Stoat
Taking science by the throat...
Profile
My family and me. More...
Search
Recent Posts
- More foam
- Sea ice forecasts
- Beach and River
- M1.25
- Poetry
- Foaming at the mouth with Joe Romm
- Sea ice: how to describe the possibility of a record?
- I feel better for that
- Mays
- 1:27 but wet
Recent Comments
- Magnus W on More foam
- Think N Trade on Hansen on cap-n-trade vs carbon tax
- Deep Cliamte on More foam
- Steve Bloom on More foam
- Deep Climate on More foam
- Magnus W on More foam
- Lab Lemming on Sea ice forecasts
- Anthony Watts on Sea ice forecasts
- Hank Roberts on Sea ice forecasts
- Hank Roberts on Foaming at the mouth with Joe Romm
Archives
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
Blogroll
- Back Seat Driving
- Bryan's Blog
- CIP
- Climate Feedback (Nature)
- QS/DA
- Deltoid
- Eli t Rabett
- FPA: climate change
- Framing Science
- Jeb
- John Fleck
- Only In It For The Gold
- Reality Check
- Real Climate
- RP Sr
- RP Jr
- Sagredo
- Some are Boojums
Other Information
| Co-moderator of globalchange mailing list | Subscribe to globalchange |
| Browse at groups.google.com | |
« Sea absorbing less CO2, scientists discover? | Main | Iron fertilisation »
Gerrymandering considered better than bombing?
Category: politics
Posted on: January 12, 2009 5:03 PM, by William M. Connolley
Comments
Was tried earlier in the decade. The Israeli Supreme Court threw it out. Besides this ain't gerrymandering, it's voter supression. (see the wiki)
[Yes yes I knew that, but its not such a cute word for a blog title -W]
Posted by: Eli Rabett | January 14, 2009 8:25 AM
Not that I think that parties should be banned - and I don't think they will be - but talking of your country as "they" doesn't exactly gives the image that they themselves consider to belong.
Posted by: avfuktning vind | January 14, 2009 9:00 AM
You could try Caging (look it up under voter supression)
Posted by: Eli Rabett | January 14, 2009 4:22 PM
My first reaction was "Oh, I didn't realise that the Arabs had a vote in Israel." But presumabley that does not include those on the West Bank and in Gaza.
My second point is that although 30% of the population are Arab, they only have about 5% of the seats in the Knesset. I thought that Israel had a propotional system, and that is why a few fundamentalist MPs could get elected and hold the government to ransom.
If that is true then banning two of the three Arab parties will "force" all Arabs to vote for the legal one, and should increase the overall Arab representation in the Knesset, since the Arab vote will no longer be split.
But then perhaps the Jews have gerrymandered the constituencies to prevent that.
Posted by: Alastair B. McDonald | January 15, 2009 4:15 AM
The Israeli supreme court threw it out again.
Posted by: Eli Rabett | January 21, 2009 10:21 PM
Alastair,
You are making the mistake of assuming that Israeli Arabs only vote for Arab parties. Many, I believe, vote for Labour or other left-Zionist parties.
Eli,
That's because this whole banning thing was political theatre, as Kadima tries to convince the Israeli public that they are as "tough" as Likud. There seems to be a wonderful positive feedback in Israel between the public and the politicians that is stoking anti-Palestinian or at least anti-Hamas fervor. (I make no comment on Hamas' contribution to this.)
Posted by: AntiquatedTory | January 27, 2009 10:33 AM