Spamdex - Spam Archive

Report spam

Send in your spam and get the offenders listed

Create a rule in outlook or simply forward the spam you receive to questions@spamdex.co.uk

Also in e.nymag.com

The Second-Worst President of the Millennium

Columns and commentary from the "New York" and Daily Intelligencer political teams, plus breaking news from New York and around the world.
 
 
FOLLOW US    
 
TODAY’S CHAT: Maundering About Gerrymandering
 
Today’s Top Stories
 
 
1.
The Case for Impeaching Clarence Thomas
 
It’s time to reexamine the evidence that he not only committed serial sexual harassment, but lied about it.
 
By Jill Abramson
 
 
 
2.
 
Americans Invented Modern Life. Now We’re Using Opioids to Escape It.
 
The scale and darkness of this epidemic is a sign of a civilization in a more acute crisis than we knew.
 
By Andrew Sullivan
 
 
 
3.
 
The Stoneman Douglas Students Are the New Faces of Gun Reform
 
Their fierce moral urgency is the jolt the movement needs.
 
By Benjamin Hart
 
 
 
4.
 
Could Trump Actually Shift the Gun Debate?
 
He may be uniquely positioned to do so, but his erratic response to the Parkland shooting suggests gun-control advocates should focus elsewhere.
 
By Margaret Hartmann
 
 
 
5.
 
Trump Offers Endorsement, Romney Caves Immediately
 
After claiming that knowing what he knows now, he would have rejected Trump’s support in 2012, Romney accepted his new endorsement in under an hour.
 
By Margaret Hartmann
 
 
 
6.
 
Can You Revise a Book to Make It More Woke?
 
When a YA novel was criticized for racism prior to publication, the author attempted something radical — she pushed its release date and rewrote it.
 
By Lila Shapiro
 
 
 
7.
 
Trump: Why Didn’t Obama Stop the Hacking That I Abetted?
 
When the criminals taunt the cops for failing to have prevented their crime.
 
By Jonathan Chait
 
 
 
8.
 
Trump Advocates for Good Old-Fashioned Gerrymandering
 
As usual, subtlety is not the president’s strong suit.
 
By Benjamin Hart
 
 
 
9.
 
Trump Blames Florida School Shooting on Russia Investigation
 
“It always has to be about you,” one student responded, “how silly of me to forget.”
 
By Chas Danner
 
 
 
10.
 
Survey of Presidential Politics Experts Says Trump Is the Worst of All Time
 
This seems just a tad bit premature.
 
By Benjamin Hart
 
 
 
SLACK Chat:
 
Maundering About Gerrymandering
 
I’m your humble host and editor Ezekiel Kweku, and today I’m talking with two members of New York's politics team — Jonathan Chait and Ed Kilgore — about why gun-control legislation is difficult to pass.
 
Ezekiel:   The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently ruled that the PA GOP must draw a new congressional map, and SCOTUS is due to hear a bit gerrymandering case in Wisconsin. What’s the big-picture take here?
Jon:   The biggest big-picture point, I think, is that there is constitutional pressure on gerrymandering nationwide. Just as Baker v. Carr forced districts to have equal population, ending a major source of overrepresentation for rural America, we may be headed toward some limits on gerrymandering, which would somewhat equalize the advantage rural and red America has in legislatures at both the state level and Congress.
Ed:   Traditionally, partisanship was considered a perfectly legitimate (constitutionally at least) grounds for drawing a map. So long as you followed the Baker v. Carr equality of population guidelines, and didn’t run afoul of the Voting Rights Act, you could do what you wanted.
Jon:   Two new trends have changed the old calculation: (1) The growing urban-rural partisan split, which makes it easier to pack Democrats into vote sinks, and (2) technology that enables more precise gerrymandering. It's just so obvious now that mapmakers have all the control.
Ed:   And in reaction, social scientists have devised a measurement of partisan vote dilution — called the “efficiency gap” — to give judges an objective standard for excessive gerrymandering.
Jon:   Zooming back in to Pennsylvania, if it's a big Democratic wave, it won't make a huge difference. But the map puts a floor on Democratic gains. And as Ed indicates, we are developing empirical tools to measure gerrymandering, which are giving judges some guidelines to creates remedies.
Ed:   Getting back to the law, SCOTUS will consider lower-court decisions finding excessive partisan gerrymandering in two states some time this term. The decision, like so many others, will probably come down to Kennedy. But as a sort of appetizer, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found its state’s congressional map to be an unlawful partisan gerrymander under the State Constitution. Using the kind of logic (and measurements) that supporters of reform are hoping SCOTUS adopts, particularly for the Wisconsin case.
Ezekiel:   Any premonitions about where SCOTUS will land? What do your visions say? Tea leaves? Trick knees?
Ed:   Like I said: It’s up to Kennedy to decide whether the “efficiency gap” is a workable standard in such cases. If not, I’m guessing the social scientists need to go back to the drawing board. Ezekiel: How worried, generally, are folks that the tools for analyzing gerrymandering are becoming more algorithmic and less intuitive for laypeople to understand, given that judges are laypeople?
Ed:   Well, there’s a real fear that Kennedy will say, “I don’t get it.”
Jon:   It seems like a real possibility.
Ed:   There’s a side issue, too: PA legislators have been trying to get SCOTUS to overturn the PA court’s decision on grounds that the U.S. Constitution gives legislatures the sole power to draw maps. This effort failed a couple of weeks ago, when Justice Alito (the justice with jurisdiction over emergency appeals from this particular state) said no to an appeal for a stay. But they’re still trying, focusing now on alleged due-process violations by the elected Democrats of the state court. It’s probably not going to work, since SCOTUS doesn’t really want to get into the business of second-guessing state constitutions.
Ezekiel:   Big picture again for a second — is gerrymandering more or less important than people appreciate? Are we looking at seismic shifts, marginal ones, or is it hard to say?
Ed:   Depends. We are in a strange moment when largely Democratic voting states are operating under egregiously Republican maps in states with a lot of changing dynamics, thanks to the 2010 elections, just prior to the last decennial redistricting. Florida, Pennsylvania, and Michigan are pretty extreme situations. And while most people are focused on the 2018 impact for obvious reasons, more important will be the impact on the new round of mapmaking that begins in 2021. Excuse me, add Wisconsin to the list of egregious GOP gerrymanders.
Jon:   It's less important than Democratic activists think, but more important than the general public thinks.
Ezekiel:   Do either of you have a ballpark figure about the number of House seats at stake here, generally?
Ed:   In PA and the two states where SCOTUS will hear cases, maybe six or seven (and in Maryland, it’s a Democratic gerrymander in question). If expanded nationally, yeah, it could be 15 to 20, but it all depends on what we are comparing it to.
Jon:   If SCOTUS made an aggressive anti-gerrymandering ruling, I think it's on the order of 10 to 15 nationally. Maybe 22, per the AP.
Ed:   Hah, hadn’t seen the AP estimate, but I was close! We may be on the brink of a big change in redistricting reform from procedural stuff like independent commissions and pretty maps to a constitutional requirement of partisan fairness. All depends on SCOTUS at this point, but the PA Supreme Court pointed the way.
 
