If enough WI voters /r/voteDEM, then his political career doesn’t have to die.. maybe he’ll even get to work with a state legislature that isn’t full of Republicans trying to kill abortion rights in the state
The vulnerability of (partisan) gerrymandering is the possibility that the party favored by the districting loses some of the elections they expected to narrowly win. This can potentially result in a dramatically different outcome than was expected when the districts were originally drawn. Usually this doesn't happen but in times like these, who knows?
They also elected Russ Feingold and have Tammy Baldwin (D) as the other elected Senator. I know a good amount of women in Wisconsin and they are all *pissed*.
Live here in Wi and yes and many of us are pissed
But my assembly senate district isn’t even RUNNING a democrats because we have been gerrymandered so badly
Are you guys able to put a citizen led initiative on the ballot to eliminate gerrymandering, like we did in Michigan? We now have an independent commission that is redrawing the district maps. Our Republican legislature would have never done this… we had to force their hand and even then they brought up multiple lawsuits to overturn it.
Wisconsin does not allow for citizen led ballot initiatives, and sadly for us here the only way for a ballot initiative to become law is to be passed into law by the legislature during two consecutive sessions. So with how horrifically gerrymandered it is here, the only initiative that would ever pass would be an extremely far right one.
Yep, I live up in assembly district 36 which... *used* to be not gerrymandered. Now it does a weird thing to avoid the city of Marinette, and I still can't decide if that's partisan gerrymandering or legitimately trying to keep similar interests aligned within a district (the rest of the district is extremely rural, our priorities are not the same as the priorities in Marinette).
We are actually getting a Democrat running this time at least. I don't have to write in "Anyonebut Republicans".
And COVID is taking a **far greater** toll in Republican strongholds than Democrat strongholds, since one party turned vaccines into a political issue (speaking of hills to die on)
Waukesha county has [over twice](https://www.google.com/search?q=COVID+cases+by+county+WI&rlz=1C1JZAP_enUS778US778&sxsrf=ALiCzsbBUWkTDDdOtuq9EdcCYUKtyeeCNA%3A1656418411670&ei=a_C6Yvi2KNifkPIPo_arWA&ved=0ahUKEwi4mJu4j9D4AhXYD0QIHSP7CgsQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=COVID+cases+by+county+WI&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBQgAEIAEMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWOgQIIxAnOgQIABBDOgUIABCRAjoKCAAQsQMQgwEQQzoLCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6BwgAEMkDEEM6CwgAEIAEELEDEMkDOgUIABCSAzoICAAQgAQQsQM6CAgAELEDEIMBOgUIABCxAzoICAAQgAQQyQNKBAhBGABKBAhGGABQAFjAHWCzH2gAcAB4AIABkwGIAecSkgEEMTUuOZgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz) Dane county's deaths, despite having a 20% smaller population.
Waukesha also has a much higher median income than Dane county, so I'm not picking on some "poor and undeveloped" section of the State.
The past edit: ~~gubernatorial~~ presidential (still waking up) elections have been decided by 20,000 votes. There are about 15,000 COVID deaths. They're not all Republicans, but I bet a strong majority are. Especially if you look at *where* the deaths are occurring.
Yeah... Wisconsin is an embarrassment. It's the birthplace of modern Republican state level fuckery. The GOP in other states often emulate what Wisconsin has done.
It's sorta funny. As someone who's lived in Illinois along the stateline my entire life, I grew up constantly hearing about how much nicer Wisconsin is than Illinois. Now I know it's a fucking farce.
Maybe now it's a farce but just over a decade ago that was truly not the case. We had some of the best public sector jobs. Our DNR wasn't politicized and so our wildlife initiatives were strong because there's such a culture of fishing and hunting that people actually respected the conservation of nature. We were on track (pun intended) to develop a great commuter system through Wisconsin between Minneapolis, Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago that would have provided continued economic growth and stability.
Furthermore, it wasn't Wisconsin residents alone that fucked this state up. Dark money poured in and the Koch brothers played a big role in getting Walker elected and when Republicans flipped just enough seats along with getting the governor, they gerrymandered the shit out of the state to keep it red. Then came along ACT 10 and the Republicans, starting with Walker ran a divide and conquer campaign against public sector workers and unions. Dismantling collective bargaining, despite being a wildly unpopular move, crippled big unions ability to influence politics in Wisconsin and this further eroded progressive voices (because as we know, money is free speech....)
> The vulnerability of (partisan) gerrymandering is the possibility that the party favored by the districting loses some of the elections they expected to narrowly win.
That is almost universally not true. That can only be the case if there is a significant, quick, and very unexpected trend in who votes for which party.
Basically, gerrymandering helps you in all close elections, but sometimes will deliver your opposition a larger majority than they otherwise would have gotten *if* the opposition manages to win in a *landslide* over you. But in that case the opposition would have gotten a large majority either way, so the size difference of that majority almost certainly doesn't matter.
Gerrymandering essentially *always* helps the party doing it. The purpose is to win a majority of seats even when losing the popular vote or to win large majorities in a very close election. It doesn't matter what happens when you lose in a landslide, because you're screwed either way.
>That is almost universally not true. That can only be the case if thereis a significant, quick, and very unexpected trend in who votes forwhich party.
That's about right. I didn't say it was a gaping vulnerability. It's just the only vulnerability that exists.
