this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
173 points (98.3% liked)

politics

31138 readers
2740 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Californian here.

It’s also worth noting that there is already a lot of GOP money flooding into the state to spread misinformation about this.

I got 3 flyers in my mailbox 2 days after Newsom allowed this to go to the voters. Two were from the state Republican Party, another was from a radical billionaire who loves Trump. Both were masked with some stupid PACs designed to look like centrists were behind the messaging.

I’m also getting a shitload of YouTube ads against it.

I’m not seeing ANY messaging counteracting the GOP propaganda.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the only positive spin I received is from Newsom dropping ads on YouTube. Got a couple negative flyers as well.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago

FWIW I do get a fair amount of ads from Newsom asking for donations and talking about the redistricting measure on the ballot. I also get that fucking Kristi Noem ad that makes me feel violence in my heart.

[–] credo@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For those out of the loop, since this headline doesn’t fully describe the situation:

California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom seeks to counter Texas Republicans’ congressional redistricting efforts by temporarily abandoning the Golden State’s nonpartisan congressional district-drawing process in favor of maps that would increase Democratic representation.

[…]

"We’re also announcing as a consequence of this effort, a commitment to national independent redistricting," Newsom said during Cohen’s Aug. 17 podcast episode. "That’s on the ballot as well. We believe it’s the right thing to do. In fact, the Democratic Party believes it’s the right thing to do. Democrats have voted for national independent redistricting. Republicans have not."

[–] hash@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We voted for independent redistricting in Utah a while back. They turned our progressive stronghold into the center of a pinwheel, but recently a judge ruled against that map. Utah is probably gonna be 3rd after Texas and Cali in a lot of these headlines soon, even though we only have one seat in dispute and the most cut and dry redistricting situation.

[–] uid0gid0@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

We had the opposite effect in Michigan. After our committee got done redrawing the districts, the next election brought the legislature in line with how the voting percentages stack up in statewide voting. https://votersnotpoliticians.com/how-redistricting-helped-democrats-flip-michigan/

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago

I think the key term here is "independent."

Prior to the current episode, Democrats wanted fair redistricting that would provide for the most equitable results.

This is what Republicans are, and have always been, against.