News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Democrats Unveil New Bill to Fully Restore Net Neutrality by hannasanarion on Thursday March 07, 2019 @03:29PM (#19332014)
The Democrats won the largest popular vote margin of any party in American history in 2018, but only the 53rd largest congressional majority in history, mostly because of Democratic voters in North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin who were "packed and cracked" so that their votes counted far less.
Re:Democrats Unveil New Bill to Fully Restore Net Neutrality by ctlby on Thursday March 07, 2019 @04:22PM (#19332605)
Suppose they had in fact won the largest House majority in history. What exactly would it change? How would NN be faring right now? Moral grandstanding aside, I don't see the relevance of any of this.
Re:Democrats Unveil New Bill to Fully Restore Net Neutrality by hannasanarion on Thursday March 07, 2019 @09:43PM (#19334675)
The relevance to this is that you asserted that Republicans haven't given themselves any electoral advantage at all or that, if they did, it accounted for less than 1% of their success, when that cannot be further from the truth.

You said "explain your reasoning", and that's what I did.

No need to get defensive over it and try to pretend like it's irrelevant to the discussion. This is literally the discussion you explicitly asked for. If you don't like the fact that the Republican party has acted in a decades-long effort to guarantee their own power in perpetuity with or without public support, don't get mad at me, get mad at them.

Re:Democrats Unveil New Bill to Fully Restore Net Neutrality by ctlby on Friday March 08, 2019 @12:22AM (#19335320)
I’m not mad at anyone, you simply haven’t explained anything. You just keep repeating the standard litany of Republican sins.

I never disputed Republicans’ attempt to give themselves an electoral advantage. I just disagree that this is consequential, much less decisive. As you yourself argued elsewhere in the thread, NC Republicans’ chicanery could mean a 2% swing in the House. Not to put too fine a point on it, but you’re telling me that by attributing 100% of R success to trickery, in a state that’s the worst of the worst in this regard and so yields the biggest effect size, you can create a counterfactual where Democrats have 2% more seats in just one half of Congress?

Your smoking gun is a rounding error. So I’m asking again: how do these sorts of numbers lead you to believe what you apparently believe?