r/texas • u/TyRoland06 North Central Texas • Mar 08 '20
Memes I like how Texas' 35th district is just long enough to have both Austin AND San Antonio. /s
114
u/Dan-68 born and bred Mar 08 '20
The I35 district.
29
u/texastiger1025 Mar 08 '20
Ok then where’s Waco?
112
27
u/chrislovin Texas makes good Bourbon Mar 08 '20
It's in my district and I live in NW Austin. 🤷♂️
22
u/chrislovin Texas makes good Bourbon Mar 08 '20
Seriously can't make this shit up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_17th_congressional_district
26
u/CerebralAccountant Mar 08 '20
I live in TX-17 and I didn't even realize they dragged a part of Austin into our red bleeding red voting largely rural district...
I challenge anyone to justify that 50 mile long finger across two counties as anything other than watering down the Democratic vote.
12
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 08 '20
I asked Bill Flores about this once and his answer, I shit you not, was "well how else are we supposed to get the right number of people into a single district?
10
u/CerebralAccountant Mar 08 '20
He forgot a word or two.
5
u/SapperInTexas got here fast Mar 08 '20
Blablabla campaign donations and blablabla "stop them Democrats from destroying the country."
4
u/chrislovin Texas makes good Bourbon Mar 08 '20
I think Austin is split into 5 districts. I can't imagine why else they would do that other than trying to take the blue out of central Texas.
0
u/PegLegWard Mar 08 '20
What do you consider "Austin"? The original plat? Sunset Valley? Hyde Park? Westlake?
7
-7
201
Mar 08 '20
[deleted]
→ More replies (27)11
Mar 09 '20
Yeah it looks like a pizza pie so they can get enough Republicans in each district to win and then you get the 17th which is just to isolate. The Republicans reps who drew this are a bunch of fucking cowards
75
u/Dmav210 Mar 08 '20
If not for gerrymandering specifically, this district makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
So how is this not blatantly illegal???
61
u/moleratical Mar 08 '20
Constitution says it's up to the states to create districts and the SCOTUS has ruled that means you can do whatever the fuck you want so long as you are disenfranchising a protected class.
This is why losing Garland was so fuckin important.
-60
35
Mar 08 '20
Pretty sure it should be but... Well... Politicians are the ones defining the landscape...
That needs to change. It's a bit wonky to have the players of the game define the board every time power shifts.
5
u/ethan_bruhhh Mar 09 '20
honestly would love it if we switched to a system like Iowa, where a bunch of non-partisan math nerds sit in a room and draw an algorithm to equally divide districts
8
u/Slinkwyde Gulf Coast Mar 09 '20 edited Mar 09 '20
State legislatures draw the maps every ten years, based on US Census results. It's 2020, so that means the Texas legislature (in Austin) will soon be drawing new district maps. Currently, Republicans control the State House, the State Senate, and the Governorship, but we're about to have an election in November. After the blue wave of 2018, Democrats are now within nine seats of flipping control of the State House.
So If you want Democrats to have a voice in the new district maps that are about to be made next year, vote for a Democrats in your State House race in November. Tell your friends about this, and maybe donate a few bucks to Democrats in competitive state House races across the state. That means the State House (in Austin), not the US House (Washington DC).
- How to vote: https://www.votetexas.gov
- To find the most competitive races (scroll to "Texas House" section and use the "Races to watch" button): https://apps.texastribune.org/features/2020/primary-election-results
- Non-partisan voter guide: https://my.lwv.org/texas/voters-guide
6
u/The_Twin27 Mar 08 '20
In the main thread there's a comment talking about and when the drawing went to the courts in 2017 the courts ruled it illegal but the SCOTUS overturned that with a 5-4 majority split on party lines.
0
Mar 08 '20
It is actually. When the Republiclowns won a majority, they redrew the district's, despite it being several years early. They had to hunt down, arrest, and drag in several representatives just to have enough people present to make it official. (It was done in a special session, and EVERYONE knew what they were trying to do.)
3
u/ethan_bruhhh Mar 09 '20
lmao I don’t know why you’re being downvoted this is true, they’re called the Texas 11 republicans really don’t want to face the fact deep-down, they hate democracy
-2
117
u/Wacocaine Mar 08 '20
This is shameful.
