Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Election Reform

2banon

(7,321 posts)

10. Seems to describe California.. at a glance. But I'm not a student on the analytics.

Reply to TygrBright (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 01:20 PM

Apr 2016

just have a pedestrian understanding of it.

The op seems a bit complicated to wrap my head around in terms of the "wasted" votes, (what does that actually mean, disenfranchisement? ) but I also understand it's legalese for court purposes.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Most Exciting Attack On Partisan Gerrymandering In Over A Decade [View all] LiberalFighter Apr 2016 OP

That seems overly complicated NV Whino Apr 2016 #1

When you're trying to bring court cases, nothing is obvious starroute Apr 2016 #2

Not always. Some Gerrymandering doesn't "look" Gerrymandered. TygrBright Apr 2016 #4

My hometown was gerrymandered back in the 60s elljay Apr 2016 #7

Seems to describe California.. at a glance. But I'm not a student on the analytics. 2banon Apr 2016 #10

Complicated, perhaps, but measurable and unbiased. tinrobot Apr 2016 #8

Courts cant base on Subjective guesses padfun Apr 2016 #9

Time to restore the VRA!!! 2naSalit Apr 2016 #3

"Adam Ruins Everything" - Why Rigging Elections Is Completely Legal NurseJackie Apr 2016 #5

Its strange they do not refer to the case in North Carolina currently under judicial review. Ford_Prefect Apr 2016 #6