Supreme Court DESTROYS Democracy

>>Today, the Supreme Court had two important
rulings. One of them kind of okay, although we’ll see
what the lower courts do now that it’s been punted back to them. The other, absolutely horrible for the future
of American democracy, and we’re gonna start there with the absolutely horrible. And that has to do with partisan gerrymandering. Effectively, the Supreme Court has decided
that they just don’t want to get involved in that sort of thing. With Chief Justice John Roberts saying, we
conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach
of the federal courts. Federal judges have no license to reallocate
political power between the two major political parties, with no plausible grant of authority
in the Constitution and no legal standards to limit and direct their decisions. Now, some of that makes some sense. The issue though is that gerrymandering does
not come about because of a close, careful reading of the Constitution. It’s just partisan BS that’s been developed
over time to give an advantage to whoever was already in charge. And thus you need someone other than those
same elected officials To adjudicate whether a gerrymandered map is fair or not. And we know, and we’re gonna give you lots
of examples of horrible ones. And now the idea was always going to be in
particular cases, hey maybe it’ll go to the Supreme Court, but you know, say goodbye to
that. Apparently it’s not gonna happen in the near
future.>>Yeah, this is upsetting. Obviously, gerrymandering on the basis of
race is unconstitutional.>>Mm-hm.>>And by all logic, partisan, gerrymandering,
just by the way things are drawn, it’s 100% about race.>>Mm-hm.>>If you just look at the different communities
and you put pictures on a map, no one would not be able to see that it is about race. And so because they’re not calling it “race
gerrymandering” it gets to slide by, which is wild for me.>>Yeah.>>Well, they talk about how, at least in
their opinion decision, how it wasn’t written up in the constitution originally, so we can’t
do anything federal judges may have decided before. Federal judges, should they also not have
a say either? The whole point is this, from the bottom to
the top, the level of judges is supposed to make these decisions based off of what you
think would make a fair democracy. I would think. I’m not a judge. I don’t know. But if a federal judge can make these decisions,
why then suddenly is the Supreme Court out of this equation, at least in their mind? Out of this equation to make that decision. And there’s plenty of things in the original
part of the Constitution that wouldn’t have come up. Yeah, gerrymandering was not something that
the founding fathers were thinking about, right? They also weren’t thinking about civil rights.>>The founding fathers didn’t have to gerrymander.>>The people that they’re splitting up in
these districts were actually owned by them.>>Yeah, keeping it real.>>So why don’t we go into some examples of
how bad this can actually be in actual practice. But first, in her dissent to Robert’s ruling
Justice Elena Kagan wrote that, quote, gerrymanders like the one here may irreparably damage our
system of government. I want to give you the example of how this
sort of process actually works and how it can be used in a state specific basis to give
an advantage to a party, but also how significant that can be once you apply it across something
like 50 states. So we have an assemblyman David Lewis, a Republican
of North Carolina who had previously said, I think electing Republicans is better than
electing Democrats. So I drew this map to help foster what I think
is better for the country. I propose that we draw the maps to give a
partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it’s possible
to draw a map with 11 republicans and 2 Democrats. But understand that if he could draw a map
that gave 13 republicans and 0 Democrats, that’s the map that we would have. But instead, he thought, the best I can do
is 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats. And in fact, in 2016, Republican congressional
candidates won 53% of the statewide vote, and they won 10 of the 13 congressional districts
or 77%. They won a very narrow majority of the overall
vote, but they got almost all of the actual political representation, which is certainly
significant. And then let’s go a little bit broader, some
more examples. If you look at in 2018, in Pennsylvania, Michigan,
and North Carolina, we’re gonna bring up this chart and you’re gonna see the difference
between the percentage of the vote that the Democrats got in those states. In all of those cases, they got the majority
of the vote, but in none of those cases did they even get half of the actual seats in
Congress. And depending on which state, it’s either
45%, 47%. Now in any particular state, this might mean
one, or two, or three seats that they don’t get.>>Right.>>But then you multiply that across the country,
and you have the difference between having the minority or the majority in the House
of Representatives, which is obviously incredibly significant nationally.>>But they will still fight and talk about
how, our election system is the way it is, it’s fine, or overwhelming. We heard Donald Trump talking earlier in the
week, or maybe even late last week, about the popular vote. It doesn’t matter they didn’t win it. In fact, he did win it. Well, our election system is the best run
because you keep messing with it in these terms. So I mean we’ve gotten to the point now where
this particular state rep was talking about this, you don’t have to even hide it. I’m not sure if they ever began to. I was going to say hide it anymore. They probably never hid it. Just say straight up, I believe Republicans
need to be elected, so I’m going to do things to make sure Republicans get elected. What part of democracy is that? You don’t have to be a supreme court justice
to understand that equation that he just put forward. I believe this, I, one guy, along with seven
to eight other guys, let’s just do it this way because I feel that way. What if one or two in the minority that you’ve
