Conservative65
Gold Member
- Oct 14, 2014
- 26,127
- 2,208
- 265
- Banned
- #21
Since Lewis' district, one he's represented for 30 years, is in such a bad state, I'm claiming he hasn't done a very good job representing it. It's easy to see why he refuses to do anything. He can continue to get elected based solely on the make up it has and the color of his skin.
Let's look at my red state. It has 6 red districts and 1 blue district. That one blue district, one gerrymandered much like Lewis' with a built in guarantee for a black running, is the ONLY one is my red state where more than 1 in 5 get food stamps. In that ONLY blue district, the median income is just shy of $29,000. The closest red district has a median income of just over $36,000. That's a $7000 or approximately 25% difference. That blue district makes the rest of the red ones look bad.
Similar situation in Georgia. There are 3 of 63 district nationwide where more than 20% of the residents receive food stamps in Georgia. 2 of the 3 are represented by Democrats. The 5th district, that of John Lewis, is one of them and is majority black. The 2nd, represented by Sanford Bishop, also has a majority black population.
I also took another red state, Texas, at random. Texas also has 3 of the 63 district nationwide with >20% food stamp use. Interestingly enough, just like Georgia, 2 of the 3 are represented by Democrats.
To add to it, I also looked at NC. It has 2 of the 63 districts where >20% use food stamps. The 1st district is represented by G.K. Butterfield, a Democrat and is a majority black district. The 12th is represented by Alma Adams, a Democrat. While not majority black, it's damn sure close.
What that does is prove that the blue districts in those states are dragging the entire state down.