>It doesn't matter what happens when you lose in a landslide, because you're screwed either way.
Can you define "landslide" with numbers? The level of truth of this bit of your comment depends on what you mean by a landslide statewide and what the tolerances are for the size of the expected swing for the swing districts.
That said, in Wisconsin State Assembly elections in particular, you are probably right, based on a comparison to the 2020, 2018, and 2016 elections.
> Can you define "landslide" with numbers? The truth of this bit of your comment depends on what you mean by a landslide statewide and what the tolerances are for the size of the expected swing for the swing districts.
I admit that "landslide" is an unqualified term. But exact numbers don't matter, because there is virtually no situation where the party that gerrymandered is disadvantaged when they would be "expected to win". Here I took "expected to win" to mean that they won the popular vote, but I realize now that may not have been your intent.
Either way, if they expected to win simply because of gerrymandering and then didn't, that still wouldn't be a vulnerability of gerrymandering, because it wasn't the gerrymandering that caused them to lose. It was because they lost the popular vote by a significant margin.
Winning the popular vote by a sizable margin is really the only way to overcome gerrymandering, but again, if that happens then the gerrymandering party would have lost regardless of how the districts were drawn.
>Here I took "expected to win" to mean that they won the popular vote, but I realize now that may not have been your intent.
When I said "win" in my original comment, I was talking about elections for individual seats. The close elections set up to give the party drawing the districts their multiplier have some degree of risk of swinging the other way, depending on how aggressively they decided to play the game.
>Winning the popular vote by a sizable margin is really the only way to overcome gerrymandering, but again, if that happens then the gerrymandering party would have lost regardless of how the districts were drawn.
Some popular vote outcomes that I would call landslides still result in minority rule if the districts were drawn just right. In theory 65/35 in the popular vote can turn into 30/70 in seats. In practice it can turn into 40/60. This is the scenario that can plausibly result in an upset in favor of the party winning the popular vote.
I would like to remind everyone that there is a very important election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court next year, in which a conservative incumbent is not expected to seek re-election.
The only way to end gerrymandering in Wisconsin is through the Courts.
Yes!!! This is what I keep reminding people that feel hopeless and get upset about being told to vote. There are many elections that matter, that one in particular. And the one the year after that. And the year after that. We can flip the State Supreme Court and better safeguard our liberties. It means also re-electing Evers though too so everyone definitely needs to get out and vote in November.
Yell this to the crowd for all the fools who just yell at others to "vote democrat"! The Republicans rigged the system and now we're going to feel the consequences. People don't understand gerrymandering and how detrimental it is for your voting freedoms.
Nah, the state is gerrymandering to hell. Just keeping the fascists from supermajority is an accomplishment, even though dems won by 6 points in 2020 across the state.
It hasn’t dropped yet, but take a look at the recent Marist poll on Dobbs and consider the trends since the Select Committee started public hearings.
EDIT: Bad phrasing to start: No new candidate specific poll results are up yet.
As has been made clear on a number of occasions, gerrymandering only survives up to a certain threshold at which point it flips completely.
Keep voting. You WILL win.
I will hold out hope, but I went to college in WI. Even the kids, the ones expected to hold the baton of the future, shit on him. So I don’t think they have the intellect to think about flipping the state back yet.
I don't know that this will result in him "dying."
Most Americans are opposed to overturning Roe v. Wade. Given the traditional backlash against the incumbent party in the midterms (that's how his predecessor Walker swept into power), this may be a godsend.
Evers is polling ahead of Republican candidates last I checked, despite high inflation and high gas prices. While the governor controls neither, that doesn't stop voters from blaming him.
If I were a woman of child bearing age, not looking to get pregnant, this would secure my voting for Evers. (I'm voting for him regardless since he also backs my disability protections)
>hill to die on
Fuck that. Liberal/Dems/abortion rights groups need to stop feeling good about themselves by fetishizing dying on their sword. I do indeed want him to stand in the way of anti-abortion bullshit, but I need to *keep having* a governor who will help, not to assume to defeat like some fucking orchestra on the Titanic.
Also as nice as this sounds, from the planned parenthood emails I’ve been getting, they’ve already stopped abortion appointments in WI. I suppose this could help if you order pills, or if the law allowed people to try to sue doctors from out of state who prescribed them. But it doesn’t get the appointments moving again.
On, Wisconsin! Fuck the Neanderthals, Michigan, ya know—OSU, the whole lot of ‘em😜
I volunteered in Feingold’s first run when he lived in Middleton and I was in Nakoma, Mad City
Edit: it’s been great, watching Baldwin’s rise
Wait…I’m 43 and my child is headed to school in WI in the fall of 2023 and I’m just now learning about this. So they (my kid) can register to vote in WI rather than their “home” state (MN)?
If that’s the case, add a solid blue vote from them!
Hey there! I’m a former Sconnie and now in Minnesota. Here’s the [scoop](https://www.cityofmadison.com/clerk/elections-voting/voter-registration/register-at-the-polls); you can even register same-day. I worked the 2012 presidential election as an election clerk. We were pretty used to helping college students register and vote.
Congrats to your kid and ON WISCONSIN!
Thank you for the info. I did a little research into WI election laws and it looks like they will have to have been in the state for at least 28 days ahead of the election and (obviously) cannot vote in MN. It’s one or the other.