created said, I don’t feel that way? What do we call that?>>Right.>>Yeah.>>Overwhelming your democracy with unfair
election systems, why would anyone applaud that? It should be talked about in every election,
every campaign when you’re talking about replacing these people and see if people really are
proud of this American best system in the world.>>Look, and best case scenario, hey, maybe
in a particular case, a particular state supreme court might decide that a map had been gerrymandered
in a partisan fashion and they might overturn it. Maybe, that’s what we’re hoping for. But understand that in some states those positions
on the courts are elected positions as well. Those are partisan positions. And in many cases, if it’s a republican Supreme
Court at the state level, maybe they’ll rule that it’s fine. Or maybe they’ll just say, well, look, the
Supreme Court said that it’s not up to them, maybe it’s not up to us. So we take our hands off the whole process,
the republicans who control state government can determine it for themselves. And this, again, is incredibly important. This isn’t some philosophical debate, just
some judicial debate. This is about power in America. Back in 2010, across all house seats, all
house races, Democratic candidates received a nationwide plurality of more than 1.4 million
votes more than the Republicans, but the Republican Party won a 33 seat majority. Thus retaining its House majority by 17 seats. So even though the democrats got more votes,
it didn’t matter. Now we’re used to this happening in Senate
races. It happens all the time because of the way
that the You only have two spots, so you can win a big state like California, and it only
has as much representation as a state that has like five people in it. But it’s happening in the House as well. We have to go broader because we know Donald
Trump didn’t win as many votes as Hillary Clinton did. That’s becoming a constant thing across Republican
presidential candidates. And still, they win it. Now they also get the Supreme Court too because,
even when a Democrats in the White House, they don’t give them the seats that they deserve. And so whether it’s at the state level, if
it’s in the house, if it’s in the Senate, if it’s in the White House, if it’s in the
Supreme Court, democracy doesn’t mean anything. Sure, it’s on the papers. But in practice, you don’t actually get the
representation that you vote for. And this is not some accident. We’re not finding a bunch of unrelated coincidences.>>Right.>>This is part of a nationwide ongoing campaign
of the Republican party against democracy because they have realized at long last, that
they simply cannot win national elections anymore. Their platforms, nobody actually supports
them. Their conservative white minority is growing
smaller with every passing day. They fear demographic change that they see
happening all over the country. And so they have decided that democracy is
not for us and that is why you’re seeing things like Mitch McConnell denying a seat on the
Supreme Court. And you’re seeing voter ID. You’re seeing all of this. Including, we’re gonna talk about in just
a minute, the census question and gerrymandering. All of these things are designed to stop you
from getting the government that you vote for. And it doesn’t matter, really, because they
can be against people voting. They can try to limit it as much as possible
and nobody says anything about it, and it doesn’t hurt them at all. They live in representative democracy. They are violently opposed to representative
democracy, and nobody really brings it up as an issue.>>Right, and you were talking about being
proud. They are proud of this. This is the plan. This is the point. They have gerrymandered the Supreme Court,
our states, you know what I mean? The federal election was kind of given to
them in this weird system that we’ve outgrown. But yeah, they are proud of this.>>Yeah.>>This is the point.>>Well, why don’t we turn to the second-
>>You get nothing done fairly.>>Jared, did you wanna say something?>>Yeah, well, because this is the problem. We talk about grassroots This is the grassroots
version of Republicans getting what they want as far as the election system. So we got tons of people, generally I hate
to generalize, but as Americans we think about, the election that matters is the presidency. Then something called that Senate and every
once in awhile the House. And it gets lessened from that point on. You don’t get a chance to really know who
your state representatives are, who your local councilman members are? All these levels of government that then leads
to the next thing up, as we just wrote down, happens in a certain way to get to the highest
point and then get people like the Supreme Court Justices in or get someone like Mitch
McConnell to make sure no other Supreme Court Justices get in under a President that’s still
sitting. It’s all connected. We have to understand how these things work. If you go out in the street and you ask folks
in general, I mean, I don’t like these man on the street things necessarily, ask anyone,
what is gerrymandering?>>No idea.>>Yeah.>>Regular folks don’t know. And I’ve always said it’s not necessarily
their fault. They just got home from their 9 to 5. They’re trying to have dinner. They don’t have time to study about gerrymandering,
which is why this is one of the most effective ways to break down our democracy.>>Yeah, yeah, you’re not wrong. Look I don’t have the numbers here, but you
can find it. When I talk about that they’re turning away
from democracy, I’m not just talking about the electoral strategy by the elected Republicans. You can look at the actual polls, their base,
when asked, is democracy the best way to run a government, they are turning against it. Those numbers are changing over time, and
that should not be a surprise. The traditional attachment to represented
democracy was contingent on those democratic results delivering power to conservative white
individuals. If its not going to do that anymore, then
