Ag with kids

No. No. No. But, keep distorting my position. It's the weekend so I'll be drinking more... And explain, in detail, how you achieve those results above with your plan.

Hot water can also be made to freeze faster than cold water

If you're using that chart above as your proof, then that's poor reasoning and poor statistics.

Communities of interest...Define that fully. Start with Dallas County. There's about 50 distinct communities of interest just in that county alone. Oak Cliff and South Oak Cliff are right next to each other and are about as far opposite in "community of interest" as you can find. I understand the concept. I actually support the concept (regardless of what @Bozo_Casanova keeps saying about me). But, we disagree on how to achieve it. As I stated above, for lack of a better proxy, dividing it by parties is what I use... For your example. look at how the parties voted for District 10 and compare it to the statewide election results. One big thing they have in common is that they vote majority Republican (conservative) - the proxy. https://www.270towin.com/2018-house-election/states/texas I DO think the way that Texas draws districts is definitely not great. But, a LARGE part of that is limited by the number of Representatives and another part is limited by law (X number of majority minority districts). Explain how you would get all the 20K "communities of interest" in Texas represented. Note...I am not opposed to having more Representatives.

So, if they have "character, intelligence, critical thinking skills, and ability to effectively govern" and tell you that every policy they will vote for for is the opposite of what you support, you would vote for them? Basically, you would get someone that would effectively implement policies you oppose, but do it nic

If you actually think the Republican party stands for fiscal conservatism after 40 years of their actions showing differently, then you're a moron. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're not, which means when you say you vote for "conservative policy" you're talking about social conservatism. Thus the cake and abortion comment. You're incorrect about my position. Can you answer my earlier question? And can you tell me who you support that promotes the "fiscal conservativism" you like?

It's cool...I get that I'm on y'alls site so I know I'll get a ration of that... Of course, I got negged earlier for my joking Dilbert response to @Bozo_Casanova for some odd reason so maybe I'm a bit touchier than I used to be...

Cool. I do math stuffs, too. BTW, who was the "one that has actually pretended to try to practice conservative financial practices" that you voted for? BTW, when did I ever say anything about abortion or baking cakes?

Ok @Bozo_Casanova...this is the real reason I don't get in your cesspool. At least you give good arguments and intelligent discussion (although the responses earlier on this thread were lacking your normal civility)....

The worldview that understands math and politics eludes you. Sorry about that...

I hate simpleton charts like this...smdh There's a reason why Benjamin Disraeli said what he said...😕

So, you've blindly pulled the R or D lever every year? And not looked to see what policies the candidate(s) you're voting for support?

I want to live in the utopian world you want. But, I don't. And neither do you.

Whatever. I've posted my position MULTIPLE fucking times on here (and Shaggy, and HF). You don't like it. Ok. And? Explain your position on this, making sure to include how you would solve the issue of communities of interest (and explain what those are fully).

I didn't say they were a GREAT proxy. Again...I don't care about the party. But, GOP politicians will generally vote for more conservative policies than Democratic politicians will. And Democratic politicians will generally vote for more liberal policies than GOP politicians will. So, that's what we have today. I don't think California would like some kind of a redistricting plan that ended up with them having more conservative representatives any more than Texas would like the opposite.

And...this is the reason why I got out of the cesspool. Have fun swimming here.

You think it's because I care about the party. I don't. I care about the policy. I would be perfectly happy with a different system that didn't have the parties.

You have stated, repeatedly, that the party interest is deserving of representation coming at the expense of community interest representation. Cornyn, in that he represents national party and national party financial interest exclusively in the legislative process is just a pure form of the outcome you've defended in discussions of gerrymandering. Sigh…. I didn’t want to do this, but I’ve had few beers so I’ll go against my best judgement and get into the stink that is the politics board here. I support POLICY representation throughout the state. For lack of a better system, the parties end up being the closest thing to get to a proxy for those policies. Texas is majority conservative. This is based on the proxy of the Republicans holding every statewide office and both Senators being Republican. So, I think, based on the above, that the majority of the state representatives in Texas, both in Congress and in the State legislature, should be represented by a majority of conservatives. Again - the best proxy we have for that is party (sure, the argument that parties suck is fine, but in this case we don’t really have much else to use). So, in this case Republican. Cornyn votes much more for conservative policies than his opponent would. So, a majority conservative state would likely elect him, barring some issue unrelated to policies (see Rob Moore in Alabama in 2018). So, again…it’s not “party” that I support it’s “policy”, but “party” is in the vast majority of cases the best way to get those “policies”. NOTE: My view is the same regardless of the state. I think California should be represented by majority liberal representatives (Democrats as proxy) based on their statewide elections. As to communities of interest, I don’t think that was ever really fully fleshed out in our earlier discussion with regards to drawing districts. For instance, Dallas County. There’s probably 50 “communities of interest” just in that county, many of which are right next to each other - take Oak Cliff and South Oak Cliff for example. But, many of those communities have certain things in common, such as being majority liberal or conservative. Other than having 50 representatives, lumping the conservative areas together and the liberal areas together (to get the Dem/GOP party proxy) is about the best way to deal with it… Now…maybe we need to have LOTS of more districts and representatives. That might help to break up the parties as being the major proxy. But, until then…here we are. (As to the book of Matthew, while I did grow up Lutheran, I'm not Christian now. I'm a deist.)

True...Luby's always has been the after church place to go (except when I was a little kid visiting my Grandma in SA and we'd hit up Tip Top since it was only a few blocks from church and house). And that REK gag was based on truth. That house WAS literally across the street from the Presbyterian church. A couple of my friends lived there back when they were in school. Too bad that whole area has been bulldozed and rebuilt...

Yes.

Again...you've gotten my position incorrect.

Where are the Presbyterians going to go?

I really don't want to get sucked in...but I do want to point out that this is an incorrect representation of my position (which was in regard to gerrymandering so bringing it up on a Senate thread is odd).

Not going to drag me back in the cesspool with unfounded claims... Carry on...