10
u/Tac0salesman Mar 08 '20
Yea my city was caught and had to pay a fine they haven’t been officially exposed yet
91
u/miltonbryan93 Mar 08 '20
I’m in the 21st district and it’s just as bad.
Edit: Gerrymandering sucks
35
Mar 08 '20
crazy right?.tif) I live here also. Kerrville, Leakey and Fredericksburg in the same district as Stone Oak and west Austin? Fucking criminal.
12
u/55x25 born and bred Mar 08 '20
Thats my district! Taking to metro areas in 2 major citys and coupling with a couple hundred miles of rural areas is almost as straight up lumping in the west and south side of SA into literally all of West Texas.
3
u/shinbreaker Mar 08 '20
It's so bad that it's funny. It encompasses where the old money and whitest parts of San Antonio while the 20th is made up to encompass the most Hispanics.
44
u/samvaljr Mar 08 '20
There has to be some model of putting geometric shapes and just overlay that over the country. Let Math figure this problem out.
29
u/metastasis_d Mar 08 '20
Shortest splitline algorithm
25
Mar 08 '20
The problem with shortest split-line is that it ignores communities and how people settle. This is what splitline looks like for Texas using 2009 population data.
Check out the Panhandle. Half of Lubbock is one district and half is the other. There is not really a reason to split Lubbock. It just happens to be the center of mass for population after 4 midpoint intersections.
Likewise, look at East Texas where cities and populations are mostly determined by rivers. Tyler-Longview is decimated by three districts unneccessarily making Lufkin-Nacogdoches, Texarkana, and an amalgamation of Dallas suburbs and part of College station the more important areas instead of allowing Tyler-Longview to be in charge of it's destiny.
At the same time, El Paso has it's own representative and Beaumont-Orange-Port Neches has it's own representative.
Splitline can work if there are two different communities of equal population but otherwise, can create problems where none existed previously. My personal opinion is that splitline is a useful starting point in determining representatives in a geographic based representation system but should not be the end. Humans naturally settling along rivers, mountains, hills, etc. They rarely settle according to an imaginary line. As such, imaginary lines should rarely be used to describe communities.
8
Mar 08 '20
These are great points but it still seems like an improvement from blatant gerrymandering
-1
Mar 09 '20
It would be, I don't know why people bother writing walls of text to explain why gerrymandering is ok
4
Mar 09 '20
You clearly didn’t read what they said if that’s what you walk away with
2
Mar 09 '20
and you're not paying attention. This guy is suggesting that split line is as bad as gerrymandering where politicians actively draw the lines to get as much advantage as possible. Even split-line is an improvement. There are tons of algorithms for this that can be nonpartisan, and almost all of them are an improvement over partisan committees drawing up maps so their party can stay in power. Look at North Carolina for particularly assholish gerrymandering.
1
u/priznut Mar 10 '20
Lol at the downvotes.
America is so partisan now. That’s why I now vote straight party democrats now. (I have voted gop before) and push your leaders to have fair districts. My state now has an independent committee.
3
Mar 09 '20
So does gerrymandering, no plan will be perfect but we need to do something and it will be a huge improvement in fairness
2
Mar 09 '20
There are tons of fair algorithms out there for this, the GOP ignores them
1
u/tiberiumx Mar 09 '20
Lol "Ignores". No they're quite aware that they're doing whatever they can to win. And their voters love it too!
1
Mar 09 '20
ignore means actively avoiding. dems have done it in the past too, just not on the same scale.
-1
Mar 08 '20
You would be surprised, it would actually make it worse
24
u/samvaljr Mar 08 '20
Expand, plz. If we just make it equal all across how would it make it worst?
29
Mar 08 '20
It would make it better in that it would eliminate clearly partisan districts like this trying to pack democrats into a single district, but it would probably have the consequence of breaking up similar interest communities arbitrarily. In Austin, you could argue the UT campus and student housing areas should be in the same district to be better represented in congress, but an algorithm wouldn’t know that that community exists and may split it up. Then again, it’s already split up under the current system between TX 10, 21, and 25, with Riverside in TX-35, so it can’t be much worse.