they’re not interested in it, and they will turn to some other system. We see Donald Trump, someone who wants to
emulate strong men, autocrats from around the globe. It’s not a coincidence that they’re turning
to someone like that. If they think that that is how they will maintain
political and economic power, then that’s the future. Democracy is simply the past. One other just interesting note because we’re
talking about examples of this. Wisconsin Democrats won every statewide election
in 2018 but did not win majorities in either chamber of the stage legislature. So they won all of the state, but they could
not actually get control the state legislature because of this sort of process.>>And also, one more thing, we were talking
about earlier how this is so blatantly about race, and I couldn’t remember the name of
the college but it’s an HBCU. Not only that, it’s the nation’s largest,
North Carolina A&T University. The districts, it’s literally split through
the college.>>Yeah.>>The HBC was split in half.>>To minimize its power.>>That’s wild, right?>>Yeah, and they have sophisticated computer
programs that allow them to do this down to the block level. Okay, so there was also a ruling on the addition
of a citizenship question to the census, which is something that Republicans have been pushing
for, for fairly obvious reasons. It’s only become obvious to people in power
and in the media recently because of a hard drive showing the sort of racial reason behind
it. But thankfully the Supreme Court did decide
that at least for right now, that cannot be added to the census, although we’re not done
with this topic. The Trump administration claimed that the
question is necessary, because it would help with enforcing section two of the Voting Rights
Act, which deals with voting practices that discriminate based on race. The idea behind this is that having this data
would help prevent the drawing of congressional maps in ways that discriminate against minority
citizens of voting age. On that question, Chief Justice John Robert
said, the court cannot ignore the disconnect between the decision made and the explanation
given. Neither respondents nor my colleagues have
been able to identify any relevant, judicially manageable limits on the Secretary’s decision
to put a core demographic question back on the census. And in case this needs to be clarified, again,
even though we’ve done it over and over and over again, Republicans keep saying that the
census is designed to count the number of citizens. It’s not. And it’s specifically cited in the Constitution
that it’s not. Where it says, representatives and direct
Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union,
according to their respective Numbers, Which will be determined by adding to the whole
number of free Persons, persons, persons, not citizens, persons, including those bound
to service for a Term of Years and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other
persons. So a couple of other national stains, they
are listed as well.>>But they are trying to add in a new one
into the census and thankfully, at least for now, they’ve been stopped.>>Were you surprised when you saw the news
this morning?>>When I saw this particular one?>>Mm-hm.>>Yes.>>You were?>>Yeah.>>Yeah, we have a conservative majority in
the Supreme Court.>>We do, yeah.>>And in general, over the past year and
a half or so, it has delivered constant wins for conservatives, for Donald Trump.>>Yeah.>>I mean on the gerrymandering, I know that
people who watch this don’t need another reminder, but this is why the Supreme Court is so important. And the Supreme Court is one of the reasons
that presidential elections are so important. Because when you hand over power to someone
like Donald Trump, this is the sort of news that you wake up to for literally years, if
not decades. And they’re gonna use that conservative majority
whether this next election is a reelection for Donald Trump, whether we get some centrist
Democrat, or whether we get a progressive, they’re gonna be able to count on their conservative
majority in the Supreme Court to protect them from the boldest legislation and to continue
to give them wins in areas of workers rights, the environment, and voting rights as well.>>I was surprised too. I think these two cases are similar in the
way that it’s obvious. It’s obvious to everybody. But luckily in the census question, there
was just blatant proof just laid out word for word on what they were doing. But regardless of that, the Trump administration
was willing to say, no, no, no, we need to know where every Hispanic person lives, so
that we can protect them because we are not the administration that ever discriminates. Absolutely not. They’re willing to like run on that argument
and go with it all the way to the Supreme Court.>>It’s every level they can think of. By the way, don’t let the smooth taste fool
you. I don’t care how many times Neil Gorsuch and
Brett Kavanaugh are going to accidentally stumble themselves across the right way to
adjudicate things like this. I never trust. That’s all. That’s just my approach to these things. Yeah, they, this is such a surprise. Yeah, this is a surprise. Because it’s not going to happen very often.>>Yeah, yeah, enjoy it while you can and
enjoy this while you can. Because again, as I’ve been saying, this is
not over. They say in their decision that there’s really
not much time there’s a few months I think until the census needs to be submitted. And as of right now, they’re saying if the
Trump administration wants to do a little bit more research and then come back with
another explanation as to why they need a citizenship question, then they’re free to
do that. Or they can potentially, I guess, try to postpone
census, even though it’s very specifically listed in the Constitution that that needs
to happen on this periodic basis. I don’t know how they would do that when the
process so far has taken literally years, but right now they have been given the opportunity
to try once again to cover up the obvious racist motivations for this addition to the
census. And it might end up getting added in
the end.

