8 ms·

The ability of the partisan brain to consistently be outraged by the perceived foul play of the other side, while never bothering to check how one's own side is

The ability of the partisan brain to consistently be outraged by the perceived foul play of the other side, while never bothering to check how one's own side is measuring up, is a fascinating phenomenon. This is really easy to sanity check. For example CA, the best known blue state in the nation. 2020 elections, 79% of the Congressional delegation is D, while only (edit) 66% of the popular vote went for (edit) Ds. But, but, but, the other guys are even worse than us. We won't stand for truth, fairness or justice, obviously the correct course of action is to out-foul them whenever we can. And then we wonder why the country is on the brink of an ugly divorce.

ceejayoz 5y ago
I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing. That said, 50-77 versus 63-79 seems like a different order of magnitude worth of gerrymandering.
- alistairSH 5y ago
  The 63-79 isn't apples to apples - it's comparing Congressional representation to Presidential votes. We should be comparing number of seats assigned to each party and % of vote cast for each party.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    I could not find the Congressional vote totals on the Wikipedia page. If you have a source with the Congressional vote totals, please share. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_California#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidentia...
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      Congressional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Re...
      - angelzen 5y ago
        Thanks for the link. The congress vote went 66-34. The congressional delegation, 79-21. There is a noticeable gap there. Perhaps this is a moment to step back, and at the very least analyze the full data set? How much being in charge of the State Legislature gives room for gerrymandering promoting candidates from the same party? Is it really a one side issue, or both parties engage in it with abandon whenever they get the chance? Well, that was a deeper foray in US politics than I ever wanted. Hastalavista!
        ceejayoz 5y ago
        It's quite clear that both sides of the aisle gerrymander. (I was in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_28th_congressional_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_28th_congressiona... when it existed; just look at that map!) The point is, barring consequences for doing it, or a Constitutional amendment banning it, once the other side is doing it, you're fighting with one hand tied behind your back if you don't reciprocate. It's bad, but it's largely unavoidable in the current legal setup.
- angelzen 5y ago
  Order of magnitude means 10x. This is 27 vs 16, not even a binary order of magnitude :) I agree that gerrymandering is a major issue. I wholeheartedly disagree that it can be solved if framed through partisan lenses. Our brains crave to know who is on our side and equate that with the good guys. As long as we don't make an explicit effort to snap out of this very seductive mode of thinking, the future is tribal. Memorably, "why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"
qqqwerty 5y ago
First of all, your numbers are wrong[1]. And second, thanks to Trump, R's lost a lot of seats in CA by close margins. Before Trump, the CA delegation was more balanced. It should also be said that CA Democrats are a super majority. Once you get into super majority territory, it would essentially require a reverse gerrymander to protect minority seats. CA uses a nonpartisan process to create their congressional maps. If and when the Republicans manage to claw their way out of super minority status, I fully expect that the congressional delegation will return to a more balanced state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Re...
- angelzen 5y ago
  Thanks for the link. The congress vote went 66-34. The congressional delegation, 79-21. There is a noticeable gap there, any plan to fix it?
  - qqqwerty 5y ago
    I don't think anyone on either side really thinks this is a problem. Look at Utah for a counter example, 75% of delegates with 60% of the congressional vote. No one on the left is complaining about Utah. When elections are winner take all, big majorities result in oversized representation. And there are still ways for minority party voters to exert influence in these states. For example, they can vote for the more moderate candidate in the other parties primary. The problem is when a state is voting closer to 50-50 like Wisconsin. The Republicans hold a near super majority in the state legislature despite receiving fewer total votes. And because the legislature controls redistricting, Republicans can essentially maintain permanent control of the legislature. That is not healthy for Democracy. But if you really wanted to fix the CA delegation representation, I would fully support moving to a system where the congressional delegation is determined by statewide popular vote. But that introduces a whole set of issues. For example that means folks would vote for the party instead of candidate, which means we could see further entrenchment of party insiders. The flip side is it would probably make it easier for third parties to get representation in congress. I think this generally would be a hard sell in the US though. I think both core left and core right are too distrustful of their respective party bosses to trust the selection process, and we are a very diverse country, geographically and culturally. So having local representation is meaningful (for example, neither AOC or Taylor Greene would survive a process like this, but both of them have very passionate followers that deserve some representation in congress).
CalChris 5y ago
California, indeed no state, uses proportional representation. The last person to recommend looking at that was ... Lani Guinier. In fact, it's a good idea but it would mean that Wyoming wouldn't get two Senators for its population of 578,000. As a Californian, yeah, proportional representation is a good idea. California passed non-partisan redistricting back in 2005. This took re-drawing the districts out of the hands of the legislature. It was proposed by Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, and passed as a ballot proposition by the electorate.

