Robin, you’re a first-term Representative. Your office isn’t a given until at least one of these conditions is met:
– You’ve spent a decade or more in office making yourself useful to your party so you become “too important to lose” to them, and you get the national party’s unwavering support regardless of how your constituents feel
– Your district is gerrymandered to the point where it plays connect-the-dots with the people who consistently vote for you
– You’re a legacy admission with a famous surname in politics
That’s not how gerrymandering works. Gerrymandering is about playing connect-the-dots with the people who consistently vote against you in order to collect them all into very few districts while collecting the rest into groups that barely but reliably vote for you. The connect-the-dots games are for clustering your enemies in order to make their votes half as effective as the ones of your supporters.
Jon Rich
You’re talking about how gerrymandering works on a macro level, how districts are drawn, but Needful is talking about how it looks *inside* a reliably-gerrymandered district.
thejeff
David’s more right than not. Gerrymandered districts are generally drawn to get more seats rather than to make seats more secure. This means the seats of the party doing the gerrymandering are usually more at risk than those of the other party.
We are a very geographically divided country, mostly on rural/urban lines. Without gerrymandering many districts would be even more secure.
LookingIn
It’s both. In Massachusett 16 years ago the most powerful politician was brought down because he gerrymandered districts that did both of those- secured his own seat as his area changed dramatically from white-Irish poor to black poor moving the bulk of the population across the city line from the suburban white voters who paid his campaigns and other things… He tried to hide this irregularity and outright lie by creating several districts that were minority-majority districts but were still able to be headed by the same current representatives due to the lines being feet from their homes.
He went to federal prison, but most of the districts remained and the odd shapes were made ridiculous a few years afterward when the people they were designed to protect ended up resigning to take better jobs elsewhere
James Rye
Why in gods name do you allow your politicians to do that anyway? Why don’t you have an independent bureau for that to prevent gerrymandering?
Unfortunately, the foresight to have such an independent bureau was not had when the details of how voting would be handled was decided. We’re now stuck begging scraps of morals from the morally poor, as the only ones that can raise and legitimize such a bureau would be the very politicians that are abusing the gerrymandering and their ilk.
The US loves to spout ideals of “power to the people”, but the reality is that the people only have power unless enough politicians disagree with the people. The politicians we’ve voted into the various offices are our representatives, and essentially decide how we get to feel about things. Not literally, of course, but our power as the people is GIVEN to them. That’s what it means to have a representative. The representatives are meant to work toward the collective will of their constituents, but that’s rarely what happens.
The people of the US know there’s a gerrymandering problem, but the power to do anything about it has been given to those representatives in office who are least likely to do anything about it due to how they benefit. Our choices, as the people, are simple: let it slide or start a civil war. And pretty much no one wants a civil war, so we’re stuck letting it slide.
thejeff
Though to be fair, some states have established such bureaus and other policies. To the best of my knowledge, all such have been established under Democratic control.
There are states where Democrats still abuse gerrymandering, but it’s currently a far more effective tool for Republicans.
vincentmuyo
That, alongside lobbying being allowed, is why it’s important to be politically active in the US aside from just voting.
Cannonshop
Have you ever SEEN how ‘independent’ those ‘independent’ bureaus are? come on, did you miss the nineties and Kenneth Starr? “independent” generally means “appointed to protect the party currently in power.”
Heck, the FBI is just the sword-and-shield of the Democratic Party after 2008, it’s supposed to be independent of party loyalty, but in practice, it isn’t, and neither are most of those ‘non-partisan’ offices. (Particularly the ones that also must rely on machine politics either due to being appointed at the start of each term, or having to run for office on a general ballot. they might not SAY “republican” or “democrat”, but they’re just as reliant on the urban political machines as any actual, honest Democrat or Republican to retain their office.) Anywhere there is actual power to be had, someone will engineer it to serve the sitting powers that be.
Ben Smith
David, you’re being WAY too generous when you say “half.”
In Texas, Republican districts get SEVEN TIMES as many congressmen-per-thousand-voters as non-Republican districts.
LookingIn
on the contrary, it’s also done to keep certain politicians in office and prevent others from running again.
I’ve seen it done TWICE in adjacent districts. The two should have been districted together as the neighborhood that one lived in fell within the area that should have been in the neighboring representative’s district while that other representative should have been districted into a third district. This wouldn’t have been a problem, except the third district was that of the #2 in the house thus meant one of them had to go. So they changed the boundaries to make bulges while giving large tracts of empty space to each to make it look like the boundaries were close because of odd population centers. It’s a total load of BS but was accepted.