100 Responses

  1. The Young Turks says:

    After the Supreme Court's disastrous decision, how can we stop Gerrymandering? Let us know in the comments.

  2. Ray D says:

    If you won't say it then I will. Jim Crow 2.0

  3. Andreja Calibri says:

    Televisions, mobile phones, computers, and light bulbs were also not in the Constitution. So, I wonder if these so-called Constitutional originalists will complain if we take theirs away. They're insistent that we go back to live like it's the 1800s our founding fathers envisioned, so let's let them live "originally".

  4. foxdragoon84 says:

    Simple: just gotta wait until Democrats starts skewing the lines to favor them for the Republicans to bitch and the SCOTUS to revisit the decision.

  5. El Tigrero says:

    This is just a result of you not letting white people separate themselves and live free from your diverse bullshit. Of course no one would be stopping you from enjoying all the diverse bullshit you want, but that's not enough for you, you evil progracist piece of garbage.

  6. DDONTE 2000 says:


  7. Kathleen Stevens says:

    Damn scary shit coming down the pike

  8. Real Beginning says:

    This is not a democracy. This is a dictatorship established by the elite and so many times has this been said.

  9. Marcus Wardle says:

    You keep talking about ‘Gerrymandering’. Why not talk about Proportional Representation? This, at a stroke, gets rid of gerrymandering. It has been proved to do so and accurately represents who the country wants to represent them.

  10. FromTacoma says:

    Progressives Must win big in 2020 or I fear we will lose the Idea of America. Please volunteer for the Progressive cause and FIGHT.

  11. Mario Quade says:

    You need to rewrite your Constitution and get rid of the first-past-the-post or winner-takes-it-all system you have. As long as that exists, you'll never have a parliament that will represent the will of the people nationwide in proportion to the overall votes a party has got. For that you need a proportional voting system.

  12. M Munroe says:

    👀 Would someone please comment on that "SANCTIONS ARE COMING November 1" poster on the table in front of Trump.

  13. Ned Thumberland says:

    First "Citizens United," and now this? The country is doomed!

  14. chris virginia says:

    Progressives need to fight dirty. One stolen presidency, one sleight of handed presidency, a stolen supreme court pick, unlimited bribery, and now legalized voter picking.

