That deliberately misleading “proposed constitutional amendment” barely won yesterday, another in the mounting examples of how the Democratic Party will cheat and lie to gain power. I wrote about this unethical tactic here.
The stats show that the Northern Virginia suburbs, where the Deep State dwells, managed to vote so overwhelming for the antidemocratic provision that the rest of the state’s rejection wasn’t enough.
Observations and statements:
- Gerrymandering is generally allowed if it isn’t based on race or other forms of discrimination. I disagree with that position that the courts have taken, but never mind: Virginians rejected that strategy, and properly so, when it made the tactic unconstitutional.
- If Virginians votes to allow the unethical practice again, that’s their prerogative. However, there is no way, in language or ethics, that what the Spanberger totalitarians are doing can be called “fair.”
- The language that was on yesterday’s ballot was misleading and dishonest.
- One of the lawsuits challenging the plot is based on the ballot language.
- I offer my services as an ethics expert to submit documents and to testify that the wording above is misleading, and that by definition gerrymandering a state to disenfranchise members of a political party is not “fair.” It may be legal, but it cannot be fair. Defining “fair” is my business.
- If the GOP does not include an ethicist, and it doesn’t have to be me, in its challenge to this scheme, it is “incompetent.” It’s also my business to define that.
- After voting for that unethical thing above, my Facebook lawyer friends are ethically estopped from lecturing about preventing “kings” and fascists, or protecting democracy. They voted to disenfranchise their supposed friends, and believe it is prudent to destroy democracy in order to save it.
I believe this election was illegal, and I believe the results will be overturned. I will believe it more if I am involved in the effort to genuinely be “fair.”
Ethics Alarms 
Yay, Jack! I hope it gets overturned! Lee♥️Sent from my iPhone
The fundamental problem is that at 800,000 people per representative, the House of Representatives, isn’t representative. At all. The first apportioned House was about 40,000 people per representative. At those ratios, we should have 8,750 Representatives.
While that is clearly untenable – even at late1800s levels of representation, we should AT least QUADRUPLE the size of the House. Does 1,740 representatives sound crazy?
I think it *sounds* crazy, but given some thought, I’m not so sure it actually is. I don’t even think 5,000 representatives is all that crazy if you really put some effort into it.
But at 800,000 people per representative? I don’t care how gerrymandered or how perfectly geometric a state map is – some reasonably definable geographic entity is getting disenfranchised.
While I’m on this rant, the Senate needs expansion as well:
Every state should have 3 Senators, with the side benefit that no cluster of states is “safe” during a particular Presidential election year. And the 15-20 larger more wildly diverse states should be subdivided into like 45 to 75 new states.
Return Senate election to the State Legislatures.
5,000+ Representatives and 300+ Senators? Sounds like a good start.
Smaller, more discreet political divisions I think would also have a tendency to temper partisanship. Also would, for the most part, solve the Electoral College complaints (which should also stay in place).
To finalize:
Washington, D.C. should still NOT receive representation.
To the contrary, as DC and its environs attracts the kind of people whose voting tendencies would be more inclined *against* the People and *for* the centralizing power, in the spirit of disenfranchising them (as the Founders would have wanted) – the Virginia part of DC should be returned, and the resulting 10 mile square should be expanded 10 miles in all directions. The new 30 mile x 30 mile Washington DC should still have NO representation.
How do you envision it getting overturned?
First shot: “A circuit court in Virginia just ruled that the newly passed but incredibly biased gerrymandered congressional map is unconstitutional. Former Virginia attorney general and Homeland Security official Ken Cuccinelli II posted on X Wednesday about the gerrymandered map, “UPDATE on referendum lawsuits: The Tazewell Circuit Court just ruled the referendum unconstitutional. The Judge entered an injunction blocking certification of the election & denied a motion to stay pending appeal. A final order will be entered once drafted, & it will be immediately appealed.”
The Democrats believe in power, and outspent the Republicans by wide margins on this issue. The Republicans believe in fairness and rules and have less appetite for power plays, which is why they voted against redistricting in Indiana.
