Jackson Jambalaya

Bennie is as sorry as they come for sure. But he has zero power. There are several incompetent numb nut republicans that I would rather see retired by the electorate.

“Should Republicans "redistrict" Congressman Bennie Thompson out of Congress?” Absolutely!

Every non-leftist, non-totalitarian should take seriously Democrat Purposeful Crime Party House Minority Leader (Walmart Obama) Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) statement “We are in an era of maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time” while describing his party’s efforts to draw state districts favoring Democrats.

But, we damned sure do not want to create 2 purple districts, so who do we believe?

Appears to me Mr. Perry, who has hoped for years that Thompson would be defeated...is now feeling a tinge of white-guilt. Does he now see Thompson as a cowering underdog who needs pity, support and prayers? Seems so.

To fall back on the notion that 'we can't do this since our voting process has already begun' is a coward's approach. Redrawing Thompson out of a job would be worth whatever effort it takes to legally move forward.

It's interesting how many of those wanting to be Bennie's pall-bearers now have cold feet, want to back off the opportunity and, as usual, want to punt the problem on down the road.

I'm sure Mr. Perry knows who will again become Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security should the democrats take the House in November. Not acting now to redraw Congressional Districts will grease the wheels for Thompson to assume that position.

Come November, leaving the districts as they are, will assure Thompson at least two more years in the House.

"Now is the time for all good men..."

This explains everything that you need to know about Bennie and the radical left wing of his party. https://youtube.com/shorts/MfT4-ljoUGE?si=yfHyhPc0ieMheVzQ

Speaking of 'numb nuts', that moniker damned sure describes whoever thinks Thompson has 'zero power'. To think he is powerless is absurd. He has nine lives and has only used six of them. If he takes back control of Homeland Security Committee next November, tell us again that he has no power.

And when Democrats take back the house by ONE member, it will be because Mississippi ran scared of Bennie Thompson.

Two purple districts won't be created. Period. Shad is correct to point out if that was remotely a possibility the Democrats would be eager to throw caution to the wind right now and support an immediate redraw -- so they could immediatelyt run on open borders, trans boys in girls sports, and the other far, far left policies their national party has embraced.

The Law of Unintended Consequences is a soundbite the Mississippi establishment Republicans like Pete employ to maintain their control grips on the party machinery. It is all about FUD and a tool to safe harbor the Democrats like Delbert Hosemann who infest the Mississippi GOP.

Pete also fails to mention that our stupid early qualifying deadlines and primaries are 100% about incumbency protection and nothing else. Mississippi Congressional Republicans fear primary challenges far more than they fear general elections because it gets exposed in primaries how often they are voting back with the Democrats back in DC. Gregg Harper's record of voting with Pelosi, for example, was scandalous.

But, but, but where Reeves is correct is Mississippi's process is well underway and to try and redraw now would only invite litigation that the state and those clamoring to redraw will likely lose.

Pete is a great and knowledgeable guy, but he's part of the weak Republican party status quo that's stood by and allowed the Democrat party to catapult this nation towards communism since the mid 90s by sticking to some set of principles the other side doesn't abide by. It's time for those like him to step aside and let the younger fighters like Shad White lead the fight against the left to force the left back towards the center left.

Pete has criticized the early qualifying deadline .

I’m not a Bennie fan. But it is to Mississippi’s benefit to have a Democrat in Congress to push the state’s interest to the executive branch when there is a Democratic president, assuming the Democrats ever get their act together enough to win again at some point in the future. I’d say the same thing if the roles of the parties in the state were reversed.

This might be more important now and in the future than in the past when there were more moderates, bipartisanship and deal making in government. I don’t see any benefit in having 1 more Republican congressman from the state unless it turned out to be a star. And let’s face it, we don’t have any stars there compared to the likes of Eastland, Stennis, Lott, Thad and Sonny Montgomery.

Shad what does this have to do with J6, quit kissing Trumps ass and go for what you do for Mississippian's! Now Shad I done told you!
PS
Trump ain’t gonna be here for ever! Get some balls of your own Shad!

"For years, courts forced Mississippi to draw districts where a majority of the voters were a racial minority."

-Shad White

1. Only one of four districts in Mississippi is majority-black, so this are no such "districts."

2. Did those courts also "force" the other three districts to be at least 60% white?

3. Should Mississippi just throw out the primary results, since they have already taken place? I think that actually might be illegal.

Bennie T is not my cuppa. He's a self serving racist thug and proved it in the J6 hearings. What long term positive improvement has he produced for MS, other than possibly encourage the DOJ/FBI to bust Lil Choke and Jody Owens?