  15. chris virginia says:

    It's not a republic when the economic elite have their candidate pick the voters in their best interest.

  16. Diego says:

    No single party should have the power to draw out their own districts.

  17. chris virginia says:

    Republicans will rig the census and hijack US politics for another decade. The supreme court will approve it.
    Progressives need to shamelessly cheat like the Patriots and Republicans.

  18. Erik Humleker says:

    Politians get to pick their voters. That's not Democratic.

  19. apostate001 says:

    So Progressives, you finally going to get WOKE about POWER or still let the SJWs whine about meaningless bullshit while an oligarchic minority rules the US while the left protests pronouns.

  20. bubbiesdad says:

    Gerrymandering goes both ways.

  21. kourii says:

    'The founding fathers didn't gerrymander'

    > gerrymandering literally named for Elbridge Gerry, founding father (and later vice president)

  22. Mark Kuiper says:

    Trump 2020 🌈

  23. ZarlanTheGreen says:

    The future of American democracy?
    Dude, America isn't a democracy, and it never has been.

  24. ZarlanTheGreen says:

    Fixing gerrymandering is a minor issue. US elections are all for one specific individual. Not policy or ideology, but personality. That's not functional democracy. Have a national vote for congress, and give each party a number of seats, proportionate to their share of the vote …and abolish the Senate and, more importantly, the Presidency.

  25. ZarlanTheGreen says:

    Use algorithms to draw districts, and you solve gerrymandering. Period.
    …but you still have winner-takes-all elections. A representative gets 50.1% of the vote, and 100% of the power. This is true of every single US election. One individual (and as it's about individuals, personality and looks effect things), who gets all the power.

  26. typeviic1 says:

    Congressional districts should look like the grid-squares, like the game 'Battleship'.

  27. Haruoki says:

    so republicans are purposely being anti-Americans

  28. Kelly Fortune says:

    So my representatives get to choose their voters rather than me and the rest of the Michigangsters choosing our representatives. The constitution is supposed to be a living breathing document and can be amended. Step up and do your job!
    Meanwhile, if we don’t fix this, the republicans are going to sell the Great Lakes to Nestle for pennies while they pollute it. This impacts everyone even if gerrymandering isn’t an issue in your state.
    Democrats have won the popular vote for the presidency twice. School elections for senate and prom queen are run with more integrity.

  29. Kelly Fortune says:

    We should all have learned what gerrymandering is in high school government class, that’s where I originally learned about it.

  30. John DG says:

    I believe the Robert's Court will go down in history as court that presided over the destruction of the United States as envisioned by the founders.

  31. mak shemi says:

    Rise of American fascism

  32. sammy says:

    America was not built on democracy, it was built on murder enslavement & treacherous behavior, which can be seen today with cops behaving like gangsters so-called politicians endorsing the bad behavior done by other politicians based on racial grounds.

  33. DRSmetal says:

    Political? But Bush V Gore in 2000 was okay?

  34. knight099159 says:

    See what happens when rapists are appointed to positions of power

  35. JoanneLG1960 says:

    In what other democratic country does the loser win?

  36. Steve A says:

    Of course they let gerrymandering continue. It's an activist right-wing court, and has been for quite a while. They ignored hundreds of years of precedent, the primary way judges decide cases, in order to rule for an individual right to bear arms. Activist. In another unprecedented act of these extremists, they actually reached down to the lower courts, the cases hadn't even been through the appeal process, in order to push their activist, extremist agenda forward. Conservatives have no principles. None.

  37. The Orthodox Moor says:

    The Supreme Court Doesn't Do Fair Unfair…They Do Constitutional Unconstitutional…This Is Basic Civics FFS

    This Does Not Deny Anyone The Ability To Vote…It's Just Shitty Policy…

  38. Nev Eklund says:

    Getting rid of geographical representation by districts would remove the issue all-together. But short of that. How about a redistricting committees chosen by a random lottery of citizens or voters? That would assure a broad mix of Americans, by gender, race, ethnic, religious, and socio-economic backgrounds.

  39. Dallas Taylor says:

    This shit is so racist and politically calculated that its like some Dr Who Time Lord shit. Taking us all back to where we have to fight the Klan. It also includes nativist hostility and a very distrustful stance towards multiculturalism and anyone who "doesn't belong here". It's going to completely collapse local economies, bet.