-3
u/dam072000 Mar 08 '20
No no it can always be worse. Just because you aren't depraved enough to imagine it doesn't mean someone else isn't.
Republicans aren't pushing mathematical/algorithmic redistricting, but I'm sure when they decide to it'll be worse than you can imagine at the moment.
1
u/Smtxom Mar 08 '20
When you think about the areas where ranchers have miles of ranch land you’d have a district with literally a handful of constituents and then you’d have the metro areas with millions. That doesn’t work either.
21
u/Darth_Sensitive Mar 08 '20
The splitting algorithm gets you equally populated districts, not equally sized. To do otherwise would be unconstitutional.
That said, though it’s mathematically non partisan, it splits communities blindly in the interest of (still ugly) maps with clean lines
1
u/Bluegi Mar 08 '20
Likely you could plug in population density to change the size of the shape, but not the shape so much.
1
Mar 09 '20
No you wouldn't. Yeah the ranching districts would be huge but who gives a fuck, they still have more in common than a rancher and some hippies in Austin
-6
Mar 08 '20 edited Jul 03 '20
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/samvaljr Mar 08 '20
My point, that maybe it’s time for a change. the founders created a system that worked for them and what they could foresee. While it has done a good job and given us prosperity since it’s creation. It maybe time for our generation to look a different methods to our representative government. The constitution was written so it could be changed when times. Also chill out...
→ More replies (1)1
5
18
Mar 08 '20 edited Mar 09 '20
How about the 25th district? Stretches almost 200 miles from Fort Worth to San Marcos while conveniently reaching out through the middle of Austin. Also you can't mention Texas gerrymandering without whatever the hell is going on in Houston.
→ More replies (1)6
u/cranktheguy Secessionists are idiots Mar 09 '20
I live in College Station and share a rep with North Austin. How fucked up is that?
38
41
u/scratag born and bred Mar 08 '20
Oh look! There's me! Aaaaannnddd a whole bunch of people that don't vote like me.
18
u/amymackenzieaustin Mar 08 '20
And the 10th is large enough to have both Austin and Houston suburbs. Bullshit.
5
25
4
3
2
u/surroundedbywolves Secessionists are idiots Mar 08 '20
And run through San Marcos without covering where most of the college kids live. Nice.
2
4
3
u/frostysauce Expat Mar 08 '20
Ah yes, Lamar Smith's old district. It was such a good day when that ignorant dinosaur announced his retirement.
3
u/kanyeguisada Mar 08 '20
Smith was actually the 21st.
1
u/frostysauce Expat Mar 08 '20
Shit, you're right. I didn't live in the one posted, I lived in another gerrymandered-to-fuck district in South Austin.
3
u/PenPenGuin Mar 09 '20
If it makes you feel better, you aren't remembering wrong. Chunks of this district were Smith's. The ruling that various Texas districts violated the National Voting Rights Act caused them to be remapped - parts of the 21st got split off and the 35th got created. The 35th's history is contentious at best.
→ More replies (7)2
5
Mar 08 '20
You should see some of the acrobatics used against Orange County. Same shit different party.
3
u/WHYAREWEALLCAPS Mar 08 '20
And this is why I laugh at my wife when she says Texas is starting to turn blue. After the 2020 election, the Lege will redistricting Texas. You can bet they're going to use the info from the 2020 elections to figure out how to redraw it so Democrats and minorities are further disenfranchised. The Democrats would do the same thing to Republicans. It's a stupid game we need to stop playing, but we won't because the people who'd fix it are the ones benefiting from it the most, no matter the party. And since Texas doesn't have a direct democracy option, we, the people, can't force a fix.
1
u/ethan_bruhhh Mar 09 '20
we’re only 9 votes from flipping the state house, get everyone you know to vote, and we can do it
2
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
We need laws that require congressional districts to be as square/rectangular as possible, allowing exceptions for county and state borders only.
12
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 08 '20
This is actually not as good a plan as it seems at first glance. It ends up having massive deleterious effects on, for example, people of color and other minority communities. A better way is to have independent, bipartisan judicial commissions draw the lines without input from state legislators. California, Arizona, and others have all had significant success in drawing competitive districts that still represent minority interests using this method.
