COMMUNITY United States Politics Thread: Trump's Second Term

I didn't bring up Illinois. It was brought up in stringers post which downplayed Illinois' gerrymandering done by democrats.

Except the post didn't downplay Dem gerrymandering. It didn't address gerrymandering at all. It only pointed out that a graphic being used to prove Dem malfeasance is leading, which you yourself admitted. You then went on to claim that the Dems are gerrymandering in IL, which isn't something that was ever denied.
 
Except the post didn't downplay Dem gerrymandering. It didn't address gerrymandering at all. It only pointed out that a graphic being used to prove Dem malfeasance is leading, which you yourself admitted. You then went on to claim that the Dems are gerrymandering in IL, which isn't something that was ever denied.
Lol bro are u serious? Can u seriously go back and look at the tweet and tell me gerrymandering wasn't being discussed?

Bro idk what is wrong with y'all sometimes

Yes the map was misleading, yes gerrymandering is why Dems have a chokehold on the state

That's why I said "both things can be true"

What are we even arguing about
 
Lol bro are u serious? Can u seriously go back and look at the tweet and tell me gerrymandering wasn't being discussed?

Bro idk what is wrong with y'all sometimes

Yes the map was misleading, yes gerrymandering is why Dems have a chokehold on the state

That's why I said "both things can be true"

What are we even arguing about

Yes, what are we arguing about?

Mary Miller put up a graphic that represented IL's party affiliation/voting patterns by coloring in the land. We all know that land doesn't vote. People do. So, Ron responded by pointing that out. That's all he did. He made a one line comment identifying the fault in the graphic used.

Yes, gerrymandering was being discussed. Ron never said Dems weren't doing it. He simply pointed out the flaw in Mary's argument.

You're arguing against a point that was never made and then acting like everybody else are the ones that's being unreasonable.
 
Yes, what are we arguing about?

Mary Miller put up a graphic that represented IL's party affiliation/voting patterns by coloring in the land. We all know that land doesn't vote. People do. So, Ron responded by pointing that out. That's all he did. He made a one line comment identifying the fault in the graphic used.

Yes, gerrymandering was being discussed. Ron never said Dems weren't doing it. He simply pointed out the flaw in Mary's argument.

You're arguing against a point that was never made and then acting like everybody else are the ones that's being unreasonable.
He said her claim that Illinois could be red if it wasn't gerrymandered by Dems could be true if cornfields could vote.

That's false, it could be true if Dems didn't gerrymander, regardless of her map being misleading (which is why I brought up population Density). He is downplaying the possibility of Il going red by saying "cornfields cant vote"

Now that I'm repeating myself im gonna stop wasting my time on this farther
 
He said her claim that Illinois could be red if it wasn't gerrymandered by Dems could be true if cornfields could vote.

That's false, it could be true if Dems didn't gerrymander, regardless of her map being misleading (which is why I brought up population Density). He is downplaying the possibility of Il going red by saying "cornfields cant vote"

Now that I'm repeating myself im gonna stop wasting my time on this farther

lol Come on bruh.
  1. She didn't say IL could be red if it wasn't gerrymandered. She said it is red and used that image as proof.
  2. He mocked her conclusion by pointing out the flaw in the image.
He was being facetious. The sole purpose of his comment was to point out the error in her argument. He wasn't making a bigger point about Dem gerrymandering not existing. I'm pretty sure you know that because it's obvious. You're just being disingenuous. You really should stop wasting your time doing that because it serves no purpose.
 


1755527185135.gif
 
Back
Top