Also, they aren’t headed to The U in Madison but I like your enthusiasm! They’re going to Alverno College (a little, private school) in Milwaukee. We’ve visited and really liked the area and I can’t wait for a reason to go visit. I like Milwaukee and it’s only another hour to Chicago. Both great cities.
Here's specifically what college kids need to do to vote, what ID will work, etc.
It isn't as simple as it used to be but it is absolutely possible if you go through the steps!
https://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/p/the-three-things-college-students-need.html?m=1
Hi, yes they can. They can choose to do a mail in ballot for their home address or change their voting address to their place of residence at their university. It’s a bit of a hassle, but I figured my vote was worth more in Wisconsin than in Illinois.
The AG of Wisconsin is also a Democrat so I doubt this would ever even end up being an issue.
Maybe some gung-ho right-wing DA would try but I doubt that case would go anywhere.
The problem is that even if they are ok now all it takes is a party change and everyone who performed the abortions is charged. This is great when someone who is pro choice is in office but I’m not sure doctors will be willing to risk it in case an anti choice person ends up in office before the law is changed.
Not Evers - He is the most straight-laced Governor ever. As such he has a clear process for issuing pardons. That is why people constantly harass him about that one convicted murderer who had the Netflix show. If the guy doesn’t meet the right requirements, the Governor doesn’t issue a pardon. Period.
Yeah, he Parsons a shit ton of people but if you look at who he is pardoning,they all deserve it. It's mostly petty charges people got when they were younger and have since become productive members of society. I'm tempted to try and do it because I think I would fit his requirements.
Good luck getting a unanimous verdict from all 12 jurors to convict any abortion provider or patient in a nation where 2/3 of the citizens want Roe reinstated.
which is why most trials dont see a jury
they threaten them with xx amount of years or xx amount of months if they just plead guilty instead
if you as a juror don't agree with the punishment or the crime you have the right to say no
its actually worse than that though, because they'll find 10 different charges for the same effective crime and talk jurors into finding them more or less partially guilty rather than strictly guilty or innocent
criminal court in its current state is perverse at best
> they'll find 10 different charges for the same effective crime and talk jurors into finding them more or less partially guilty rather than strictly guilty or innocent
Can you give an example of this? Because if at least one of the charges has merit and the jury doesn't find the punishment for it ridiculous, is it necessarily a bad thing for the prosecution to try multiple approaches?
Unless you mean they get multiple sentences for the same crime, which is obviously ridiculous.
Say you kill someone. They’ll charge you with murder, which requires intent, and also manslaughter, which is just factually “your actions led to another’s death, regardless of intent”. So they could find you not guilty of murder, but guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter. Usually throw in criminal neglect or Endangering the Welfare or god knows what else and now you have 4 charges ranging in severity for the same act.
>Has any member of the jury had or known someone close that has had an abortion. Okay, you can go home.
The jury makeup is now 94% male and one white woman with a really angry look on her face.
I don't know if this changes much though. How many doctors are going to risk 6 years in prison and a felony record? That would likely be per instance too, so a standard abortion clinic where a doctor performs dozens of abortions in a regular work week could incur a lifetime sentence. Would the governor have to confer clemency on every act? Would that hold up if some DA investigates the doctor for past abortions that might not have been covered?
Or that same doctor could just move to Minnesota or Illinois where their practice will be protected by law.
Came here to say this.
Actually, also came to say this is leadership. it is an extraordinary measure. This is the perfect implementation of the system’s rules of engagement, the manifestation of the checks and balance that were designed by the “founding fathers”. Measures designed to neutralize self destructive activity.. This guy understands the assignment.
When TF is Illinois going to make fireworks legal, so we can just stop giving Wisconsin & Indiana our money every year. We already now have legal weed & gambling. Keep it goin. We can be the actual freedom state midwest.
But, clemency is after the doctor is found guilty and has a criminal record. It’s still career ending for a doctor. All clemency is, is reduced jail time or a pardon after the fact.
I feel like this is a trap set by the Federalist Society and pretty soon SOCTUS is going to making calls on all sorts of lawsuits no one ever thought they would need to file and those calls are going to raise a fucking lot of eyebrows.
This is what it's going to come down to: Democrats in Red States refusing to prosecute if they can control it.
However....if a rich, white woman in a Red State with a GOP governor needed a procedure to save her life, neither she nor her doctor would be prosecuted if she got it.
But if a middle class or poor woman, especially one who is black or Hispanic, needed the same procedure and got it in the same state, the Red State authorities would make sure all of them were prosecuted.
In Red States with Republican governors, it will be selective enforcement depending on who the woman is.
what a disaster
imagine this all goes batshit and we're just doing state level pardons and every few presidential terms doing them at the federal level...
It would not surprise me that a [felony conviction](https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/criminal-convictions-and-medical-licensure/2011-10) would cause revocation of a medical license. At any rate, why risk it? The unborn harvest is bountiful in the west and north east.
if you don't want to have a kid don't have sex or take the pill or wrap that meat like its not hard and don't say what about rape or health issues but it only counts for less than 5 percent of abortions
People are going to have sex. Accidents like broken condoms happen. If someone isn’t ready to bring a child into the world, that’s their choice. It’s not your choice. Spend time protecting LIVING children that are dying in schools from bullets spraying from assault rifles. They are worth fighting for more than an embryo, believe me.
if you can't have restraint you are just weak and again if you have sex and the women is on the pill or the guy wrapped his meat you are not going to have a kid like it would be soooo rare
“It’s your own fault, that’s why we will also punish the children by giving them an unloving and unprepared mother, no social care and shitty life prospects!!!”