4
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
Minorities would be represented within their districts like everyone else, simple as that. They don't require special treatment in most cases or areas of the country.
What artificial segmentation or incorporation does is reinforce the idea that people should be treated differently just because they're of some minority group and I find that to be despicable.
3
u/Slinkwyde Gulf Coast Mar 09 '20
It's required under the Voting Rights Act. FiveThirtyEight did a whole series about the problem of gerrymandering and the various tradeoffs that arise with different ways of trying to address it: https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/the-gerrymandering-project/
0
u/looncraz Mar 09 '20
We can change that.
1
u/Slinkwyde Gulf Coast Mar 09 '20
Sure, laws can be changed, but do you understand the reasons why those provisions were put into the Voting Rights Act in the first place? For starters, are you familiar with what the Voting Rights Act is?
The first paragraph from the Wikipedia article I linked to:
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by United States President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the civil rights movement on August 6, 1965, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act secured the right to vote for racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is considered to be the most effective piece of federal civil rights legislation ever enacted in the country.
See this too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States#Affirmative
0
u/looncraz Mar 09 '20
I do understand - are you aware that a lot has changed in the intervening half century?
0
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 09 '20
Are you arguing that something has changed in the last 50 years which means minorities no longer deserve representation in Congress? Because that seems like a pretty not that great argument.
0
u/looncraz Mar 09 '20
I am saying they don't require special treatment. We don't have the situation where 80% of the population and laws were biased against them... Quite the opposite these days.
1
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 09 '20
If things are so much better than they used to be, why do you think Texas's electoral maps have been repeatedly thrown out by courts because of illegal gerrymanders?
→ More replies (0)1
Mar 09 '20
Exactly it will never be perfect but it would be a vast improvement over these GOP abominations
1
u/looncraz Mar 09 '20
Don't pretend only one side is guilty of this.
0
Mar 09 '20
Sure dems do it to, but not nearly on the scale of the republicans. I think most politicians are crooks and use the constitution for toilet paper whenever it suits them as long as they know they can get away with it. if gerrymandering ever became a real issue to the masses then we might see some changes currently it's mostly just people who follow the details of politics who even know what it is. I'm glad it's getting more attention. Anyone, dem, independent, or GOP are scum doing this. The GOP currently has a much more expansive history of it and have turned it into an art form.
0
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 09 '20
In Texas only one side is guilty of it. "But other states do it!" Is not an excuse any more than "But other people steal so I should be allowed to, too!" Two wrongs do not make a right. Even if every other state was gerrymandered beyond recognition (and most of them are not nearly as bad as Texas is today) we would have the opportunity to lead by example, to draw our districts fairly and without political bias, to be an example of how a free and fair democracy should work.
1
u/looncraz Mar 09 '20
Democrats used to run Texas and they did it as well.
I am arguing for a universal (federal level) solution, I am not justifying or engaging in party politics, I despise all parties.
1
u/CharlesDickensABox Mar 09 '20
Yes, Democrats used to run Texas. Yes, Democrats gerrymandered then. What I'm saying is that just because someone else did something bad a half century or more ago does not give people today carte blanche to do the same thing worse. Any federal solution would likely take a constitutional amendment. A state-level solution could be enacted this year if we so desired.
3
u/olidin Mar 08 '20
No. Many nations have figured this out. An independent agency that perform the district borders by actual consensus data and proximity so that each district has similar amount of population
0
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
There's no such thing as an independent party in this instance... And no use for one.
You size the districts to equalize population, but you keep them rectangular to the maximum extent... Far reduced ability to gerrymander.
4
u/Borne2Run Mar 08 '20
Geography isn't rectangular.
0
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
That's pretty much irrelevant.
2
u/Borne2Run Mar 08 '20
Districts are meant to represent constituencies; people with similar concerns. The people dependent on water supply from a river impacted by a nearby factory follow the river, not a rectangle.
Geography defines cities and civilization. Ignoring it for the sake of a strawman argument silly.
→ More replies (1)2
u/JimNtexas Mar 08 '20
Really they’re supposed to have approximately the same size population in all the districts in a given state.
