Posted on 11/08/2025 12:22:16 AM PST by thecodont
Causes me to wonder more about voting fraud and propaganda ……
Not surprised at all it passed. I’m in California, BTW
They spent a bunch of money pushing it. Every time I turned on YouTube I was treated to AOC (but never Gavin Newsom) imploring me to “Stop Trump from stealing the midterm elections! Vote Yes on 50!”
Never saw a single “No on 50” ad.
I would’ve voted no on 50 myself but instead I voted by mail for Winsom Earle-Sears as I’m registered to vote in Virginia.
What a waste of a vote that was.
Probably should’ve registered in CA just for this (thought about it). But, you see, I’m the kinda guy they’d make an example out of. “Republican voter commits election fraud!”
So I played by the rules and only voted in one election.
Kinda feel like a chump, not that it would’ve made a difference in either election.
Im sorry what you will have to go through, as far as consequences go, before California might right itself.
Nah, it just sucks because I hate this communist state but Uncle Sam has ordered me to stick it out here until 2030.
It's a beautiful place though, San Diego, it's just we're governed by retards.
So I vote in Virginia where I own a home because I think I could affect change. But even this fails.
A few months after that, I turned around and headed back east. California had beaten me. And now I couldn't be more glad that it did.
San Diego has great people though. I visited a number of churches while we were there. I got the feeling that if it wasn't for the close proximity to L.A. it could be a much more friendly place for conservative-leaning folks.
Here is a bright spot. Liberals reproduce at 1.6/1000 people. Conservatives reproduce at 2.4/1000 people. Every year, the net change is 1.5% for conservatives. Each year, liberals lose the ability to affect politics by 1%/year.
Sadly, illegal invaders and muzzoids are reproducing faster than conservatives.
We are in a Civil War to save our Constitutional Republic.
I wish POTUS would recognize this and begin Military Tribunals and crackdowns on the various terrorist groups.
We saw the same violent leftwing communist terrorists in the 70s...it’s deja vu all over again.
If I counted correctly it looks like it was 35 yes to 23 no. Yet demonicRATS hold a 43-9 advantage. Soon to be 48-4 or worse. Not exactly what you’d think a “democracy” looks like, does it, Libtards?
I guess ignorant voters believed the millions and millions of dollars worth of lies they heard TV and radio. Newsome spent taxpayers into the poor house to pump the airwaves full of lies.
Not exactly what you’d think a “democracy” looks like, does it, Libtards?
It does to them...All D’s, no R’s too bad so sad...
I am not sure why Trump decided this was a good idea...maybe he calculated he would gain more seats if red states all redistricted. We’ll see. Right now its close to a wash...
“Soon to be 48-4 or worse...”
48-4 is definitely the likeliest outcome in CA under the Prop 50 map.
Never underestimate the apathy/laziness of GOP voters or the creativity of Democrat vote-counters during Ballot Harvesting Month in California which occurs after every election, but it would be hard to do *worse* than 48-4.
The real brilliance of this Ratmander (Democrat gerrymander) is that they have actually managed to bolster ALL of their vulnerable incumbents at the same time they are screwing Republicans to the wall. Absent some kind of “red” wave (in 2026? LOL.) there are almost zero pickup opportunities for CA Republicans in House races.
The new map appears to have only ONE district (CD-48) that could be described as a tossup and the GOP incumbent (Issa) will be trying to hang on by his fingernails there. So maybe 47-5.
As far as I know, there is one Rat incumbent (Ami Bera) who is leaving his safe CD-6 district to run against GOP incumbent Kevin Kiley in the revised CD-3 which is now equally favorable to the Democrat. Some sources say that CD-6 isn’t so safe for the Rat anymore but CD-3 will be, but the current data doesn’t support that very much.
Kiley may choose to run against another Republican (McClintock) instead. Either way, when it all shakes out the likely result is 48-4 (47-5 at best), a net loss of 4 or 5 GOP congressmen. I suppose if 2026 is like 2018 was (exactly as 2025 has been like 2017 was) then it could be worse, but those 4 GOP districts are pretty “safe” by CA standards.
“I am not sure why Trump decided this was a good idea...maybe he calculated he would gain more seats if red states all redistricted. We’ll see. Right now its close to a wash...”
Exactly right.
And the courts haven’t even gotten involved yet. Just wait until some court decides that the CA gerrymander is perfectly acceptable but another court says the new plan in Texas is “unconstitutional”. Because discriminating/gerrymandering against Whites and Republicans (CA) is always acceptable; attempting to do anything similar to Democrats or minorities anywhere is not.
That’s according to liberal judges and other racists, and they have proven it many times with their rulings. I wouldn’t expect them to change now.
SD used to be very Conservative along with Orange County.
Unfortunately, even if 2 Conservatives reproduce, the outcome may not result in a Conservative spawn.
I'm not sure if this really happens but if it does it's clearly voter fraud. Huge fraud!
The unprecedented mid-decade gerrymandering wars were triggered when Texas decided to redraw its maps in the Republican’s favor in August, at the behest of Trump.
Regarding the somewhat misleading (imo) statement from the OP above, I understand that Texas Republicans were undoing a previous gerrymander by Democrats.
There has unsurprisingly not been enough discussion about gerrymandering possibly being a violation of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, that section a penalty for states where voting integrity has been compromised. So let's take a look at that section again.
Note the zero tolerance, "hair trigger" wording of that section which federal and state governments, under the boots of the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties, are evidently ignoring imo.
But when the right to vote at any election
is denied to any
or in any way abridged,
Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election [all emphases added] for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. [Apportionment of Representatives]
Here is third party opinion that both state and federal governments are wrongly ignoring Section 2 imo.
No serious effort was ever made in Congress to effectuate § 2, and the only judicial attempt was rebuffed.2 , cert. denied, 328 U.S. 870 (1946). —Apportionment Clause
The Section had long been dead. But there are two camps of legal scholars who wish to revive it. The first consists of those who would like to see Section Two enforced to punish states that abridge their citizens’ right to vote, especially in the wake of Shelby County v. Holder. Recently, Joshua Geltzer, the executive director at Georgetown’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection and the former senior director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council, added himself to this camp. The second camp is using Section Two, which distinguishes on the basis of gender, as evidence that Section One’s Equal Protection Clause does not prohibit gender-based discrimination. Jonathan Mitchell spearheads this movement. —The Worrisome Ghost of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Second Section
Note Thomas Jefferson's advice against ignoring parts of the Constitution, Section 2 of 14A in this example.
"The general rule [is] that an instrument is to be so construed as to reconcile and give meaning and effect to all its parts.
Regarding alleged violations of Section 2, especially 2020 elections that state and federal governments have outright ignored, we've arguably passed the point where we need to elect all-new state and federal governments. But let's keep Trump and Vance.
65% ??
vote fraud.
Where was DOJ?
Naaw, it wouldn’t have made a difference. The fix was in just in the way the envelopes were “gifted” with a hole that displayed from the outside ONLY if you voted no. That mailin ballots were still allowed with no ID is the way of CaCaLand voting for over a decade.
Plus, local social media outfits banned you regularly if you spoke out against 50. NextDoor suspended me twice. The 2nd time was laughable since they said that they suspended me for telling a local lady that the stray cat that showed up on her porch was gonna just mooch some food and move on. That was deemed “disrespectful” enough for a 10 days suspension. Uh huh, yeah, right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.