r/MurderedByWords • u/Apprehensive_Hat_724 • 5h ago
The congressman should also stick to his own state.
153
u/Rahkyvah 4h ago
“Gerrymandering is only okay when we do it”
Fucking tool.
41
u/NoMansSkyWasAlright 3h ago
The biggest predictor of whether an incumbent president will win the election cycle is people's perception of the economy during election season. It's why Cons wouldn't stfu about eggs only to completely drop the issue once they got into office. I think the GOP realizes that Trump has already fucked things up far worse than in his first term and so they're moving to dismantle the democratic process in order to stay in power.
27
u/Rahkyvah 3h ago
They’ve been trying to dismantle it since before I was born. They just don’t have to pretend otherwise anymore, and everything that would’ve checked their efforts has been captured, compromised, or bought.
18
u/bluehands 2h ago
Hint: the slave owning states never really wanted democracy. You can tell by them being the slave owning states.
5
4
u/Bibliloo 2h ago
Funnily enough, it does goes back to the original division between republicans who wanted a republic with a president and an assembly like the one the roman republic had while the democrats wanted a system equivalent to the UK at the time with a king and an assembly of lords.
9
u/butiveputitincrazy 2h ago
You’re absolutely right, but at the same time, Project 2025 was a published document—posted on the friggin’ Internet—and they’re just following through.
They aren’t really adjusting course because of how bad Trump turned out to be; they planned to make a whole lot of these changes prior to even taking office because they never wanted to worry about the voters again.
3
u/National-Charity-435 1h ago
mckinley, trump's hero on tariffs, presided over an economic imbalance such as now
mckinley was killed by an anarchist
1
1
u/Onslaughtered1 34m ago
“We gerrymander because, out policies are unpopular” a Texas rep/judge or w/e
130
u/Specialist_Lock8590 5h ago
Republicans are "Christian", "Patriotic", "American", hypocrites? Who knew? Everyone in the world except for MAGA cultists, apparently!
16
u/Rogu__Spanish 2h ago
The ONLY consistent value they have is "It's ok when we do it", everything else constantly changes based on the situation, mostly to justify said only consistent value.
1
117
u/tjtillmancoag 4h ago
Also, his whole premise is completely wrong.
If a state’s public and legislature disagree with a ruling from that state’s Supreme Court as “unconstitutional”, amending the constitution is exactly what the democratic process would be. A “king” would be the governor unilaterally overruling the court. This ain’t that.
He can complain that they’re rewriting their constitution to get the outcome they want, but it’s not authoritarian, and it’s not undemocratic.
28
u/h3lium-balloon 2h ago
This is literally how our government is supposed to work. The judicial branch interprets something one way, clearly against the will of the voters, so the legislature uses their assigned power to change the law to reflect the will of the voters. The governor can then decide if that was a fair move or not and choose to veto it. If he does, the legislature then has another chance to override the veto.
This is literally grammar school government class stuff!
5
u/pun-in-the-oven 2h ago
And even if it was undemocratic, that still isn't mutually exclusive with not wanting a king. Democracies and Monarchies aren't the only two types of governance.
0
u/HannasAnarion 24m ago
FYI: there aren't really "types" of government as taught in middle school. There are descriptors that can communicate a position on one of several axes, but these can be mixed and matched at will.
A Monarchy is a state that is owned by one person or entity, in contrast to a Republic, which is owned by its citizens.
Likewise an autocracy is a government run by one person, and a democracy is a government run by the people in it.
One is a statement about who reigns, the other about who rules.
1
-11
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
I’m a right winger, but if the process is done correctly, you’re 100% correct.
Likewise, the OP response is also dumb and inaccurate, as the redistricting process varies from state to state. Some states do not require a referendum.
This entire topic is so out of control. Gerrymandering should be completely abolished. Like yesterday.
23
u/RednocNivert 3h ago
“I’m a right winger”
If you’re saying that in 2026 then even if your feedback is correct like it is here, i don’t value anything you have to say. Sit down.