All-Purpose Guru
As a Texan, I can tell you *this*.
As a Californian I can *also* tell you *this*, but not to the degree of Texas.
Texas was originally a Democratic state until the democratic districts were all concentrated into a fewer group of districts so the Republican districts were able to overwhelm them.
It was so bad in Texas that there are still several districts that have to get approval from the Federal Government before their boundaries can be adjusted. This congressional oversight, as far as I know, has ONLY been exercised in Texas.
There are districts that spread out over wide areas and connected by little thin tendrils that actually follow the freeways. By doing this those districts have actually less representation in the government.
Yup. She’s said it before that she doesn’t *want* Robin to win, but she is getting paid to do a job that she will do to the best of her ability. Well, kind of, anyway. I don’t think she was trying all that hard in the dorm hallway.
To be fair, if she can actually get Robin to completely flip her voting record and go full left, and if Robin sticks with that once steered that way, then there’s no reason she wouldn’t WANT Robin to win at that point.
Needfuldoer
Whether Robin will stick to it is the question.
At least it will be almost like having a genuine left-leaning Rep in office for a few weeks.
Circeus
I think Robin will stick to it until more money comes her way for not doing so. She’s demonstrated having not so much a moral compass as a weather vane. She basically has no emotional investments in the results of her votes (or even in hardly any of her actual public statements).
Shen Hibiki
Exactly. As long as playing by the orange demon rules keeps her with a job, she’ll play along. As soon as something better comes her way though…
thejeff
Past a certain point though, there’s no turning back. The GOP base won’t easily forgive the rhetoric and leadership won’t forgive the votes or trust her again. Becky’s trapping her. Making her go back and actually vote these new principles is perfect.
Mind you, I think it also works against her winning reelection now. I don’t believe there’s a path for a Republican to beat an even vaguely viable Democrat by running against the base on pro-LGBTQ and leftist populism. She’s getting social media likes from it, but those aren’t necessarily votes. OTOH, it’s Robin and wacky hijinks are her path to victory.
John Smith
I still think there’s going to be a major scandal around the opponent that basically kills his campaign and leaves Robin the only candidate. So neither side trusts her but the other guy is in jail so…
thejeff
Possible, but then she would have won without Becky’s help
Chris Phoenix
…Wait, which orange demon? It took me a while to realize you weren’t talking about the real-life one. That was a pretty confusing few seconds.
Shade
Well she’s still a registered republican at this point, so the party might have something to say about it.
189 thoughts on “Credibility”
Ana Chronistic
“dawg, having to WORK to keep my job?? what’s THAT about” D=
Michelle J. Caboose
Unfortunately, I’ve worked with many people who had that attitude. :/
Needfuldoer
Robin, you’re a first-term Representative. Your office isn’t a given until at least one of these conditions is met:
– You’ve spent a decade or more in office making yourself useful to your party so you become “too important to lose” to them, and you get the national party’s unwavering support regardless of how your constituents feel
– Your district is gerrymandered to the point where it plays connect-the-dots with the people who consistently vote for you
– You’re a legacy admission with a famous surname in politics
David
That’s not how gerrymandering works. Gerrymandering is about playing connect-the-dots with the people who consistently vote against you in order to collect them all into very few districts while collecting the rest into groups that barely but reliably vote for you. The connect-the-dots games are for clustering your enemies in order to make their votes half as effective as the ones of your supporters.
Jon Rich
You’re talking about how gerrymandering works on a macro level, how districts are drawn, but Needful is talking about how it looks *inside* a reliably-gerrymandered district.
thejeff
David’s more right than not. Gerrymandered districts are generally drawn to get more seats rather than to make seats more secure. This means the seats of the party doing the gerrymandering are usually more at risk than those of the other party.
We are a very geographically divided country, mostly on rural/urban lines. Without gerrymandering many districts would be even more secure.
LookingIn
It’s both. In Massachusett 16 years ago the most powerful politician was brought down because he gerrymandered districts that did both of those- secured his own seat as his area changed dramatically from white-Irish poor to black poor moving the bulk of the population across the city line from the suburban white voters who paid his campaigns and other things… He tried to hide this irregularity and outright lie by creating several districts that were minority-majority districts but were still able to be headed by the same current representatives due to the lines being feet from their homes.
He went to federal prison, but most of the districts remained and the odd shapes were made ridiculous a few years afterward when the people they were designed to protect ended up resigning to take better jobs elsewhere
James Rye
Why in gods name do you allow your politicians to do that anyway? Why don’t you have an independent bureau for that to prevent gerrymandering?
