According to Wikipedia, San Juan County ranks 24th in area among the counties in the country. San Bernardino County in California, the largest county by area, is about 2 1/2 times larger. (Alaska, by the way, has ‘boroughs’, rather than counties. 10 of those 22 boroughs are larger than San Bernardino County.)
This entire thread is about the divide between Navajos and whites. In a county where American Indians have a slight majority over whites, the issue was that whites historically have had a 2 out of 3 majority on the county commission. This was reversed after the last election, which occurred after the districts were redrawn. So, yes, for the purpose of the discussion in this thread, I think we can all agree that ‘the main divide’ is Navajo vs white.
I don’t see how the former gerrymandering is relevant. If the districts had always been drawn this way, would you allow secession?
I also don’t see how the racism of the people is relevant. If they weren’t racist would you allow the secession?
Just a bunch of sanctimonious BS if you ask me. Will you force these people into your jurisdiction or not?
Yes, you. You just made a post pointing out that, even with the large number of Native Americans, the county was still Republican by a significant margin, and so there was no reason for there to be a partisan gerrymander. So I pointed out that that means that the gerrymander must have been for other reasons.
I don’t think there was a gerrymander at all. I disagree with the Obama-appointed judge on that point. The county votes ~60% Republican and Republicans had 2 of the the 3 County Commission seats. How many seats do you think that 60-40 split should have resulted in being controlled by each party? You think 2 Dems vs 1 Rep is the non-gerrymandered result?
You disagree with the Republican judge that was nominated at the recommendation of Orrin Hatch, and who Mike Lee fawned over as “a preeminently qualified lawyer with a very distinguished career both within and outside the legal profession. He’ll be an outstanding judge, and I look forward to his confirmation.” Nice try with the ad hominem, bud.
Basically, it shows that the new boundaries created one strongly Republican district, one strongly Democratic district, and one that seems to be more or less a swing district. That sounds mostly fair to me, but I’m not tied to any outcome in this county so long as the borders drawn aren’t racist and are generally fair.
But like Chronos, I can’t figure out why you seem to be pursuing the line of “it isn’t politics” (my words) when the only other explanation that seems apparent is race.
Only if you have the most facile understanding of the philosophy imaginable. The “outcome they want” has to do with forcing other individuals into an involuntary political jurisdiction.
A county that’s 60% Republican, with fair elections, I would expect Republicans to usually control two of the three seats, but sometimes only one. This election does not refute that. The current situation might or might not be a partisan gerrymander in favor of the Democrats.
A county that’s majority Native American, with fair elections, I would expect the Native Americans to usually control two of the three seats, but sometimes only one. All of the history of this district, when there has consistently been only one Native American seat, does refute that. The previous situation was definitely a racial gerrymander in favor of the white people, and shouting “It’s not a partisan gerrymander!” means absolutely nothing.
The Navajo do not vote at the same rate as the non-Navajo population. That’s the main reason why we’ve got a county that’s ~51% American Indian population but only 40% Democrat votes.