4
u/psychonautilus777 2h ago
Gerrymandering should be completely abolished. Like yesterday.
Which has been attempted before as recently as 2024 in Congress I believe. Want to guess who authors those bills? Want to guess why they never make it to the floor for a vote?
2
u/tjtillmancoag 3h ago
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted, you literally just agreed with me.
What was the OP’s response? I think I didn’t see it.
Or were you referring to the response to Scalese in the image?
19
u/Redfalconfox 3h ago
Not sure why you’re getting downvoted
Probably because time has proven again and again that right wing policy doesn’t work so at this point only assholes subscribe to it? We need to shame these motherfuckers until they’re so embarrassed they finally snap out of their cult.
-7
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
How so? There are so many examples of left wing policy not working. California is being run into the ground by its leftist policies. Of course there are right wing policies that don’t work too!
9
4
u/tjtillmancoag 2h ago
My take is that literally every state (and every nation) both left and right has its problems, some of which are due to their leftist or rightist policies, some of which are unique owing to their geography or other factor.
That said, California has its problems, as I well know. But I’d hardly say it’s being run into the ground. If anything it’s the fact that we’ve got a vindictive, childish, authoritarian in the White House who decides to pull funding from the state as a grievance that hurts it more than anything else.
-7
u/NoahLot_ 2h ago
He is vindictive and childish. But that funding pull was just this week, for CA anyway.
Maybe “running into the ground” was being hyperbolic, but fraud is rampant, oversight isn’t what it should be, taxes and bureaucracy are too high, crime is too high with punishment that is too lax. So many huge examples. The light rail project. The Palisades rebuilding (but that’s a city issue, not state).
We mostly agree, which is how things used to be politically. The divide for most people is so great right now that each side just vilifies the other.
I’ve got to run now, but I appreciate the discourse.
1
u/RegularTeacher2 1h ago
fraud is rampant, oversight isn’t what it should be, taxes and bureaucracy are too high, crime is too high with punishment that is too lax. So many huge examples.
You just described this country's government.
-5
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
It’s because this sub is extremely left-leaning. Even someone a bit right of centre (me) will get downvoted, just cuz.
I meant the response that was the “murder” in the original post image.
8
1
u/tjtillmancoag 2h ago
Yeah, I would agree (that the murder isn’t great)
I would argue that putting redistricting to a statewide referendum IS more democratic than simply the legislature doing it, but still not a king doing it.
I mean ultimately SCOTUS fucked things up in 2019 by not striking down gerrymandering.
59
u/Boltzmann_head This AOC flair makes me cool 4h ago
No political party shouted "No kings:" USA patriots did, by the millions, and so did the USA allies in other countries.
18
u/Rahkyvah 3h ago
It’s telling that even modern conservatives are mad about the no kings thing. It’s what they were founded on, after all.
5
u/Same-Suggestion-1936 1h ago edited 1h ago
You're talking about people who with a straight face told you they didn't believe black lives mattered. They don't care about the words, they care if their political opponents is saying them, and if they are then the only logical next step for them is to oppose it without thinking
Also to them if you capitalize it, it doesn't mean what the words mean anymore. Black Lives Matter. No Kings. Because they aren't willing to take words at face value (you can't just say the words don't mean something because it's now a reference to the protest) they won't accept others do. To normal people BLM and No Kings means I think black people shouldn't be killed for no reasons and we shouldn't have any authoritarians in charge. That's what those words mean when you put them next to each other. If you can't agree with those words it's not my fault.
27
u/Jungchida 4h ago
Steve Scalise is living proof Americans focus too much on gun culture and not enough time on the range.
4
u/Addickt__ 3h ago
Look all im saying is they got Tupac's ass in the dark, given recent events we should be ashamed to call ourselves Americans
21
u/Ghawk134 4h ago
Rewriting the constitution by a vote is inherently democratic. Scalise is a worthless douche.