  40. achaasejr says:

    The bright side is this. The Republican Party is devolving into petty little white men destroying themselves. Kind of like Rome in Nero and Caligula times.

  41. snowflake melter says:


  42. snowflake melter says:


  43. john alley says:

    The supreme court deliberately coped out to keep gerrymandering the same obviously to help the republicans.

  44. 666rune4 PV says:

    So many american people need education fast… the stupidity an sich is not my problem… the consequences are devastating.. (what is gerrymandering.. ehmm.. dunno … ehmm…trump trump trump ehmmmm biden biden biden)

  45. Jypsy with_a_Jae says:

    The court has been stacked for bias and so have the districts in question. And their decisions show it blatantly. Period.

  46. Crackajack Whizbang says:

    Yep…Our so called Democracy is just an illusion.

  47. Xnerdz says:

    There could be a couple of very simple rules to fight Gerrymandering. For instance, geometrically, the traced shape of districts could be convex by requirement, or only have a limited amount of corners. Some rules based on the population of the state could require a minimum and max amount of residents within each districts. As of right now, there doesn't seem to be any rules and parties (Republican) are left tracing whatever boundaries they want.

  48. Malèna P says:

    Change to proportional representation. You not only stop gerrymandering but you will automatically have more parties.

  49. don jonson says:


  50. Rick Sanchez says:

    Supreme Court has become useless. However Democracy is NOT destroyed yet. There is still a chance to save it.

  51. Ahriz M Khalil says:

    Great Democracy where the politicians chooses his voters

  52. Fake progressive says:

    Liberals only care about democracy when people are voting the way they want if people are going to vote republican they don’t care about democracy

  53. Ryan Walk says:

    Pray a progressive takes over and understands just how much hardball they need to play against the republicans to reform… well everything, but in this instance our systems of elections and supreme court nominations needs to be changed, the republicans need repercussions for what they did to Garland and that should be an amendment that reinforces either term limits or a rotational structure in the court (like Bernie said last night) and we need to possibly create a non-partisan federal agency to handle national districting for elections because states have proven again and again that this power cannot be trusted to local authorities. Shit, even if you're a republican, seeing your party win seats and nominate justices has to make you uneasy if you at all believe in our system of democracy.

  54. David Held says:

    Of course!! The Supreme Court has been Gerrymandered

  55. Dagoberto Lagarda says:

    This is called "white rage"
    There is a doctor who gave a talking point on the subject, it's titled white rage you can find it on YouTube

  56. elftax says:

    Why was the Supreme Court allowed to mention the “two parties”, gerrymandering allows one party to have an electoral advantage and restrict competition, new parties have no chance of competing because the maps carve up the electorate.

  57. Casey Czarnomski says:

    Stop blaming race. Yes racism is a problem, but the problem is to keep the 99% in line. It's all about income! Racism is used as a distraction to divide the people. Wake up! Discrimination based on income is still legal everywhere!!

  58. marco antonio says:

    Taí tudo corrompido. É por isto. Que só uma Lei Marcial. Pra dar um tranco nestes corrompidos. É por um basta nesta impunidade

  59. Just me I says:

    10:35 well maybe if the far left was not so virulently racist against white people that would be less of a problem.

  60. Just me I says:

    Funny that TYT is talking about gerrymandering when they also desperetly want to flood the US with illegal migrants that they can then give complete amnesty just to make whites minority because they think brown people would all vote democrats. Although is true that they simply hate white people and them being a majority in anything in itself is evil according to the insane left.

  61. Jeremy J says:

    It's too bad your country is run by small minded people.

  62. Richard Alexander says:

    Impeach Judge Boofer, appointed by Russian backed illegitimate criminal president.

  63. dlee t says:

    Roberts stripped the voting rights because he said racism was over. He wrote the briefs in W v Gore along with boof and Gorsuch.

  64. dlee t says:

    Doesn't this come out close to white people get 5/4ths vote? Now it is white's 5/4ths to blacks' 4/4ths since they never got the other 5th from Dredd Scott. But, nobody else did either so the dixiecrats could be fair and make resentment continual when the rich thieves have always had the 5th/5th.