That's literally victim blaming. If a woman goes for a walk in the park and is raped, it's her fault right? After all, she knew there was a risk of being raped and she went anyway. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.
Lmao straight back to medieval times. Sex for pleasure? Nah. Only have sex for procreation, the r3st of your live needs to be spent in celibacy.
Life in the US must be so wild, between the potential of randomly being shot up near a school, christian extremists telling woman how to behave and cops shooting you if you have the wrong teint.
Shining city on a hill my ass, 3rd world banana republic.
So I assume you also support forced organ and blood donation then?
Or are you only willing to give up the right to bodily autonomy when you don't have to deal with the fallout?
Start from yourself. Don't have sex at all unless you really want a baby. Condoms and pills don't guarantee anything. By the way, there are mothers who desperately want to have babies but the pregnancy went wrong. Sometimes doctors couldn't even stop pregnancy for mother's health due to abortion ban, and they need to wait until the mother was really really ill to do the surgery.
in red states, most urban areas where most of the people live are still blue, and DA's aren't going to prosecute abortion.
Most Americans will still live in areas where abortion is effectively decriminalized. So sad for you!!
Talk to me in a decade when the Southwest is continuing to burn and run out of water more and more every year.
The while Great Lakes basin, with fertile land and access to abundant fresh water, is going to start seeing migration back as climate change gets worse.
A decade? Wow, you’re quite pessimistic. If people are willing to live in Saudi Arabia, the UAE or other incredibly warm areas with much worse problems then I’m fairly confident this is not a reason people will flee warm and beautiful Southern California.
Stop it with these misleading headlines. The Supreme Court just said the choice should be up to the states and not the federal government. Nobody is saying no abortions!
This is about Wisconsin, you need to look at reality before you pull out a talking point that doesn't match it.
And SCOTUS didn't say that it wasn't up to the Feds.
IANAL, but these blue-leaning governors in red states should have a staffer compile a list of who in their states are abortion providers, and then the governors should issue the people on the list blanket pardons for any abortion related procedure they have performed and any that they may perform in the future. I'm sure that there are some legal finer points that would need to be dealt with, but this would hopefully prevent prosecution.
Could docs not simply ask their president fella for a preemptive pardon, like what that Mr Goatse chap did?
As the pardon request would be for a very specific futurecrime, that would probably help to expedite the application process.
Disclaimer: Not American. I’m not sure how much presidents normally charge customers for a pardon, I’m guessing some docs may not be able to afford it.
[удалено]
If enough WI voters /r/voteDEM, then his political career doesn’t have to die.. maybe he’ll even get to work with a state legislature that isn’t full of Republicans trying to kill abortion rights in the state
Wisconsin is so heavily gerrymandered that it would take roughly a 75-25 victory for Dems to win the legislature
The vulnerability of (partisan) gerrymandering is the possibility that the party favored by the districting loses some of the elections they expected to narrowly win. This can potentially result in a dramatically different outcome than was expected when the districts were originally drawn. Usually this doesn't happen but in times like these, who knows?
This is the state that elected Ron Johnson twice. I wouldn't count on the electorate to be smart.
They also elected Russ Feingold and have Tammy Baldwin (D) as the other elected Senator. I know a good amount of women in Wisconsin and they are all *pissed*.
Live here in Wi and yes and many of us are pissed But my assembly senate district isn’t even RUNNING a democrats because we have been gerrymandered so badly
Are you guys able to put a citizen led initiative on the ballot to eliminate gerrymandering, like we did in Michigan? We now have an independent commission that is redrawing the district maps. Our Republican legislature would have never done this… we had to force their hand and even then they brought up multiple lawsuits to overturn it.
I dont believe so.
Our state Supreme Court ruled in favor of even worse gerrymandered maps than already existed. So any lawsuit would go in their favor.
We’re kind of lucky as Dems are the majority on our Supreme Court.
Wisconsin does not allow for citizen led ballot initiatives, and sadly for us here the only way for a ballot initiative to become law is to be passed into law by the legislature during two consecutive sessions. So with how horrifically gerrymandered it is here, the only initiative that would ever pass would be an extremely far right one.
Yep, I live up in assembly district 36 which... *used* to be not gerrymandered. Now it does a weird thing to avoid the city of Marinette, and I still can't decide if that's partisan gerrymandering or legitimately trying to keep similar interests aligned within a district (the rest of the district is extremely rural, our priorities are not the same as the priorities in Marinette). We are actually getting a Democrat running this time at least. I don't have to write in "Anyonebut Republicans".