 
 
WE HAVE A FAVOR TO ASK:
 
We've made some changes to our newsletter, including adding a short "chat" between members of our political team.
Please tell us what you think.
 
 
 
Read More on Daily Intel
 
 
 
REACH THE RIGHT ONLINE AUDIENCE WITH US
For advertising information on e-mail newsletters please contact AdOps@nymag.com
This email was sent to
 
 
 
subscribe  |  nymag.com/daily/intelligencer  |  unsubscribe  |  privacy policy  |  nymag.com  |  manage preferences
 
 

---------------------------

All titles, content, publisher names, trademarks, artwork, and associated imagery are trademarks and/or copyright material of their respective owners. All rights reserved. The Spam Archive website contains material for general information purposes only. It has been written for the purpose of providing information and historical reference containing in the main instances of business or commercial spam.

Many of the messages in Spamdex's archive contain forged headers in one form or another. The fact that an email claims to have come from one email address or another does not mean it actually originated at that address! Please use spamdex responsibly.


Yes YOU! Get INVOLVED - Send in your spam and report offenders

Create a rule in outlook or simply forward the junk email you receive to questions@spamdex.co.uk | See contributors

Google + Spam 2010- 2017 Spamdex - The Spam Archive for the internet. unsolicited electric messages (spam) archived for posterity. Link to us and help promote Spamdex as a means of forcing Spammers to re-think the amount of spam they send us.

The Spam Archive - Chronicling spam emails into readable web records index for all time

Please contact us with any comments or questions at questions@spamdex.co.uk. Spam Archive is a non-profit library of thousands of spam email messages sent to a single email address. A number of far-sighted people have been saving all their spam and have put it online. This is a valuable resource for anyone writing Bayesian filters. The Spam Archive is building a digital library of Internet spam. Your use of the Archive is subject to the Archive's Terms of Use. All emails viewed are copyright of the respected companies or corporations. Thanks to Benedict Sykes for assisting with tech problems and Google Indexing, ta Ben.

Our inspiration is the "Internet Archive" USA. "Libraries exist to preserve society's cultural artefacts and to provide access to them. If libraries are to continue to foster education and scholarship in this era of digital technology, it's essential for them to extend those functions into the digital world." This is our library of unsolicited emails from around the world. See https://archive.org. Spamdex is in no way associated though. Supporters and members of http://spam.abuse.net Helping rid the internet of spam, one email at a time. Working with Inernet Aware to improve user knowlegde on keeping safe online. Many thanks to all our supporters including Vanilla Circus for providing SEO advice and other content syndication help | Link to us | Terms | Privacy | Cookies | Complaints | Copyright | Spam emails / ICO | Spam images | Sitemap | All hosting and cloud migration by Cloudworks.

Important: Users take note, this is Spamdex - The Spam Archive for the internet. Some of the pages indexed could contain offensive language or contain fraudulent offers. If an offer looks too good to be true it probably is! Please tread, carefully, all of the links should be fine. Clicking I agree means you agree to our terms and conditions. We cannot be held responsible etc etc.

The Spam Archive - Chronicling spam emails into readable web records

The Glass House | London | SW19 8AE |
Spamdex is a digital archive of unsolicited electronic mail 4.9 out of 5 based on reviews
Spamdex - The Spam Archive Located in London, SW19 8AE. Phone: 08000 0514541.