  65. Reflex says:

    What's happening is the USA is turning into something like Iraq under Saddam Hussein. The Shia are the majority of the population but the Sunnis control the country. The Shia and Sunnis hate each other. The majority Shia lived under political oppression of a minority ruling population. It's only going to get worse in America because most of the population growth is happening in Democratic cities and people continue to migrate there, yet these rural red states becoming ever smaller in population will simply become more powerful thanks to the Senate. I think at some point this is all going to explode into violence and may lead to the fragmentation of the USA. You can only rig a system so long before it starts to lose legitimacy and your political opponents start resorting to terrorism in revenge. We aren't at that stage yet, but but without a course correction, this nation is going to be broken apart by Republican authoritarian shenanigans. I'm already at the point where I wish we could just split the country in half and have separate nations. If Trumpism is the new normal for the GOP and they are going to continue to rig the system in their favor, the blue states should start seceding. Most of the nation's economy is generated by the blue states anyway. They don't even need the red states for anything. They are like a parasite that kills its host.

  66. skewCZ says:

    I wonder if CNN and MSNBC and all these other networks started running stories about gerrymandering but presented it the opposite way. They could just give some historical examples where gerrymandering helped the democratic party and talk how wrong it is, and then maybe present maps of current districts and show how absurdly gerrymandered they are (but leave out the detail that nowadays, it's to benefit republicans), to underscore that gerrymandering is a problem even to this day.
    If you presented it that way, I wonder if you'd get a popular support to stop it, even popular support from republicans.
    Problem is ofc that republicans tend to not watch these networks, they watch Fox, but there's no way Fox would run these stories on their own, if at all.

  67. Captain Prototype says:

    The real title should be " Bernie Or Busters Enable Supreme Court To Destroy Democracy".
    # 2016

  68. ric b says:

    And this is why Venezuela is a more democratic country than the US. Maybe Maduro should try to export the Bolivarian revolution to the USA….

  69. Lelynn Miller says:

    aint every1's rights the SAME now? so WHY do they still use the electoral college & tell ppl that "every vote matters"? 🤔 how can every vote matter, if every vote don't count? the electoral college allows them to rig the election. all they gotta do is count the southern states 1st. our population continues to grow everyday… & everyday, ppl continue to question just how resourceful their "rights" actually ARE… 😳

  70. doug thompson says:

    Save for possible personal issues, Kennedy leaving was a disservice to America. He knew what was coming. He knew he would never go for some things conservatives on the court would do. Yet he left at a crucial time. I have no respect for him.

  71. Brownsugar M says:

    Conservative Republicans will do the most heinous things in God's name. Furthermore, the separation between church and state needs to be enforced. Conservative republicans highjacked American core values. They abused our scared trust that they were sincerely working for the betterment of the WHOLE American society. But instead we found out underneath it all there is hatred greed and corruption. Very scary 😨

  72. bitterboi31 says:

    What these Young Turds fail to say is that PEOPLE Gerrymander themselves into specific communities because of their beliefs, lifestyle, income, and other reasons…Why do Blacks, Asians, Latinos, Muslims, and other groups develop their own communities. If I had a choice, I would not live in a community where it is dominated by Blacks because of the level of violence, corruption, and utter chaos. This is based on facts but I am sure the SnowFlakes will view it as racist because heaven forbid I want to live in a society where I don't have worry about making the Black Kids Angry. I do not want to live in a community where it is primarily Asian or Muslim. I would rather live in an area which with people who have more of the same shared values as I do. Areas where you can trust neighbors not to steal, shoot, and will act on your best interest even if you are not around. This is not the case in Black, Latino, and Asian communities.

  73. Dan says:

    The democrats gerrymander in Illinois, never hear the democrats complain about that cause it works in their favor.

  74. Jen Bui says:

    I'm a Republican voter and I'm all for Socialism so Democrat has my vote
    in 2020! Republican ideology and policies has become outdated and
    ancient in this generation.

  75. Jen Bui says:

    I'm a Republican voter and I'm all for Socialism so Democrat has my vote
    in 2020! Republican ideology and policies has become outdated and
    ancient in this generation.