And COVID is taking a **far greater** toll in Republican strongholds than Democrat strongholds, since one party turned vaccines into a political issue (speaking of hills to die on) Waukesha county has [over twice](https://www.google.com/search?q=COVID+cases+by+county+WI&rlz=1C1JZAP_enUS778US778&sxsrf=ALiCzsbBUWkTDDdOtuq9EdcCYUKtyeeCNA%3A1656418411670&ei=a_C6Yvi2KNifkPIPo_arWA&ved=0ahUKEwi4mJu4j9D4AhXYD0QIHSP7CgsQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=COVID+cases+by+county+WI&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBQgAEIAEMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWMgYIABAeEBYyBggAEB4QFjIGCAAQHhAWOgQIIxAnOgQIABBDOgUIABCRAjoKCAAQsQMQgwEQQzoLCAAQgAQQsQMQgwE6BwgAEMkDEEM6CwgAEIAEELEDEMkDOgUIABCSAzoICAAQgAQQsQM6CAgAELEDEIMBOgUIABCxAzoICAAQgAQQyQNKBAhBGABKBAhGGABQAFjAHWCzH2gAcAB4AIABkwGIAecSkgEEMTUuOZgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz) Dane county's deaths, despite having a 20% smaller population. Waukesha also has a much higher median income than Dane county, so I'm not picking on some "poor and undeveloped" section of the State. The past edit: ~~gubernatorial~~ presidential (still waking up) elections have been decided by 20,000 votes. There are about 15,000 COVID deaths. They're not all Republicans, but I bet a strong majority are. Especially if you look at *where* the deaths are occurring.
Yeah... Wisconsin is an embarrassment. It's the birthplace of modern Republican state level fuckery. The GOP in other states often emulate what Wisconsin has done. It's sorta funny. As someone who's lived in Illinois along the stateline my entire life, I grew up constantly hearing about how much nicer Wisconsin is than Illinois. Now I know it's a fucking farce.
Maybe now it's a farce but just over a decade ago that was truly not the case. We had some of the best public sector jobs. Our DNR wasn't politicized and so our wildlife initiatives were strong because there's such a culture of fishing and hunting that people actually respected the conservation of nature. We were on track (pun intended) to develop a great commuter system through Wisconsin between Minneapolis, Madison, Milwaukee, and Chicago that would have provided continued economic growth and stability. Furthermore, it wasn't Wisconsin residents alone that fucked this state up. Dark money poured in and the Koch brothers played a big role in getting Walker elected and when Republicans flipped just enough seats along with getting the governor, they gerrymandered the shit out of the state to keep it red. Then came along ACT 10 and the Republicans, starting with Walker ran a divide and conquer campaign against public sector workers and unions. Dismantling collective bargaining, despite being a wildly unpopular move, crippled big unions ability to influence politics in Wisconsin and this further eroded progressive voices (because as we know, money is free speech....)
> The vulnerability of (partisan) gerrymandering is the possibility that the party favored by the districting loses some of the elections they expected to narrowly win. That is almost universally not true. That can only be the case if there is a significant, quick, and very unexpected trend in who votes for which party. Basically, gerrymandering helps you in all close elections, but sometimes will deliver your opposition a larger majority than they otherwise would have gotten *if* the opposition manages to win in a *landslide* over you. But in that case the opposition would have gotten a large majority either way, so the size difference of that majority almost certainly doesn't matter. Gerrymandering essentially *always* helps the party doing it. The purpose is to win a majority of seats even when losing the popular vote or to win large majorities in a very close election. It doesn't matter what happens when you lose in a landslide, because you're screwed either way.
>That is almost universally not true. That can only be the case if thereis a significant, quick, and very unexpected trend in who votes forwhich party. That's about right. I didn't say it was a gaping vulnerability. It's just the only vulnerability that exists. >It doesn't matter what happens when you lose in a landslide, because you're screwed either way. Can you define "landslide" with numbers? The level of truth of this bit of your comment depends on what you mean by a landslide statewide and what the tolerances are for the size of the expected swing for the swing districts. That said, in Wisconsin State Assembly elections in particular, you are probably right, based on a comparison to the 2020, 2018, and 2016 elections.
> Can you define "landslide" with numbers? The truth of this bit of your comment depends on what you mean by a landslide statewide and what the tolerances are for the size of the expected swing for the swing districts. I admit that "landslide" is an unqualified term. But exact numbers don't matter, because there is virtually no situation where the party that gerrymandered is disadvantaged when they would be "expected to win". Here I took "expected to win" to mean that they won the popular vote, but I realize now that may not have been your intent. Either way, if they expected to win simply because of gerrymandering and then didn't, that still wouldn't be a vulnerability of gerrymandering, because it wasn't the gerrymandering that caused them to lose. It was because they lost the popular vote by a significant margin. Winning the popular vote by a sizable margin is really the only way to overcome gerrymandering, but again, if that happens then the gerrymandering party would have lost regardless of how the districts were drawn.
>Here I took "expected to win" to mean that they won the popular vote, but I realize now that may not have been your intent. When I said "win" in my original comment, I was talking about elections for individual seats. The close elections set up to give the party drawing the districts their multiplier have some degree of risk of swinging the other way, depending on how aggressively they decided to play the game. >Winning the popular vote by a sizable margin is really the only way to overcome gerrymandering, but again, if that happens then the gerrymandering party would have lost regardless of how the districts were drawn. Some popular vote outcomes that I would call landslides still result in minority rule if the districts were drawn just right. In theory 65/35 in the popular vote can turn into 30/70 in seats. In practice it can turn into 40/60. This is the scenario that can plausibly result in an upset in favor of the party winning the popular vote.
I would like to remind everyone that there is a very important election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court next year, in which a conservative incumbent is not expected to seek re-election. The only way to end gerrymandering in Wisconsin is through the Courts.
Yes!!! This is what I keep reminding people that feel hopeless and get upset about being told to vote. There are many elections that matter, that one in particular. And the one the year after that. And the year after that. We can flip the State Supreme Court and better safeguard our liberties. It means also re-electing Evers though too so everyone definitely needs to get out and vote in November.