The Democrats’ first objective is power. They play to win at all costs, even if the country and the electorate are worse off. James Carville provided an example of that mindset when he said that as soon as the Democrats are fully back in power in Washington DC “I think on day one, they should make Puerto Rico and D.C. a state, and they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F*** it. Eat our dust.” This would require nuking the filibuster as well.
The refusal of Republican Senators to ram through the SAVE act in Congress, and the willingness of 20 Republican house members to support the DIGNIDAD amnesty bill for illegal immigrants demonstrate the lack of will of Republicans to win on issues that are critical to the fairness of the election process. The GOP again and again proves that they prefer losing magnanimously above fighting to secure political wins.
The Republican electorate in Virginia took note; they refuse to turn out on behalf of a GOP packed with RINOs, spineless cucks, impotent geldings and f**king losers.
CVB wrote,
“The Democrats believe in power, and outspent the Republicans by wide margins on this issue. The Republicans believe in fairness and rules and have less appetite for power plays, which is why they voted against redistricting in Indiana.”
Au contraire, mon frere. According to Joy Reid, Democrats believe in playing by the rules, Republicans don’t:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/maury-povich-shuts-down-joy-003401982.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall
You really have to say something monumentally stupid to get Maury Povich to scoff at you. To her credit, Reid just kept on going like the good little liberal Everready bunny she is.
jvb
So the ballot said “Should we make districting fair today, but return to unfair districting in 2030?”?
At least one individual is trying to make sense of the publicly available information. He’s downloading the publicly available JSON data files that are supposed to be what is feeding the outcome graphics and he can’t make the data match. It doesn’t mean there’s an incorrect result being reported, but it does show a problem with transparency on what data is current, what data stops being updated when, and how the reported totals are being calculated.
https://x.com/WWRKDS/status/2046782784497209560?s=20
This is a naked power grab. Illinois led the way on this, and I expect other blue and purple states who have not been gerrymandered to within an inch of existence to follow suit.
Florida may well do the same, and after this, Indiana also. If Louisiana v. Callais ends favorably for the Right, more red states are likely to do so as well.
Thank you Jack….I have been continually asking, since I first saw the wording of this ballot question, “When is “restoring fairness” a proper description of a measure on a ballot? Such statements should be relegated to ads and signs – NOT official election materials.”
92 cities and counties voted NO – most with huge margins….31 voted Yes – many with squeaker margins…..and yet Dems got away with the phrase “restore fairness” on the ballot. Orwellian, when such a phrase is seen as fact rather than purely partisan political opinion. Sigh. Blue cities and counties won out in the name of “fairness” with Northern Virginia’s 70% support, but the whole state voted 51% to 48% for the amendment – so not a wipe-out in popularity. https://www.nbcnews.com/…/2026…/virginia-ballot-measures
I hope you get to make your case. Some sanity would be greatly appreciated.
[From your host: It does give me some pleasure when a banned commenter quickly validates my decision to ban him or her. This is generally done by commenting after being banned, which shows a lack of respect and decorum, but frequently said comment is moronic, as was this one by “Jude.”
“Insanely unhinged post. You’ve lost the plot” he wrote. Nothing substantive, no effort to explain how a partisan gerrymandering scheme that violates the Virginia constitution can possibly be described as “fair.” I assume that the “plot” refers to the Democrats’ “tit for tat” argument, but you see, even if one agrees that politics ain’t beanbag, describing what is wildly unfair to Virginia Republicans and conservatives is what we call in the ethics biz “a lie.”
Shut up, Jude. Or let me sing it…
Hey Jude, it makes me sad.
But you’re a dumb hack, a real bed-wetter
Your bias just makes you sound like a fool
And like a mule, you won’t get better.]
The Babylon Bee gets it:
https://babylonbee.com/news/too-far-gerrymandered-virginia-congressional-map-includes-california?fbclid=IwY2xjawRWGXBleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF2RzVsVzVWc0hmNFdISXVsc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHg4mTaYzAeeJpp5ss9hZDg98yBN2zJIAZl5POEEW8kN8u2BOrTPhgn6Wf3-B_aem_Gn3-FbXO3o0DiMEcBuipRQ