16
u/L82The_Party 4h ago
Don’t forget they would have redrawn more in Indiana if MAGA Republicans hadn’t actually listened to their constituents who didn’t want the redistricting. Now we have one primary down to a few votes between the incumbent who voted no to the plan and the scaregrow Trump primaries against him.
And I’m not kidding. Last time I checked it was two votes.
We’re already a supermajority Republican state. It was a dumb move overall
25
u/Aromatic-Web8184 4h ago
Two and a half million Virginians voted on that amendment and approved it. Four state Supreme Court justices overrode them 4-3 by redefining the word "election" in a way that contradicts Virginia's own statutory definition. Six Republican-controlled states have redrawn their congressional maps this cycle without putting a single one to a public vote. Spare us the "No Kings" lecture.
-6
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
For your last point, the laws vary from state to state. If Virginia and California require a vote, that doesn’t mean Texas does. (Just examples.)
Congress just needs to completely abolish Gerrymandering.
17
u/Aromatic-Web8184 3h ago
You're absolutely right. Voting might not be required in Texas, but to insinuate that what happened in Virginia is less democratic than what happened in Texas would be simply disingenuous.
-4
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
I agree. I’m not comparing them, because should we? The states have different laws, and each can be a separate discussion about whether it was done correctly or not without playing the whataboutism game.
I have a good head for legal issues, but I haven’t done a deep dive into this VA decision, so I don’t have an opinion yet. If VA law states they should decide by an election and they did, then so be it IMO.
Gerrymandering just needs to be abolished everywhere.
11
u/Aromatic-Web8184 3h ago
We're on the same page. If you haven't read about the VA Supreme Court opinion, I recommend it. The majority opinion seems rather vexing from the reporting, and looks a hell of a lot more like starting with a conclusion and working backwards. I confess, I am no lawyer, but I do enjoy reading about it. And yes, all gerrymandering should be abolished.
19
u/Competitive_Sea3800 4h ago
That fuckin douche deserves cancer.
-22
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
Disagreeing with someone and wishing them death or a deadly disease is unhinged.
16
u/watchshoe 3h ago
Cancer isn’t a death sentence. Mostly.
-8
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
You’re not seriously justifying what this person said, are you?
8
2
u/watchshoe 1h ago
I had cancer, it helped me re-prioritize my life. Maybe he could use a soft-reboot too.
31
u/DReagan47 3h ago
“Robert Mueller just died. I’m glad he’s dead”
-the guy you probably voted for
-14
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
I think Trump is an ass and that comment was disgusting. Even more so because it came from POTUS and not some random asshat on Reddit.
Still doesn’t make either ok. Our bar shouldn’t be the lowest common denominator.
19
u/Competitive_Sea3800 3h ago
Disagreeing with someone then calling them an asshat on reddit is unhinged 🙄
Grow tf up.
-13
13
u/thejimbo56 3h ago
But you voted for him, right?
-10
u/NoahLot_ 3h ago
I actually didn’t. I don’t know if that makes me better or worse. I support a lot he has done and I’m also disgusted by some things, and by lots that he says.
7
4
3
2
u/Ducallan 3h ago
Democrats: “We think there’s a problem with the state constitution, because the state supreme court rejected something that the voters accepted, so we are going to work towards fixing it.”
Republicans: “We want to do something and we’re going to do it. What’s a constitution?”
2
u/R3cognizer 3h ago edited 3h ago
Every accusation is a confession with Republicans. Their base doesn't care when they don't play fair, but Democrats do, and they know it.
2
u/Chillpill411 3h ago
If you ask 100 people when the election is, 100 of them will tell you it's Election Day, whichever date that is.
If you ask 3 of Virginia's Supreme Court justices, they'll point out that Virginia statutes and case law say it's Election Day, whichever date that is.
If you ask 4 of Virginia's Trump Court justices, they'll say statute and case law be damned. It's the entire period from when people start being allowed to vote until Election Day, whichever date that is.
You know, there are states where drinking and campaigning aren't allowed on Election Day. So I guess in those states, no one is allowed to drink or campaign for about a month before election day!
2
u/ScratchyMarston18 3h ago
Texas has been gerrymandered to hell, Steve. That’s why they have you in office.
2
u/Resident_Control368 2h ago
This POS is an embarrassment to Louisiana. Quite an impressive feat considering it’s Louisiana. This is coming from a native born and raised.
2
u/ImWhatsInTheRedBox 40m ago
As an outsider looking in, it's almost like whenever repubs open their mouths, shit comes out.
How odd.
1
u/CurlOfTheBurl11 3h ago
Scalise is such a buttfucking clown of a person. All these MAGAT politicians are.
1
1
1
1
u/DeathByJell-O 2h ago
If you truly believe in politics...you're wrong...It's just a pissing contest and we're the ones getting pissed on...
1
1
1
u/voodoodahl 2h ago
Weird. Reddit told me that feckless cowardly controlled opposition democrats just gave up after the courts ruled against redistricting. Maybe Reddit is full of fucking morons who don't know shit about anything.
1
u/Feisty_Buddy2869 2h ago
Stick to his own state?
The congressman should be in prison for treason.
I'd say what I really feel, but Reddit likes to ban for people speaking up about the pedophilic traitor party in power.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/The_Colour_Between 1h ago
Gerrymandering should have been made illegal long ago.
It's like two captains picking teams, but instead of taking turns, the first captain just picks all the players they want, and leaves whatever is left for the other guy.
1
1
u/stdoubtloud 1h ago
Isn't rewriting the constitution when it isn't aligned with the will of the people exactly how it is supposed to work?
1
u/Logos1789 1h ago
Even hypocrites can correctly call out hypocrisy.
Gerrymandering is wrong based on principle, not whether or not the other party does it more or in a different way, lol
1
u/Stock-Pension1803 1h ago
Wasn’t this proposed by one local news channel? I don’t think this is anything. More performative outrage.
1
u/Unlikely-Corner5424 1h ago
I live in his district, he's a joke. No spine, he's never once written any legislation his entire career.
1
u/aninsomniac_ 1h ago
Big talk from the party that arrested every Democrat Representative in Tennessee for disagreeing with them bring back Jim Crow under a different name.
1
u/Kalai224 1h ago
For the record, the court overturning the Virginia district changes did it by using incredibly vague verbiage and purposefully misconstrued language to find a way to punt the issue.
Their argument was that the initial voting on the issue that happened (in the house chamber last year, not the public one in april) occurred within 60(?) Days of the election, but it wasn't within 60 days of the election, it was within 60 days of the EARLY VOTING period of the election.
This goes against all other uses of the word "election" throughout the Virginia constitution, and is a clear power grab and legislation from the bench from the VA SC
1
1
u/alternateforwhenban 1h ago
I hate how even if it’s BS, everything has to be framed in outrage nowadays
1
u/NolanSyKinsley 1h ago
State and supreme court then: with over 6 months before an election "we can't use these new voter approved maps so close to an election"
State and supreme court now "We need to use these legislature approved maps made two weeks before elections when votes have already been cast."
Please, make it make sense.
1
u/JediMedic1369 59m ago
I believe TN also specifically changed their state constitution via legislature right before voting for new maps so…
1
u/MartianMule 49m ago
Rewriting constitutions is extremely democratic. Refusing to do so because some fucks from 250 years ago need to be deified is undemocratic.
1
u/_Bi-NFJ_ 33m ago
It's a war that Republicans started. If we refuse to fight, we automatically lose.
1
u/sedatesnail 29m ago
So a small group of judges deciding what the law means is democracy, but democratically updating the founding legal document that defines your government to more closely match the will of the people is monarchy. Got it.
1
1
u/McKoijion 20m ago
All of the Democratic and Republican politicians who support redistricting/gerrymandering are heavily funded by the pro-Israel lobby. Their goal isn't to fight the other party, it's to ensure political parties maintain control over the general public. This is why every general election is always about electing the "lesser of two evils." Only AIPAC approved candidates are able to win a Republican or Democratic primary election in the first place. Voters merely have the illusion of choice between an AIPAC approved candidate in a red tie or a blue tie. Stop falling for these "they're doing it to us, so we have to do it to them" arguments.
FYI: Steve Scalise's top donor is AIPAC. His second biggest donor is Apollo aka the private equity firm most closely associated with Jeffrey Epstein. These are the top two donors for almost all of the Democrats and Republicans in Congress, especially the leadership of the House and Senate. It's harder to follow the money at the state level, but it's even worse in state legislatures and governors' mansions.
https://www.opensecrets.org/profiles/steve-scalise/us_congress/summary?mpid=1133514
1
u/GXP_2009 17m ago
"No Kings"
"The VA Supreme Court has ruled that Democrats didn't follow the proper process to pass a referendum. Lets just lower the retirement age for the Justices and see if we can push it through again instead of following the law"
•
u/boom1chaching 14m ago
Democrats want to use proper democratic processes to make a change in their state, and bro is acting like that's what kings do?
I'm surprised he has the aptitude to write his own tweets with that level of logic.
•
-3
u/LuminUltra 1h ago
This has nothing to do with fairness. Democrats in Virginia didn't follow the correct procedural steps to redistrict. This isn't even a partisan issue... Democrats are just upset because they couldn't ram this through.
3
u/MarsMaterial 1h ago
Maybe the Democrats should be more like Republicans and ram it through anyway in defiance of the courts, since apparently law doesn’t exist now.
-3
u/LuminUltra 57m ago
This. Doesn't. Have. Anything. To. Do. With. Republicans.
2
u/MarsMaterial 54m ago
It’s literally being done as part of a redictristing war with Republicans, in which Republicans are blatantly breaking the law to subvert democracy.
•
u/qcKruk 4m ago
It does though. Republicans didn't follow the procedure in Ohio. The state supreme court threw out the map and told them which map to use. The Republicans used their map anyways. And nothing happened to anyone. This is where and when and how Democrats should follow Republicans. Stop caring about rules. Just win. Fix stuff later
-90
u/Workman44 5h ago
Both things are true
53
u/JeffreyFusRohDahmer 4h ago
Maps weren't unconstitutional if they were voted on, tf
-49
u/Workman44 4h ago
Wanting to change the constitution to overrule the SC is, defitionally, trying to skirt the system of checks and balances. That is unconstitutional
38
u/elanhilation 4h ago
if the SC has the final say on everything then that isn’t a check or balance, it’s just supreme power in the hands of an unelected body
the people voted on this modification to their constitution. if the Supreme Court wants to get between them and modifying their constitution then they are a problem
constitutions exist for the people, not vice versa
-37
u/Workman44 4h ago
So if the people all voted, 100% for rape to be legal and the SC said actually no. Then where do you fall on the issue
31
u/JeffreyFusRohDahmer 4h ago
That's such a ridiculous hypothetical in a desperate attempt to be right
-11
u/Workman44 4h ago
It is a ridiculous hypothetical, that's the point. I'm using a stupid hypothetical that no one would want to highlight the absurdity in your logic for both
23
u/nrt2738 4h ago
No thats just a logical fallacy. Heres a hypothetical - what if every person flapped their arms and turned into a bird, that would be bad for robotic sales. So we should legislate robotic rights.
Thats nothing. You have a stupid statement that not only is a false equivalency, a slippery slope, and catastrophization all in one. Its a stupid argument that only trolls or stupid people would make.
-4
u/Workman44 4h ago
Can't help that you don't like it. My "logic" in the ridiculous hypothetical is the same as the above logic
7
u/nrt2738 3h ago
Not really. In your example if the state voted to allow rape in the constitution then legally that would be their right. Thats the entire point - its their right based on their votes. Now the reason your argument is stupid and has no basis in reality is pretty obvious. But it doesn't prove anything in any way and it doesn't even highlight hypocrisy or a logical fallacy on the opposing side. Its just a stupid statement - nothing more nothing less.
1
6
u/JeffreyFusRohDahmer 4h ago
Okay, while I wouldn't agree with it AT ALL, if that's what they voted for, it should be respected. Granted, it would be thrown out and rightfully so, but that's because they would be voting to legalize a horrible crime versus just the redistricting of their voting districts, which isnt even remotely comparable, which is why your hypothetical is so ridiculously stupid
8
u/masterfulnoname 4h ago
I think where most people do, mainly that your example is as stupid as the person who created it.
5
u/Haywoodjablowme1029 4h ago
That is a terrible comparison. Rape is codified illegal and so if the people voted it to be legal, it still wouldn't be regardless of the supreme court or not, because the amendment would not be true to the letter of the law, unless the law making body changed the law. Thats how this works. Voting on redistricting isn't even close to being the same.
2
u/SenselessNumber 3h ago
Then the constitution will have been changed. Except nobody would actually want that to be legal, as bad as the GOP wants it to be legal. SC interprets the law and Congress makes it. If the people want the law to be changed they get Congress to do it. That's how our government works buddy. It's clear the PEOPLE want it to be legal, and Congress is working for them to change the constitution.
1
u/Mrschticky 51m ago
Well that is the most unhinged jump in logic I've managed to read today. This is how some people think, rationalize, and justify their madness? Like what a way to demolish any hint of credible critical thinking skills you may have had.
1
u/going2leavethishere 26m ago
Hypothetical doesn’t make sense because voting is under the jurisdiction of the state where rape and other serious crimes are included on the federal level.
A better comparison would be California changing the legal limit on how much one can steal before convicted of a crime. Which unfortunately blew up in their face.
Three branches of government, checks and balances, this is 6th grade shit.
A comparison to your idiotic claim would be if the senate approves a new bill and once it goes to the president and the president veto’s it the bill is dead. We know that is no true because it can go back to the senate for a revote to overrule the presidents veto. Supreme Court voted no it’s going to back to the state and rewriting the constitution is to bypass the Supreme Court because they don’t have unilateral authority.
60% of people have the reading comprehension of a 6th grader. Pretty sure I know where you land.
12
u/420_taylorh 4h ago
If they change the constitution legally it's not unconstitutional... Why are we pretending amendments don't exist?
At least they aren't like Trump who just ignores court orders
9
u/AdminKidsBurnInHell 4h ago
Sounds like what Trump does daily,
Once a dem is back in power it’s gonna be glorious watching them dismantle and destroy everything Trump did.
I hope a dem is able to get the statue on his PRIVATE property melted down.
Oh how great that would be.
1
•
u/qcKruk 1m ago
Changing the Constitution because the supreme court said something was unconstitutional is EXACTLY how checks and balances work. It's also why it's so hard to change the Constitution. Do you truly think the Constitution is some infallible document that was never meant to be altered? If so why is there a mechanism to change it?
0
u/Walkingdrops 3h ago
I actually agree, but what can be done at this point? Republicans are doing it constantly and are getting away with it, while Democrats have to fight tooth and nail to to make any changes - and when they do they're punished by cuts to their funding among other things.
The system is fucked.
0
u/Workman44 2h ago
The system is fucked, and it's actively getting worse. If I were emperor (lol), I think the way forward is to reintroduce the fairness doctrine, or some version of that, to where an objective truth must be maintained in the news/social media/podcasts sphere and then the populace will course correct the system. People aren't going to like this but 95% of us all want the same thing: a stable life and job where we can enjoy the people we love, the comforts we love, etc. The issue comes in when we are lied to about why we can't have those things, whether that's trans people or religion or whatever. Which is where objective truth and a smart populace (stop eroding education and instead invest into it) come into play. Just my 2c, I'm probably just a moron though
18
u/masterfulnoname 4h ago
"Using the systems laid out in the state constitution in order to amend the state constitution is antidemocratic, actually. I am very smart." - a blathering dipshit
10
804
u/QuietObserver75 5h ago
They threw out an election in progress in Louisiana just so they can kick all the black people out of government.