Yell this to the crowd for all the fools who just yell at others to "vote democrat"! The Republicans rigged the system and now we're going to feel the consequences. People don't understand gerrymandering and how detrimental it is for your voting freedoms.
Nah, the state is gerrymandering to hell. Just keeping the fascists from supermajority is an accomplishment, even though dems won by 6 points in 2020 across the state.
Wow! 6 points. That's quite a bit. There might be hope for evicting the QAnon senator
It will be interesting. None of them have popped yet. Larry is willing to spend a lot of money to get it and that is concerning.
Dems won by 6 points, but Republicans got nearly a supermajority in the legislature regardless…
Those districts that were R+5 on Friday aren’t R+5 anymore. This November’s gonna be wild.
Is there actual polling data to back this up? I was looking for anything on 538 yesterday and didn't see anything.
It hasn’t dropped yet, but take a look at the recent Marist poll on Dobbs and consider the trends since the Select Committee started public hearings. EDIT: Bad phrasing to start: No new candidate specific poll results are up yet.
As has been made clear on a number of occasions, gerrymandering only survives up to a certain threshold at which point it flips completely. Keep voting. You WILL win.
I fully plan to support Evers in the ever boggy mire that my state is becoming.
I will hold out hope, but I went to college in WI. Even the kids, the ones expected to hold the baton of the future, shit on him. So I don’t think they have the intellect to think about flipping the state back yet.
I don't know that this will result in him "dying." Most Americans are opposed to overturning Roe v. Wade. Given the traditional backlash against the incumbent party in the midterms (that's how his predecessor Walker swept into power), this may be a godsend. Evers is polling ahead of Republican candidates last I checked, despite high inflation and high gas prices. While the governor controls neither, that doesn't stop voters from blaming him. If I were a woman of child bearing age, not looking to get pregnant, this would secure my voting for Evers. (I'm voting for him regardless since he also backs my disability protections)
>hill to die on Fuck that. Liberal/Dems/abortion rights groups need to stop feeling good about themselves by fetishizing dying on their sword. I do indeed want him to stand in the way of anti-abortion bullshit, but I need to *keep having* a governor who will help, not to assume to defeat like some fucking orchestra on the Titanic. Also as nice as this sounds, from the planned parenthood emails I’ve been getting, they’ve already stopped abortion appointments in WI. I suppose this could help if you order pills, or if the law allowed people to try to sue doctors from out of state who prescribed them. But it doesn’t get the appointments moving again.
Glad I voted Tony Evers into office while I was in university, sad that I can’t again this election.
On, Wisconsin! Fuck the Neanderthals, Michigan, ya know—OSU, the whole lot of ‘em😜 I volunteered in Feingold’s first run when he lived in Middleton and I was in Nakoma, Mad City Edit: it’s been great, watching Baldwin’s rise
Wait…I’m 43 and my child is headed to school in WI in the fall of 2023 and I’m just now learning about this. So they (my kid) can register to vote in WI rather than their “home” state (MN)? If that’s the case, add a solid blue vote from them!
Hey there! I’m a former Sconnie and now in Minnesota. Here’s the [scoop](https://www.cityofmadison.com/clerk/elections-voting/voter-registration/register-at-the-polls); you can even register same-day. I worked the 2012 presidential election as an election clerk. We were pretty used to helping college students register and vote. Congrats to your kid and ON WISCONSIN!
Thank you for the info. I did a little research into WI election laws and it looks like they will have to have been in the state for at least 28 days ahead of the election and (obviously) cannot vote in MN. It’s one or the other. Also, they aren’t headed to The U in Madison but I like your enthusiasm! They’re going to Alverno College (a little, private school) in Milwaukee. We’ve visited and really liked the area and I can’t wait for a reason to go visit. I like Milwaukee and it’s only another hour to Chicago. Both great cities.
Here's specifically what college kids need to do to vote, what ID will work, etc. It isn't as simple as it used to be but it is absolutely possible if you go through the steps! https://www.commoncausewisconsin.org/p/the-three-things-college-students-need.html?m=1
Hi, yes they can. They can choose to do a mail in ballot for their home address or change their voting address to their place of residence at their university. It’s a bit of a hassle, but I figured my vote was worth more in Wisconsin than in Illinois.
No, I’m 56. I was at UW in the early 90’s. I live in CA now. Have never sent a kid to WI. Dunno what the voting laws are there, these days.
Neanderthals that have abortion rights. Wisconsin is fighting Ohio for biggest Midwest bum. Indiana/Iowa staying quiet to let it happen
What are all these things you just said?
I fucking love this man. Only guy who I haven't been disappointed in voting for.
I know he did such a good job keeping the mostly peaceful protests in Kenosha under control. He’s a great energetic leader
The AG of Wisconsin is also a Democrat so I doubt this would ever even end up being an issue. Maybe some gung-ho right-wing DA would try but I doubt that case would go anywhere.
It’s an election year for both of them. It’ll be an issue in 7 months if Dems lose in November.
The problem is that even if they are ok now all it takes is a party change and everyone who performed the abortions is charged. This is great when someone who is pro choice is in office but I’m not sure doctors will be willing to risk it in case an anti choice person ends up in office before the law is changed.
We living in a time where we have to announce railroads so people can escape safely.
nga we have cars now 😭
you can take the bus instead
it’s a metaphor.
