Yes, Another Salon Article with ill winds in the forecast for MAGA

1. 81

   Credence2posted 2 weeks ago

   https://www.salon.com/2025/11/13/texas- … mandering/
   
   MAGA is not invulnerable and can be stopped.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      wildernessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

      Of course MAGA can be stopped!  All you have to do is murder them!
      
      (I notice that your link plainly says the Texas MAGA effort to redistrict was NOT stopped.)

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Readmikenowposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

         I, myself, don't put too much stock in anything printed in Salon.com.  I actually ignore it as I don't feel it has any value.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            wildernessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

            Sounds like a wise move.  They very obviously have an axe to grind, an agenda they want to push.  Given that there isn't much reason to listen to anything they have to say.

            replyreport
      2. 81

         Credence2posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

         Of course MAGA can be stopped!  All you have to do is murder them!
         
         (I notice that your link plainly says the Texas MAGA effort to redistrict was NOT stopped.)
         ———-
         Don’t give me any ideas, Wilderness…
         
         While the Texas two=step was not stopped, the Democrats have been motivated as a result to counter in a big way. That is better than allowing a GOP foul to go unchallenged. This is just the beginning of our on going resistance to this regime.

         replyreport
   2. 72

      Ken Burgessposted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

      I suspect it might be... if the midterms go your way... the nation will be gridlocked... the shutdown will be considered mild compared to the Impeachment efforts and lack of a passed budget the Dems will bring from 2026 - 2028...
      
      Not expecting good times... just chaos and turmoil the extremist Left will bring with it.

      replyreport
   3. 84

      Sharlee01posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

      So all I can do is read the article, give my perspective, and try like hell to keep it dialed down, and you know that’s not easy for me. This gal really covered a lot…
      
      I have to be honest -- I’m struck by how confidently it frames Democratic tactics as heroic “stands” while describing Republicans as manipulative cartoon villains. I’m a conservative, and I try to approach politics with basic common sense, not emotion or party spin. And the tone here is so one-sided that it practically undermines itself.
      
      The article treats the Texas Democrats’ quorum walkout as some noble act of courage. I remember it as exactly what it was: a political stunt to block a vote they knew they couldn’t win. When you flee the state to shut down the legislative process, you’re not “taking a stand”;  you’re refusing to do your job to suit a narrative. If Republican lawmakers had done the exact same thing, this article would be calling it an “assault on democracy.”
      
      The idea that Republicans were using “Machiavellian tactics” but Democrats redrawing maps in California, Illinois, Maryland, and Virginia are doing something principled is pretty laughable. Gerrymandering is wrong no matter who does it. Pretending one side is pure and the other side is scheming is exactly why so many Americans tune out these partisan narratives.
      
      The article suggests Texas somehow “woke up” California to rewrite its own map, but it completely ignores that California only passed Prop 50 after months of political messaging.  Calling it a grassroots awakening feels very dishonest. It was a top-down maneuver meant to claw back Democratic seats. Own it or don’t, but is it fair to rewrite history to make it sound virtuous?
      
      Then there’s the assumption that Trump’s supposed “war on the Latino community” is going to cause a political landslide. I find that kind of language irresponsible. Latino voters, like every group of Americans, care about the economy, safety, border security, and opportunities for their families. Treating them as a monolith that reacts emotionally to slogans instead of policies is insulting.  Many voted for Trump because he delivered results they felt in their communities,  not because they were “brainwashed,” as this article implies.
      
      Finally, the whole narrative that Republicans are about to be blindsided feels more like wishful thinking than sober analysis. Elections swing for all kinds of reasons. Predicting Democratic waves every cycle has practically become a sport for some outlets, even when the data doesn’t support it.
      
      In the end, I think a little humility on both sides would go a long way. Republicans shouldn’t act like any single strategy is a “magic bullet,” and Democrats shouldn’t pretend they’ve cornered the moral high ground while doing the same things they accuse others of.  I can disagree strongly with someone’s politics without needing to turn them into a vile villain.
      
      If we’re ever going to have an honest political debate in this country, articles like this need to stop dressing up spin as truth, because that’s exactly why so many people can no longer tell the difference.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Credence2posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

         Yes, Sharlee, it is an opinion piece, but one that I agree with.
         
         The issue is that none of the this redistricting effort would have been contemplated if Texas and Trump did not violate decorum as to how this process normally takes place. At least in California, people had a choice in the vote while in Texas the Republican controlled legislature just simply made the change by fiat.
         
         The Republicans have put the Democrats in the position to have to “fight fire with fire” and whatever the result of that, the Republicans only have themselves to blame.
         
         Oftentimes, the appearance of impartiality is more an illusion than many would like to admit.
         
         Trump is already losing ground as many states have resisted his request to reapportion the states’ representatives on a partisan basis.
         
         Latino have been targeted by ICE and they racially profile, we all know that.
         It is my opinion that part of the ICE sweeps are stepping on the toes of legal residents and American citizens.
         