Vandril
Unfortunately, the foresight to have such an independent bureau was not had when the details of how voting would be handled was decided. We’re now stuck begging scraps of morals from the morally poor, as the only ones that can raise and legitimize such a bureau would be the very politicians that are abusing the gerrymandering and their ilk.
The US loves to spout ideals of “power to the people”, but the reality is that the people only have power unless enough politicians disagree with the people. The politicians we’ve voted into the various offices are our representatives, and essentially decide how we get to feel about things. Not literally, of course, but our power as the people is GIVEN to them. That’s what it means to have a representative. The representatives are meant to work toward the collective will of their constituents, but that’s rarely what happens.
The people of the US know there’s a gerrymandering problem, but the power to do anything about it has been given to those representatives in office who are least likely to do anything about it due to how they benefit. Our choices, as the people, are simple: let it slide or start a civil war. And pretty much no one wants a civil war, so we’re stuck letting it slide.
thejeff
Though to be fair, some states have established such bureaus and other policies. To the best of my knowledge, all such have been established under Democratic control.
There are states where Democrats still abuse gerrymandering, but it’s currently a far more effective tool for Republicans.
vincentmuyo
That, alongside lobbying being allowed, is why it’s important to be politically active in the US aside from just voting.
Cannonshop
Have you ever SEEN how ‘independent’ those ‘independent’ bureaus are? come on, did you miss the nineties and Kenneth Starr? “independent” generally means “appointed to protect the party currently in power.”
Heck, the FBI is just the sword-and-shield of the Democratic Party after 2008, it’s supposed to be independent of party loyalty, but in practice, it isn’t, and neither are most of those ‘non-partisan’ offices. (Particularly the ones that also must rely on machine politics either due to being appointed at the start of each term, or having to run for office on a general ballot. they might not SAY “republican” or “democrat”, but they’re just as reliant on the urban political machines as any actual, honest Democrat or Republican to retain their office.) Anywhere there is actual power to be had, someone will engineer it to serve the sitting powers that be.
Ben Smith
David, you’re being WAY too generous when you say “half.”
In Texas, Republican districts get SEVEN TIMES as many congressmen-per-thousand-voters as non-Republican districts.
LookingIn
on the contrary, it’s also done to keep certain politicians in office and prevent others from running again.
I’ve seen it done TWICE in adjacent districts. The two should have been districted together as the neighborhood that one lived in fell within the area that should have been in the neighboring representative’s district while that other representative should have been districted into a third district. This wouldn’t have been a problem, except the third district was that of the #2 in the house thus meant one of them had to go. So they changed the boundaries to make bulges while giving large tracts of empty space to each to make it look like the boundaries were close because of odd population centers. It’s a total load of BS but was accepted.
All-Purpose Guru
As a Texan, I can tell you *this*.
As a Californian I can *also* tell you *this*, but not to the degree of Texas.
Texas was originally a Democratic state until the democratic districts were all concentrated into a fewer group of districts so the Republican districts were able to overwhelm them.
It was so bad in Texas that there are still several districts that have to get approval from the Federal Government before their boundaries can be adjusted. This congressional oversight, as far as I know, has ONLY been exercised in Texas.
There are districts that spread out over wide areas and connected by little thin tendrils that actually follow the freeways. By doing this those districts have actually less representation in the government.
TachyonCode
Beelzebub has a plethora of devils put aside for her.
Mada
That moment when Becky actually turns out to be good at her job.
DailyBrad
Yup. She’s said it before that she doesn’t *want* Robin to win, but she is getting paid to do a job that she will do to the best of her ability. Well, kind of, anyway. I don’t think she was trying all that hard in the dorm hallway.
LeslieBean4shizzle
To be fair, if she can actually get Robin to completely flip her voting record and go full left, and if Robin sticks with that once steered that way, then there’s no reason she wouldn’t WANT Robin to win at that point.
Needfuldoer
Whether Robin will stick to it is the question.
At least it will be almost like having a genuine left-leaning Rep in office for a few weeks.
Circeus
I think Robin will stick to it until more money comes her way for not doing so. She’s demonstrated having not so much a moral compass as a weather vane. She basically has no emotional investments in the results of her votes (or even in hardly any of her actual public statements).
Shen Hibiki
Exactly. As long as playing by the orange demon rules keeps her with a job, she’ll play along. As soon as something better comes her way though…
thejeff
Past a certain point though, there’s no turning back. The GOP base won’t easily forgive the rhetoric and leadership won’t forgive the votes or trust her again. Becky’s trapping her. Making her go back and actually vote these new principles is perfect.
