Moore v Harper has a lot of libshits quivering. A ruling in favor of Republicans would be the end of the Democratic party. A narrow ruling would likely cut off remedies of judicial review for Democrats seeking to enjoin Republican redistricting maps and election laws. A sweeping ruling would likely get rid of independent redistricting commissions for congressional redistricting (which Democrats have gotten passed through ballot initiatives in swing states like Arizona and Michigan) or potentially even eliminate a governor's veto over congressional redistricting/voting laws.
Note that Republicans have full control over the state legislatures of 30/50 states, split control over 3/50 states, and potentially full/split control over an additional 3-5 state legislatures after the 2022 midterms.
Having full control over redistricting doesn't just mean entrenching a permanent Republican majority for the U.S. House, it also means that swing states like Pennsylvania can split their electoral votes among Congressional districts (i.e. Nebraska or Maine). If the midterms oust Democrat governors in states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota, the state legislatures could redraw their redistricting maps after a favorable Moore v Harper ruling before the 2024 election. For instance, Pennsylvania has 19 electoral votes (17 for House seats, 2 at-large votes for Senate seats). Pennsylvania Republicans could feasibly split the electoral votes 13 (R) - 4 (D) by congressional district and ensure that 13 electoral votes have a high probability of going to Republicans.
A guaranteed 13 electoral votes from one of the most essential swing states in the country would be a body blow to Democrats. Wisconsin could do this as well with a guaranteed 6 electoral votes. Michigan, Minnesota, Virginia, and New Hampshire too. The math would ensure Republicans win no matter what (given that R's hold the obvious states like Texas and Florida).
If Republicans take over reliably Democrat states like Minnesota or Virginia (Virginia's General Assembly election is in 2023) and split the electoral votes, it is well and truly over for the D's. Cocaine Mitch, if he doesn't get ousted by members of his own party, may just get rid of the filibuster if he sees that it's impossible for the D's to ever get control of the House again. Then we'll finally see some governance coming from the Republicans in 2024 when Drumpf wins.
Election integrity bills, immigration reform, welfare reform, tort reform, mass deportations, censorship and purging of degeneracy, overhaul of the education system, mass removal of bureaucrats, punishing libcuck corporations, I could go on an on. The insanity and degeneracy coming from this country will begin to slow in the coming years. It will take decades to heal, but this is just the beginning.
2022 is the inflection point, bros. Go out and vote.
>muh democratic presidential election They're just lying. And why should the federal government have a say? What if a Democrat federal government tells a Republican state government what they can't do? Isn't that the same thing? The fact is about 90% of the population needs to be killed. They're just too stupid to live.
Doesn’t this benefit both parties equally well? Also if elections are run by state rules exclusively like the Democrats abused in 2020, then why not redistricting as well? Doesn’t seem like you can reasonably have it both ways.
So what's really at the heart of this? Community Organizing. Remember when they used to call Obama a "Community Organizer?" That's code for mass ballot harvester. Dense urban populations of blacks and immigrants give over their ballots and are filled out by "election supervisors" in exchange for gift certificates and continued support of massive welfare programs that they benefit from. Democrats really have no problem with this, because they assume (rightfully so) that blacks would otherwise vote for Democrats anyway, they're just doing the heavy lifting. But if Republicans were to shore this up, the blacks would have to be relied upon to go vote themselves, which we know they're all too lazy to do.
Courts throw out a lot of cases in the Texas one they said Texas had no standing so the case was dropped with no legal merit to either party's claim/argument.
Brayden Stewart
That's what I meant, it had no standing because it's not their business.
Carson Taylor
This isn't a fucking democracy
Caleb Cruz
Right, but the legal argument was never heard and did not have a judicial ruling for any cases that are similar to it. So in this current case that is in the SCOTUS docket, there is standing so the SCOTUS will make a ruling.
Evan Robinson
>Cocaine Mitch, if he doesn't get ousted by members of his own party, may just get rid of the filibuster if he sees that it's impossible for the D's to ever get control of the House again. Then we'll finally see some governance coming from the Republicans in 2024 when Drumpf wins. both of your posts are excellent analysis all throughout, this line is key the 17th Amendment was unfortunate, but with the partisan leans of the states the senate will never be permanently blue if the right people in the right states play hardball, house of reps and white house control will be permanent when there is a red senate, with the filibuster gone and red house + white house the GOP can actually pass legislation we see bills being churned out of Florida all the time, expect to see a similar volume of bills coming out of Congress if this all goes our way
Ryder Gonzalez
Sounds to me like if they rule in favor of the state legislatures they'll just be following the precedent they set 2 years ago.