ceejayoz 5y ago

I can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing. That said, 50-77 versus 63-79 seems like a different order of magnitude worth of gerrymandering.

alistairSH 5y ago
The 63-79 isn't apples to apples - it's comparing Congressional representation to Presidential votes. We should be comparing number of seats assigned to each party and % of vote cast for each party.
- angelzen 5y ago
  I could not find the Congressional vote totals on the Wikipedia page. If you have a source with the Congressional vote totals, please share. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election_in_California#Results https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidentia...
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Congressional: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Re...
    - angelzen 5y ago
      Thanks for the link. The congress vote went 66-34. The congressional delegation, 79-21. There is a noticeable gap there. Perhaps this is a moment to step back, and at the very least analyze the full data set? How much being in charge of the State Legislature gives room for gerrymandering promoting candidates from the same party? Is it really a one side issue, or both parties engage in it with abandon whenever they get the chance? Well, that was a deeper foray in US politics than I ever wanted. Hastalavista!
      - ceejayoz 5y ago
        It's quite clear that both sides of the aisle gerrymander. (I was in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_28th_congressional_district https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York%27s_28th_congressiona... when it existed; just look at that map!) The point is, barring consequences for doing it, or a Constitutional amendment banning it, once the other side is doing it, you're fighting with one hand tied behind your back if you don't reciprocate. It's bad, but it's largely unavoidable in the current legal setup.
angelzen 5y ago
Order of magnitude means 10x. This is 27 vs 16, not even a binary order of magnitude :) I agree that gerrymandering is a major issue. I wholeheartedly disagree that it can be solved if framed through partisan lenses. Our brains crave to know who is on our side and equate that with the good guys. As long as we don't make an explicit effort to snap out of this very seductive mode of thinking, the future is tribal. Memorably, "why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"

qqqwerty 5y ago

First of all, your numbers are wrong[1]. And second, thanks to Trump, R's lost a lot of seats in CA by close margins. Before Trump, the CA delegation was more balanced. It should also be said that CA Democrats are a super majority. Once you get into super majority territory, it would essentially require a reverse gerrymander to protect minority seats. CA uses a nonpartisan process to create their congressional maps. If and when the Republicans manage to claw their way out of super minority status, I fully expect that the congressional delegation will return to a more balanced state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_California https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_House_of_Re...

angelzen 5y ago
Thanks for the link. The congress vote went 66-34. The congressional delegation, 79-21. There is a noticeable gap there, any plan to fix it?
- qqqwerty 5y ago
  I don't think anyone on either side really thinks this is a problem. Look at Utah for a counter example, 75% of delegates with 60% of the congressional vote. No one on the left is complaining about Utah. When elections are winner take all, big majorities result in oversized representation. And there are still ways for minority party voters to exert influence in these states. For example, they can vote for the more moderate candidate in the other parties primary. The problem is when a state is voting closer to 50-50 like Wisconsin. The Republicans hold a near super majority in the state legislature despite receiving fewer total votes. And because the legislature controls redistricting, Republicans can essentially maintain permanent control of the legislature. That is not healthy for Democracy. But if you really wanted to fix the CA delegation representation, I would fully support moving to a system where the congressional delegation is determined by statewide popular vote. But that introduces a whole set of issues. For example that means folks would vote for the party instead of candidate, which means we could see further entrenchment of party insiders. The flip side is it would probably make it easier for third parties to get representation in congress. I think this generally would be a hard sell in the US though. I think both core left and core right are too distrustful of their respective party bosses to trust the selection process, and we are a very diverse country, geographically and culturally. So having local representation is meaningful (for example, neither AOC or Taylor Greene would survive a process like this, but both of them have very passionate followers that deserve some representation in congress).

CalChris 5y ago

California, indeed no state, uses proportional representation. The last person to recommend looking at that was ... Lani Guinier. In fact, it's a good idea but it would mean that Wyoming wouldn't get two Senators for its population of 578,000. As a Californian, yeah, proportional representation is a good idea. California passed non-partisan redistricting back in 2005. This took re-drawing the districts out of the hands of the legislature. It was proposed by Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, and passed as a ballot proposition by the electorate.