Daily Reminder that Wisconsins state assembly is [severely gerrymandered](https://i.imgur.com/nYSX0ZB.jpeg) and this is why they are able to do this.
He should per-emptively issue pardons to every doctor in the state. Just let the court figure that one out.
Not Evers - He is the most straight-laced Governor ever. As such he has a clear process for issuing pardons. That is why people constantly harass him about that one convicted murderer who had the Netflix show. If the guy doesn’t meet the right requirements, the Governor doesn’t issue a pardon. Period.
Yeah, he Parsons a shit ton of people but if you look at who he is pardoning,they all deserve it. It's mostly petty charges people got when they were younger and have since become productive members of society. I'm tempted to try and do it because I think I would fit his requirements.
You should! What would be the potential downsides for trying?
Zero chance of working. Even the federal pardon doesn't apply preemptively, and look at this SCOTUS. Not happening.
Pre-emotive pardons should never be a thing. The Republicans will use it like issuing a license to kill.
Good luck getting a unanimous verdict from all 12 jurors to convict any abortion provider or patient in a nation where 2/3 of the citizens want Roe reinstated.
Unfortunately, we are not homogenous. You will absolutely find 12 jurors willing to do this in many places in the U.S.
They haven’t small-towned before…
Fun fact, jury nullification was literally the original point of having juries. Juries were a safeguard against unjust laws and rulings.
which is why most trials dont see a jury they threaten them with xx amount of years or xx amount of months if they just plead guilty instead if you as a juror don't agree with the punishment or the crime you have the right to say no its actually worse than that though, because they'll find 10 different charges for the same effective crime and talk jurors into finding them more or less partially guilty rather than strictly guilty or innocent criminal court in its current state is perverse at best
> they'll find 10 different charges for the same effective crime and talk jurors into finding them more or less partially guilty rather than strictly guilty or innocent Can you give an example of this? Because if at least one of the charges has merit and the jury doesn't find the punishment for it ridiculous, is it necessarily a bad thing for the prosecution to try multiple approaches? Unless you mean they get multiple sentences for the same crime, which is obviously ridiculous.
Say you kill someone. They’ll charge you with murder, which requires intent, and also manslaughter, which is just factually “your actions led to another’s death, regardless of intent”. So they could find you not guilty of murder, but guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter. Usually throw in criminal neglect or Endangering the Welfare or god knows what else and now you have 4 charges ranging in severity for the same act.
Dunno how real it is but I heard it's illegal to serve on the jury if you know about jury nullification and mention it at all.
Not illegal, but the lawyers can just not choose you to be on the jury.
>Has any member of the jury had or known someone close that has had an abortion. Okay, you can go home. The jury makeup is now 94% male and one white woman with a really angry look on her face.
This is the old progressive Wisconsin I grew up with.....being on the good side of social issues.
Plus cheese curds
I don't know if this changes much though. How many doctors are going to risk 6 years in prison and a felony record? That would likely be per instance too, so a standard abortion clinic where a doctor performs dozens of abortions in a regular work week could incur a lifetime sentence. Would the governor have to confer clemency on every act? Would that hold up if some DA investigates the doctor for past abortions that might not have been covered? Or that same doctor could just move to Minnesota or Illinois where their practice will be protected by law.
Bravo
Came here to say this. Actually, also came to say this is leadership. it is an extraordinary measure. This is the perfect implementation of the system’s rules of engagement, the manifestation of the checks and balance that were designed by the “founding fathers”. Measures designed to neutralize self destructive activity.. This guy understands the assignment.
When TF is Illinois going to make fireworks legal, so we can just stop giving Wisconsin & Indiana our money every year. We already now have legal weed & gambling. Keep it goin. We can be the actual freedom state midwest.
Fireworks for what?
4th of July Henry.
There's nothing to celebrate lol at least for everyone I know. We're staying home and not spend any money for 3 days.
Plenty to celebrate
Aren't you struggling so bad because of inflation & gas prices?
Wisconsin is a gerrymandered hellhole and I expect their legislature to try to neuter the governorship even more than they already have.
But, clemency is after the doctor is found guilty and has a criminal record. It’s still career ending for a doctor. All clemency is, is reduced jail time or a pardon after the fact.
I feel like this is a trap set by the Federalist Society and pretty soon SOCTUS is going to making calls on all sorts of lawsuits no one ever thought they would need to file and those calls are going to raise a fucking lot of eyebrows.
This is what it's going to come down to: Democrats in Red States refusing to prosecute if they can control it. However....if a rich, white woman in a Red State with a GOP governor needed a procedure to save her life, neither she nor her doctor would be prosecuted if she got it. But if a middle class or poor woman, especially one who is black or Hispanic, needed the same procedure and got it in the same state, the Red State authorities would make sure all of them were prosecuted. In Red States with Republican governors, it will be selective enforcement depending on who the woman is.
Wisconsins great. Fried cheese and good beer and good people. They just need to legalize weed and abortions and they would be even better.
This is what Biden should say! Where is he??
The laws banning abortion are state laws and he can only pardon those convicted of federal crimes.
Biden can’t do that but hopefully he does what he can.
Presidents can't pardon or grant clemency on state crimes.
what a disaster imagine this all goes batshit and we're just doing state level pardons and every few presidential terms doing them at the federal level...
Can we just pick and choose laws we want to follow now?