Mind you, I think it also works against her winning reelection now. I don’t believe there’s a path for a Republican to beat an even vaguely viable Democrat by running against the base on pro-LGBTQ and leftist populism. She’s getting social media likes from it, but those aren’t necessarily votes. OTOH, it’s Robin and wacky hijinks are her path to victory.
John Smith
I still think there’s going to be a major scandal around the opponent that basically kills his campaign and leaves Robin the only candidate. So neither side trusts her but the other guy is in jail so…
thejeff
Possible, but then she would have won without Becky’s help
Chris Phoenix
…Wait, which orange demon? It took me a while to realize you weren’t talking about the real-life one. That was a pretty confusing few seconds.
Shade
Well she’s still a registered republican at this point, so the party might have something to say about it.
Deanatay
This places Robin in the camp of people who see normal, well-adjusted people as literally the devil.
Her campmate.
Doctor_Who
Next step on the campaign trail.
Mr. Random
There are a few questions.
Doctor_Who
Don’t question Becky’s process.
TrueVCU
I stan
ValdVin
A livestream of putting together an Ikea bookshelf?
Hey, the bad jokes write themselves. “What’s the deal with these Allen wrenches?”
Reltzik
“I dunno, but I think I’m supposed to answer with a Chuck E Cheese joke.”
Reltzik
…. or is that Chuck @ Cheese?
Stephen Bierce
Well, it certainly is NOT Chuck ヨ Cheese.
butts
chuck ∈ cheese
chuck is in cheese
Ana Chronistic
Chuck Σ Cheese
Michelle J. Caboose
Chuck Ξ Cheese
SillyGoose
As long as it’s not Chucky, cheers.
TrueVCU
Hey it worked for AOC
ValdVin
I know, but the exact same thing? I am trying to figure out what fits Robin’s personality.
I mean, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and all, but I just think something a bit different is called for.
Schpoonman
Video game livestream.
ValdVin
Ooh, that does sounds like her.
noiob
I heard that there’s a group of people who’d vote for a candidate who can beat the Beaver Bother minigame in DK64
Schpoonman
I will vote, no questions asked, for anyone who can complete DMC3 on Dante Must Die without getting hit.
Needfuldoer
How do you like my new campaign? I put it together myself, and I have all these pieces left!
Nono
Becky also buys Robin a wardrobe of flannel shirts. And a cat.
Danielle
becky, the power behind the throne
butts
the tyrion to her joffrey
Danielle
oh thats just mean! robins more of a robb
Rabid Rabbit
Oh heavens no. Far more of a Renly (up to and including the bisexuality).
butts
bold of you to assume i know more than three games of throne characters
butts
joke’s on me it’s actually four
1. tyrion dinklage
2. johnny snowden
3. joffrey bongortheon
4. uhh… dangerous tangerine
that’s it that’s all the throne gamers
Lawzlo
Boromir. You forgot Boromir.
butts
rip in peace, seam beam
Clif
There’s also Don Juan Winter whose activities keep being mentioned occasionally throughout the series.
Deanatay
Yeah, but Dangerous Tangerine died in the first book…
JBento
I thought dangerous tangerine was the POTUS? That’s non-fiction, regardless of how much I’d wish otherwise.
Ryek Hvek
Dangerous Tangerine aka The Mandarin, a nefarious double agent whose perfidy is exceeded only by his stupidity.
It could also relate to the Un-Funny Face powdered drink mixes. (another of the flavors is Gooper Grape)
JBento
Ok, that first paragraph doesn’t really exclude Trump, soooo…
Kyrik Michalowski
Huh, maybe this won’t be a trainwreck. I’m still expecting some form of catastrophe but maybe a smaller one. Carwreck maybe? Dirtbike collision?
Chronos
That just means the trainwreck will be later, but probably *much* worse.
Dean
A tricycle falling onto its’ side.
Opus the Poet
Looked for the classic Arte Johnson bit, but the only thing I could find was this homage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOLc3epArFM
Chronos
It made me think of the Jay Sherman Student Film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xslyoK9uobE
taekwondogirl
Robin really played herself, if you think about it.
Mr. Random
…. Considering how sheltered and catered a politician can be….
Yeah.
I’d watch it for a bit.
butts
“watch robin bang her hand and spew profanities for three hours”
sounds like a fun stream
Screwball
*Digs out a pencil and paper pad, gets ready to learn some new Earth English words, maybe a few other languages too…*
Reltzik
Robin, Ikea isn’t THAT bad.
…. livestreaming is, though.
ShinyNeen
Now now, Robin, if you keep protesting like that you’re only going to make Becky more powerful.
And she already seems to know exactly how to push you around, so…
Deathjavu