         The odds, at least as defined from midterms in the past, are that the ruling party loses, that is natural and historical. So, I want Trump and the Republicans to take their medicine next fall, without the benefit of a lollipop before or afterwards.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            Sharlee01posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

            Cred,  I hear what you’re saying, and I get the frustration behind it, but I think a few things need a little more balance. In Texas, the Republican legislature definitely used its power to draw the maps the way it wanted, no argument there, but it wasn’t exactly “by fiat.” Texas has a built-in process with public hearings and legal requirements they still have to follow. Whether the final map is fair is absolutely debatable, but the idea that this was some unprecedented breach of decorum feels like a stretch when both parties have a long history of pushing redistricting to their advantage.
            
            As for Trump “losing ground” because states won’t reapportion the way he wants, apportionment isn’t something a president or a campaign can change. That’s locked in by the census. What he’s actually pushing for is favorable redistricting, and states are pushing back on that for political reasons, not because there’s some clear rule he broke.
            
            On ICE, I’m with you that there have been legitimate concerns about profiling, and there’s data showing Latino residents, even citizens, have been caught up in sweeps. But I wouldn’t go as far as saying “we all know they racially profile” as if that’s an official policy. It’s more than their enforcement tactics often result in profiling, whether intentional or not, and that absolutely deserves scrutiny.
            
            And yes, historically the party in power usually loses seats in the midterms , that’s just how the cycle tends to go. If Republicans take a hit, it won’t be about “lollipops,” it’ll be because voters make that call. And honestly, if Trump can’t show that the economy is moving in a better direction, common sense says people usually end up voting with their pocketbook.
            
            And honestly, when it comes to the economy, Trump might need a little divine help. From where I’m sitting, things feel pretty flat, and the shutdown was a risky move by Democrats that definitely set him back, almost like in a board game where you draw the wrong card and get pushed two spaces behind. So the real question is whether Trump can pull off what I’d call some good karma and climb out of that hole. I’m not going to predict anything, because if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that Trump doesn’t follow the usual political script. He tends to break the patterns we’re used to.

            replyreport
            1. 81

               Credence2posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

               “Texas has a built-in process with public hearings and legal requirements they still have to follow. Whether the final map is fair is absolutely debatable, but the idea that this was some unprecedented breach of decorum feels like a stretch when both parties have a long history of pushing redistricting to their advantage.”
               
               It is unprecedented, Sharlee, we all know that thus requiring a bold and immediate Democrat  reprisal. Breaking patterns is what I do not like about Trump as he can well ignore any precedent as to how things have been done. You don’t think that public hearings and legal requirements had any real influence on the rabid red Republican Party control in that state, do you? While apportionment is nothing that a president or campaign can change, it still can be adversely influenced as was done by Trump in Texas.
               
               Excerpt from a CNN article:
               
               “President Donald Trump and Republicans have launched an unprecedented effort this year to redraw state congressional maps to help protect the party’s narrow majority in the House ahead of the 2026 midterm elections”
               
               Yes, voters will make the call, and if Trump drops the ball on the economy, those that may have resigned themselves to vote for him last year may well jump ship in frustration. And let’s face it, if he doesn’t deliver on the economy and the Dems take control of Congress, Trump is finished.
               
               As I said earlier about ICE, whether racial profiling is against policy or not they are still doing it. So what is being done about it? And since there seems to be no policy, who is making sure that racial profiling is not practiced?

               replyreport
               1. 84

                  Sharlee01posted 2 weeks agoin reply to this

                  I think you're mixing several different issues together in a way that doesn’t really match what’s happening.
                  
                  Calling Texas “unprecedented” ignores the fact that both parties have pushed the limits of redistricting for decades. Democrats have done the same in states they control,  New York and Illinois being recent examples. So if we’re going to talk about precedent, let’s at least be honest that the entire system has been a political battlefield for a long time, not something Texas suddenly invented. Public hearings and legal requirements may not sway partisan motives, but they’re still part of the process every state must follow.
                  
                  Blaming Trump for the mechanics of Texas redistricting doesn’t hold up. A president has no real authority over state map-drawing. That CNN article is talking about national political strategy and fundraising, not Trump personally redrawing Texas maps. States redraw; campaigns strategize around the maps they are given. That’s been true under other presidents.
                  
                  As for the economy, voters will judge results when the time comes. But predicting Trump’s “finish” every cycle hasn’t exactly worked out for his critics. People vote based on outcomes, not hypotheticals.
                  
                  On racial profiling and ICE, I’m not dismissing the concern,  but if the claim is that something is “ongoing,” then the question becomes: what verified examples, what data, and what oversight mechanisms are we actually talking about? Policies exist, investigations exist, and misconduct is addressed. 
                  
                  My point in all of this is: if we’re going to discuss precedent, fairness, or accountability, then the standard should apply across the board, not only when one party does something.

                  replyreport
2. 81

   Credence2posted 2 weeks ago

   I am not surprised about your apprehension regarding the source. You all would doubt the fact that the sun rose in the east and set in the west if it came from Salon. But that is ok, as I find your sources specious as well. The three stooges of the apocalypse all in one place? If the forums close, I am going to miss you guys……

   replyreport