Food for thought: If 50 percent of the country doesn't vote...

[Hippo_Tron]

And even less in midterm elections, is there really such a thing as "safe" House seats? I wonder how effective Gerrymandering would actually be if 50 percent of the country wasn't apathetic.

[AntiCoup2K4]

1. That IS how Newt and the Pukes won in 1994 after all.

They took out a Contract on America and then herded their flock of sheep to the polls. And sheep they are, but at least they showed up.

[reichstag911]

2. even more than that are pathetic

Take that 50%, add repugs, you've got about 75.5+% pathetic.

[Igel]

3. Gerrymandering would be effective ... it would just be a

different gerrymander. All it requires is being able to reliably predict the outcome of the vote in a precinct with a given shape.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. I guess I mean the current Gerrymandering

I assume that when they draw the districts, they factor in that on average, 50% of the people won't vote. What if in one election, we got that other 50% (who are mostly people who have been hit hard by the Bush economy) out to vote? We'd have a supermajority in the House and we could do cool things like over-ride Bush vetos (he might actually have use that power) and make rules like, Tom DeLay isn't allowed to speak unless spoken to.