14)*

So my two-part question is, Why did the percentage of black districts never exceed the percentage of black population, and why does the percentage of white districts far exceed the white population in the redrawn districts?

Which is outwardly less equal?

Who cares about skin color other than racists?
You must develop the ability to be disliked in order to free yourself from the prison of other people's opinions.
Who cares about skin color other than racists?
(05-21-2026, 08:03 PM)DBCowboy Wrote: Who cares about skin color other than racists?

I'd imagine the black people pissed they're losing nationwide representation for a weird gaslighty color blind argument where they are told their caucus needs to be reduced (below their percentage of the national population) in the name of equality.  

They care a hell of a lot about it, and myself as a progressive white bitch brainwashed by woke causes, I care about it for them! 

So a lot of black people are racist, and I'm a race-trader racist for supporting their racism...

[Image: 31f81a2c5518ba3724608331648e47e8.jpg]
[Image: 107a51d8a80e0f254dc6a5020be80ef3.jpg]
(05-21-2026, 08:28 PM)IdeomotorPrisoner Wrote: Who cares about skin color other than racists?
I'd imagine the black people pissed their losing nationwide representation for a weird gaslighty color blind argument where they are told their caucus needs to be reduced below their percebtage of the national population in the name of equality.  

They care a hell of a lot about it, and myself as a progressive white bitch brainwashed by woke causes, I care about it for them! 

So black people are racist, and I'm a race-trader racist! 

And this is my response to the accusation of being racist:

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...8e47e8.jpg]

They can still vote for whomever best represents them.

Just now its not rigged by the evil leftists.
You must develop the ability to be disliked in order to free yourself from the prison of other people's opinions.
(05-21-2026, 08:30 PM)DBCowboy Wrote: They can still vote for whomever best represents them.

Just now its not rigged by the evil leftists.

Hey, whatever, progressives don't control progress anymore, its all currently being burned at a massive Project 2025 rally with everything else we've tried since 1970...  kinda like the concept of a mandala, so really we have no choice but to let go of the intricate work we all created and learn to get corrected on our former progressive opinions by an absolute truth of our morality..

Kinda like a break up with the America you loved, on an anniversary, where you mostly delude yourself it can still be saved until the end.

Only you get kidnapped by a cult instead... 




 If you believe it in your head.
[Image: 107a51d8a80e0f254dc6a5020be80ef3.jpg]
Cultnapped....is that a word yet? It is now.

#cultnapped

Also never forget

#sammichgate
(05-21-2026, 02:52 PM)Harte Wrote: So, you can't show the definition of due process in the Constitution.
That's because the Constitution NEVER defines due process.
The Legislature defines due process.
The Legislature passed the law.
Due process is entirely context dependent. There are different "due processes" for different situations.

Harte

That was my point about giving sovereignty over all law to the Constitution, which has very poor definitions of terms and is even self-contradictory.

Due process is not actually defined entirely in US legislature, a lot is assumed from pre-existing laws, codes and statutes (such as British Common Law).

Did you know, for instance, that in the USA, its citizens are not 'explicitly in statute' granted presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law (that is why the police are supposed to recite your Miranda rights, as explanation that anything you say can be used in a case against you - that isn't a condition of presumption of innocence, it is presumption of guilt and self-incrimination).

The basis of the US Legal system is Common Law codified in British courts, which in turn is based upon extension to the Magna Carta, which are particular enactments formed around the last 5 of the 10 Commandments (which are preceded by the Noahide covenant laws) and the Code of Hammurabi.

As such, the US Constitution cannot claim supremacy to its founding laws, but it is only part of a larger legal framework with specifics defined for the country of the USA.

The US Constitution has no supremacy outside of the nation of the USA, neither does US Statute, nor US caselaw.

These things are important because if anyone can infer whatever they want, as if it were real law (such as the "Sovereign Citizens" do), it means that the real law becomes irrelevant to those people and those they may persuade out of ignorance. And soon you have people killing each other over "invading their sovereign domain", when it was just someone walking their dog or the mailman delivering mail (yeah there are fruitcakes like that, and the 2nd Amendment gives them access to firearms).
Support the Christchurch Call