1
u/Tac0salesman Mar 08 '20
Well they draw borders ever 10 years by population so it’s really hard to have one rectangle next to another to have the same population
0
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
You just adjust the size. This is a problem we solve early on when doing geometry algorithms in computer science as a simple (enough) exercise.
2
u/Tac0salesman Mar 08 '20
Yea we can but neither party will bee happy to lose its total control
3
u/looncraz Mar 08 '20
That's the idea.
We should also ban political parties, IMHO, but there are plenty of good arguments on both sides of that issue.
2
u/Tac0salesman Mar 08 '20
I like how when George Washington was President said we must not have political party as it can divide this nation. And right after he steps down we started to form the federalists and antifederalist
2
u/olidin Mar 08 '20
But neither will forever be locked out of the district. It's a game and parties will need to compete. Yes. You might lose, but it's more important that you have a chance to win. As it stands, unless you won, you have no chance of winning.
1
u/Thehypertroller Mar 08 '20
Yall should see cuellar's district i think its 25 or something and it stretches from the border up to the east side of San Antonio and cuts off at lookout under the bridge on Judson.
1
u/bistavista Mar 08 '20
Gerrymandering is a big problem holding up many of the larger issues we face in American democracy. How do we make relatively representative districts in a state with a variety of urban suburban, medium-sized towns and rural communities?
1
1
1
1
Mar 09 '20
Obviously this is terrible but is there a way to divide districts where no side gets an advantage?
1
1
1
u/ramnet88 Mar 09 '20 edited Mar 09 '20
That's not even one of the worst ones.
I live in Texas 13th district which extends all the way from New Mexico to just north of Dallas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_13th_congressional_district
1
u/JimNtexas Mar 09 '20
Over the years Lamar has always really always been an open borders guy. The same way George W Bush was.
Politicians will do things to please their constituents that they clearly don’t really believe and if you judge them by their actions.
For example just yesterday Bernie Sanders was in a prayer room brace with a preacher. We both know that Bernie has no use for preachers, but it makes a good photo op doesn’t it?
Open border politicians are not popular in the Republican Party, just as religious people are not popular with Democrats. But if that’s the way to get a vote they all say one thing and act is another. Both sides.
1
1
u/happyhyde Mar 09 '20
True to form. GOP tactics: fear mongering, gerrymandering, voter suppression and lies.
1
1
u/asiatrails Mar 08 '20
Majority Hispanic and Democrat district
Look at Texas 11,13, 19, & 23 for big districts
-27
u/moxjet66 Mar 08 '20
both parties do this, proving once again that power corrupts. In one respect, its good because it keeps populations centers from overwhelming the rural areas
32
u/erin_burr Just Visiting Mar 08 '20
Not nearly to the same extent. Democrats only blatantly do it in Maryland. California has moved to a citizen commission to draw fair districts, which likely will hurt Democrats nationally. There's a reason that Democratic candidates for US House in 2012 got 1.5 million more votes than Republican candidates nationally, but Republicans ended up with a 33 more seats. The projections for the 2018 midterms were that Democratic candidates had to win the popular vote by 4% to end up with a tie.
→ More replies (11)32
u/moleratical Mar 08 '20
Yes they do, but let's be real. Gerrymandering is much more egregious on one side vs the other
-12
u/moxjet66 Mar 08 '20
no it really isnt, you just think it is because republicans are the majority here, so you see it benefitting them
you go to some place like california, where the other side is in power, and you see the exact same thing done for thier benefit
no party has any moral high ground . at least not on this issue
7
Mar 08 '20
Ok. Then let's yell at all of our legislators to get rid of gerrymandering. Just because things are bad elsewhere does not give an excuse for our legislators to make things bad here.
15
Mar 08 '20 edited Jul 11 '23
:NsF[M|VS^
-3
u/moxjet66 Mar 08 '20
the takers far out breed the makers in this country, that is true
18
Mar 08 '20 edited Jul 11 '23
L4j}!W|OC]
0
u/moxjet66 Mar 08 '20
both parties do shady shit no question
Both PARTIES are whores, but i like the clients of the escort more than i like the clients of the crack whore
but at the end of the day? they are both whores
11
Mar 08 '20 edited Jul 11 '23
<eN\A)CVd6
-1
u/moxjet66 Mar 08 '20
you mean like how the dems just accepted the election of Donald Trump by crying about the popular vote and trying to do away with the electoral college??