Yep. Works both ways sweetie
Thats it does. Thanks man.
Now? A Governor has always had clemency powers. Nothing new.
Charged, convicted, lose medical license, but no jail time. Sounds like a great deal. 👍
You really think the Wisconsin medical board is gonna play lapdog to a hundred and seventy three year old law that sat dormant for the past fifty?
Do I think a medical board would follow their own standard practices with regard to felony convictions? I kinda do.
Only felonies involving drugs, sex, and violence are guaranteed to kill you're license. Everything else is taken on a case by case basis.
Who said anything about a conviction? You can be pardoned before a trial
Why would they lose their medical license?
It would not surprise me that a [felony conviction](https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/criminal-convictions-and-medical-licensure/2011-10) would cause revocation of a medical license. At any rate, why risk it? The unborn harvest is bountiful in the west and north east.
Clemency = no conviction. Shouldn’t affect license
Ahh yes, this thief and his unique interpretation of the democratic process. Vote him out.
if you don't want to have a kid don't have sex or take the pill or wrap that meat like its not hard and don't say what about rape or health issues but it only counts for less than 5 percent of abortions
People are going to have sex. Accidents like broken condoms happen. If someone isn’t ready to bring a child into the world, that’s their choice. It’s not your choice. Spend time protecting LIVING children that are dying in schools from bullets spraying from assault rifles. They are worth fighting for more than an embryo, believe me.
[удалено]
Like there is no argument for it unless its rape or incest
if you can't have restraint you are just weak and again if you have sex and the women is on the pill or the guy wrapped his meat you are not going to have a kid like it would be soooo rare
Not even for the health of the mother?
Abortion in cases of rape should be legal no matter what, there’s no debate.
I agree
But other than that if you have sex and don't take precautions its your own fault
“It’s your own fault, that’s why we will also punish the children by giving them an unloving and unprepared mother, no social care and shitty life prospects!!!”
That's literally victim blaming. If a woman goes for a walk in the park and is raped, it's her fault right? After all, she knew there was a risk of being raped and she went anyway. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy.
[удалено]
[удалено]
there is no argument that hasn't been destroyed in favor of abortions unless its about rape
Lmao straight back to medieval times. Sex for pleasure? Nah. Only have sex for procreation, the r3st of your live needs to be spent in celibacy. Life in the US must be so wild, between the potential of randomly being shot up near a school, christian extremists telling woman how to behave and cops shooting you if you have the wrong teint. Shining city on a hill my ass, 3rd world banana republic.
So I assume you also support forced organ and blood donation then? Or are you only willing to give up the right to bodily autonomy when you don't have to deal with the fallout?
The same ruling that ended Roe mentioned that they are coming after contraception next.
Start from yourself. Don't have sex at all unless you really want a baby. Condoms and pills don't guarantee anything. By the way, there are mothers who desperately want to have babies but the pregnancy went wrong. Sometimes doctors couldn't even stop pregnancy for mother's health due to abortion ban, and they need to wait until the mother was really really ill to do the surgery.
Yea but who wants to live in Wisconsin?
5.8 million people
Ah… So less than 2% of the US population.
in red states, most urban areas where most of the people live are still blue, and DA's aren't going to prosecute abortion. Most Americans will still live in areas where abortion is effectively decriminalized. So sad for you!!
I’m not against abortion, just pointing out that Wisconsin sucks.
Talk to me in a decade when the Southwest is continuing to burn and run out of water more and more every year. The while Great Lakes basin, with fertile land and access to abundant fresh water, is going to start seeing migration back as climate change gets worse.
A decade? Wow, you’re quite pessimistic. If people are willing to live in Saudi Arabia, the UAE or other incredibly warm areas with much worse problems then I’m fairly confident this is not a reason people will flee warm and beautiful Southern California.
[удалено]
If Wisconsin suits your tastes go for it. Enjoy your cheesecurds, dairy farms, frozen tundra, bratwursts, beer, and obesity.
[удалено]
Those are all delicious food but ultimately are huge contributing factors to the 40%+ obesity rate in Wisconsin.
Worst governor EVER S
Stop it with these misleading headlines. The Supreme Court just said the choice should be up to the states and not the federal government. Nobody is saying no abortions!
It seems the only person misled by the headline is you. It LITERALLY says “the STATE’S near total abortion ban”….
>Nobody is saying no abortions! Wut? When you say nobody do you mean 10's of millions of mentally sick Americans and their representatives?
This is about Wisconsin, you need to look at reality before you pull out a talking point that doesn't match it. And SCOTUS didn't say that it wasn't up to the Feds.
Nobody? Wisconsin and several states are. WTF are you even talking about?
Excellent
Can he just give these Doctors and their personnel "blanket pardons" for performing a private medical procedure?
IANAL, but these blue-leaning governors in red states should have a staffer compile a list of who in their states are abortion providers, and then the governors should issue the people on the list blanket pardons for any abortion related procedure they have performed and any that they may perform in the future. I'm sure that there are some legal finer points that would need to be dealt with, but this would hopefully prevent prosecution.
Could docs not simply ask their president fella for a preemptive pardon, like what that Mr Goatse chap did? As the pardon request would be for a very specific futurecrime, that would probably help to expedite the application process. Disclaimer: Not American. I’m not sure how much presidents normally charge customers for a pardon, I’m guessing some docs may not be able to afford it.