  76. Jen Bui says:

    I'm a Republican voter and I'm all for Socialism so Democrat has my vote
    in 2020! Republican ideology and policies has become outdated and
    ancient in this generation.

  77. discipleofsakura says:

    The GOP is a terrorist organization that has been on a 30 year campaign to destroy American democracy. They're moving in for the kill right now.

  78. Jonathan Izaac says:

    😔😪 It’s like Justice Roberts forgot that Baker v. Carr was a thing

  79. FPV Addict Dad says:

    Ok, so what the hell can we do???

  80. Hammerhead547 says:

    John is such an elitist snob.

    What he's basically saying is: give big democratic states like california more power on the national stage so progressives can force our will onto people in places that have different more important concerns that matter more because everyone who lives in the middle of the country is a filthy uneducated pleb who doesn't know what's best for them.

    At least he's being honest that he's an elitist asshole.

  81. Mohamed Barry says:


  82. Antney Fatts says:

    Last time I checked, we're a Republic, not a democracy. So, Supreme court did not kill what we aren't! Nice try though

  83. HSC MUFC says:

    So the Court repealed Baker vs Carr? That sounds fun

  84. Rank Amateur says:

    It's getting close to that time to build guillotines and fix the problem the hard way.

  85. icecoldpierre says:

    We need a New amendment to stop gerrymandering. Lets see if Obama and Eric Holder's little anti-gerrymandering organization gets the ball rolling on that one. I bet they won't. Then we'll know they aren't serious about fixing our democracy.

  86. Abhishek Bhaskar says:

    how many took you seriously ??

  87. Iron wall says:

    We need an anarchist government, not this oligarch trash!

  88. Rains215 says:

    Gerrymandering is the main reason why Republicans have any power, they have to cheat to win.

  89. Ian Quailey says:

    What you thought was going to happen. We watched as this President put TWO supreme court justices. While the Democrats sat by and let them steal one from the first Black president of the United states. Awww .. it wasn't no big deal ,forget about it, move on,and the Democratic party let it slide into history. Now here it is not only this issue but abortion rights elections. NOW its and issue? Man ….how did Trump win?

  90. End Political Corruption says:

    The problem is that Republican voters don't care because they're "winning". Who cares about fairness when "your team" is advantaged and your preferred representatives get to be in power? Nor would they even be aware that their party "cheats" in these ways. Anyone on that side who pays attention to politics gets informed by partisan "news". And so not only are these issues not addressed there, they actively sell the notion that Dems "cheat", because the Right loves projection. But the scariest part is that they fervently believe these lies without evidence and beyond reason.

  91. Michael Mcgee says:

    It's not only that but the Ex democratic party, the Republicrats, don't support the low income, unemployed,much less homeless. this result in low income and unemployed not voting. Many feel it's a waste of time cause the only thing that the Republicrats represent is their side of the wealthy and big corporations, not whole populous. They knew that the Republicrats weren't going to use brute force, aka civil war 2 to make the supreme court ruled against gerrymandering. This gave power to the illegal separate from the union conservative states to promote the political version of community standards.

  92. MaskedMarvyl says:

    The Republican-controlled Supreme Court stated that the Republican-controlled states have the power to gerrymander as much as they want. The red states are preparing even more radically gerrymandered districts based on this green light from the Republican Supreme Court justices.
    ONLY the blue states have proposed independent redistricting commissions to keep voting fair in states: none of the red states have.

    Do the Republican voters care about this?

  93. Simple Logic 90 says:

    Ha ha ha ha ha suck it

  94. Dreamer K says:

    This country is going to hell

  95. memory lane says:

    By destroying democracy I assume they ruled in such a way that upsets the finer libs that be.

  96. Neculta says:

    Today its gerrymandering
    tomarrow its Auschwitz

    Conservitism always leads to fascism and dictatorship.

  97. MWhaleK says:

    Dems were sleeping on the job in 2010.

  98. MWhaleK says:

    Dems SAY they are super smart people playing the long and 3d chess, but they let the GOP have the Supreme court and keep a strangle hold on power.

  99. JP BLACK says:

    1 vote equals 1 vote.
    You have 300 million people you do not need proportional representation

  100. delon a says:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *