I was just skimming some news and came across this story on channel 4's site.

 

 

Did she really say that?

 

Yet, to use some Donald Trump terminology, "stupid people will elect stupid people".  That's why we have "stupid" people in Washington DC.

 

Seems pretty clear to me what she's saying - i.e., the urban core that she represents has little in common with the more rural areas of northeast Florida.

 

But she is a black Democrat so the default mode is to go to the "stupid people electing stupid people" mode.

 

How is she different than Ander Crenshaw?

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Seems pretty clear to me what she's saying - i.e., the urban core that she represents has little in common with the more rural areas of northeast Florida.

No, she's saying that the properly-redrawn district isn't drawn to guarantee her reelection. Don't act like this is anything else, please. It's an insult to our intelligence.

---

No, she's saying that the properly-redrawn district isn't drawn to guarantee her reelection. Don't act like this is anything else, please. It's an insult to our intelligence.

 

Perhaps your intelligence is easily insulted, I don't know, but she wasn't saying that at all.

 

Her law suit is all about her trying to retain her seat, no doubt about it, but her argument wasn't. It would be clear to see if people weren't predisposed to certain attitudes - which they don't apply to certain other very similar politicians.

 

Funny how that works.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Invoking the race card?

 

Brown's argument is a facade. The redistricting draws a proper district, not one that snakes around to keep her voting block intact. She can talk about demographics all she wants, but the only demographics she cares about are the urban black Democrats that keep her in office. I'd actually almost rather see Brown stay in office than handing another House seat over to Republicans on a silver platter, but the woman is so vile and corrupt (as are plenty of white Republican men, so don't even waste time going there) that I feel like fresh blood in that seat, regardless of party, can't be a bad thing.

---

Invoking the race card?

 

Brown's argument is a facade. The redistricting draws a proper district, not one that snakes around to keep her voting block intact. She can talk about demographics all she wants, but the only demographics she cares about are the urban black Democrats that keep her in office. I'd actually almost rather see Brown stay in office than handing another House seat over to Republicans on a silver platter, but the woman is so vile and corrupt (as are plenty of white Republican men, so don't even waste time going there) that I feel like fresh blood in that seat, regardless of party, can't be a bad thing.

She's basically arguing in favor of gerrymandering if I am interpreting this correctly. 

---

She's basically arguing in favor of gerrymandering if I am interpreting this correctly. 

That's exactly what she's arguing, only she's framing it as "my constituents are not fairly represented in this new district that is drawn in a manner consistent with the spirit of districting laws."

---

That's exactly what she's arguing, only she's framing it as "my constituents are not fairly represented in this new district that is drawn in a manner consistent with the spirit of districting laws."

:down:

---