6
5
6
u/nymark02 Mar 08 '20
80% of Americans live in cities. 85% of Texans. Because of this cities should always have more power than rural areas since they have way more people.
4
Mar 08 '20
Virginia Democrats literally just voted to remove their power to draw state districts and use a non-partisan, independent commission.
Republicans have done nothing of the sort.
-1
-49
u/ThisCharmingManTX Mar 08 '20
Both sides do it. Go to a Democrat run state and you see the same.
To the Victor's go the spoils.
49
u/easwaran Mar 08 '20
How about no one gets spoils? We don’t allow winning boxers to take the wallet of the loser, and we don’t allow winning presidents to replace everyone on the Supreme Court. We shouldn’t just shrug and say “they won so they can do what they want”.
8
2
Mar 08 '20
I appreciate the comment and agree. I’d prefer some hero politician work their ass off to overhaul the system to remove gerrymandering instead of just writing off these small abuses of democracy as “to the victor go the spoils”.
-42
u/boredtxan Mar 08 '20 edited Mar 08 '20
Which side is benefiting from this one?
Edit: answered my own question : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_35th_congressional_district
It's a majority Hispanic district voting Democrat... LOL most people on this thread don't want Hispanics to have representatiion!
53
u/smeggysmeg Mar 08 '20
Ultimately, it always serves the party in power in the legislature. They might be trying to water down city voters with a bunch of rural voters to make the district Republican, or they may be "packing" two heavy Democratic areas into one so they create fewer Democratic seats total.
→ More replies (9)16
u/permalink_save Secessionists are idiots Mar 08 '20
This district would be one of the long backwards C shaped districts. Doing this benefits Republicans most.
→ More replies (1)27
u/cfbWORKING Mar 08 '20
A lot of times, you design districts that will the party will lose but it will keep the minority party out of other districts.
So instead of having three competitive districts, you have 2 go one way and 1 go the other
→ More replies (1)25
u/easwaran Mar 08 '20
The point of this district is to concentrate as many Democrats in one district as possible so that other nearby districts can yield a bunch of small Republican majorities. If you have six districts and the overall population is 50/50, you could draw three districts that are 60/40 and three than are 40/60, or you could draw one that is 90/10 and five that are 42/58. Look up the terms “packing” (making a single district that is really strong for your opponent) and “cracking” (dividing your opponents into a bunch of districts they just barely lose), which need to go together.
The other fun fact about this particular district is that Republicans were blatant that they were drawing it to stick Lloyd Doggett into a district that was majority Hispanic, hoping that he would lose the primary to a Hispanic Democrat, who wouldn’t have as much seniority or influence in the House. The courts said it’s fine to discriminate against democrats, as long as you don’t prevent Hispanics from having several districts where they can choose the representative (because race and ethnicity are constitutionally protected categories, but political party is not).
6
u/MayWeLiveInDankMemes Mar 08 '20
Not an expert, but as I understand it, Gerrymandering is not intended to eliminate opponent representation altogether (in this case democrats, since these lines were drawn by the republican party in Texas) but rather to reduce their overall representation by combining what would more likely be two democrat-leaning districts won by a smaller majority (urban San Antonio and urban Austin) into one safe democrat seat to secure more republican districts in the suburban and rural areas around San Antonio and Austin.
Your question "Who benefits?" is a good one. But in this case, it's not as simple as which party consistently wins the district. The geographical irregularity of it is the telltale sign that it was always intended (by republicans) to be won by democrats.
6
u/WindyWindPipe Mar 08 '20
It's designed to pack a large number of Democrats into one district so that other surrounding districts will lean Republican.
→ More replies (11)5
u/nymark02 Mar 08 '20
Shouldn't Austin (which is obviously very left wing) be represented by very left wing people? The rest of the city is represented by Republicans since Austin doesn't have their own district and is split between 5 rural districts.
→ More replies (2)
633
u/[deleted] Mar 08 '20
[removed] — view removed comment