The reasons given by those opposed to redistricting only validate why the Supreme Court ruled they way they did. And Bennie's supporters also conveniently forget that he has served in a re-drawn district. The court's ruling says that should never have been done, so Bennie should simply thank Christmas for coming and stop trying to flip race cards in all directions.

I doubt most of those negatively commenting have ever met Bennie Thompson. I served on a committee with him. He did his due diligence by researching the options and had impeccable manners and was always calm and pleasant. He's also very smart.
In truth, both political parties have their conscientious, hard workers trying to do the best for those they represent and their arrogant jerks who only represent their own interests.
I would remind you that the first Republican leaders in this State were gentleman and that's why Bill Buckley was their friend.
Being a loud, ill mannered jerk isn't strength, it's low class.

Reporter- "Mr Thompson, will we EVER Vote this flag away?"
Thompson- Oh no, you'll NEVER VOTE the flag away, you'll have to LEGISLATE the flag away".
What goes around comes around, eh Bennie?

Shad, in an effort to be mini-Trump, is actually anti-democracy. The 2nd Congressional District voted for Bennie. He's their choice. He has no right to attempt to remove the man because he doesn't like him. Move there and run, Shad.

I have nothing for Bennie, but this goes beyond how one may feel about him.

Shad: "...there are many ways to create maps with four districts in Mississippi that Donald Trump would have won by more than 15 percentage points in the last election."

You are providing evidence for the plaintiffs, should this ever happen.

While the recent ruling seems to say it's unconstitutional to gerrymander to create minority-majority districts, it would follow that it would be unconstitutional to gerrymander to create Trump districts. Also, Mississippi's situation with only four districts is a lot different than some of the other states.

But, Big Ears can bang the drum all he wants, it's the people currently in charge that must comply with the law. I've never been a big fan of Tate, but when he's right, he's right.

11:33 I hope you served your committee better than getting the point you just missed. It doesn't matter how nice Bennie is. This is about a gerrymandered district that the highest court in the land said should not have been redrawn that way.

11:00, clearly neither you, nor many of the other commenters here or Shad for that matter, have paid attention to what 'the courts', specifically the 11th Circuit, had to say about Alabama's attempt to redraw their second m/m district.

But since you missed it, by only using social media and TS for your news, they said NO to Alabama's desire to eliminate their court mandated district. Had to do with that little "discriminatory intent" language that Perry noted still survives Section 2 of the VRA.

And before you take the usual MAGA approach, the three judge panel that said "NO" included two Trump appointed Judges.

You and others also err in your saying "those opposed to redistricting". I never read anywhere that Perry claimed to be 'opposed to redistricting', nor was Reeves. The point was, and is, the legality and ability to redistrict NOW. Perry's entire column focused on the propriety of not following Shad's suggestion that it can, and must, be done immediately which is not feasible.

By the way, maybe you should actually read what the Supreme Court actually ruled, which is not that districts such as our 2nd is unconstitutional; that's totally off the mark of the actual ruling and in the court's language. But what the hell, most folks don't care about the details; clearly obvious from reading all of Shad's banter over this issue for a month.

11:55 the issue is how the district was re-drawn, that being to achieve a specific result. The Supreme Court just ruled that was unconstitutional to do it that way. The poll tax worked in a similar manner (to achieve a desired result) but that was wrong too.

... to remove the man ...

He isn't being removed. He'll seek re-election from a newly drawn district that will likely mirror much of his existing district.

The 2nd wasn't redrawn post-2020 to achieve a specific desired result. It was redrawn (primarily expanded southward) to maintain the status quo.

If he is smart, he sure didn’t show it for the Jan 6 commission or most of what he says in Congress.

10:21 asserts that it's in Mississippi's interest to have a democrat in congress 'to assert the state's interest'. My God, what is that poster smoking?

Please name ONE time, during Bennie's 33 years, it's been in this state's best interest to have him in congress.

May I have your permission to enter your comment in to the dumbest damn post of the year contest?

It's a guarantee that the governor will have pissed in his whiskey if he has any intention of seeking any other office dependent on Mississippi votes.

Whether you or I am opposed to the new flag or not, it's a fact that there are multiple thousands of voters who are still angry about the way Tate handled that.

Couple his flag debacle with leaving Bennie untouched will damned sure doom any dream Reeves has for other office.

And he knows this will be his legacy after all else is forgotten. "Yep, He was the governor who, when he had the chance..."

I have NO PROBLEM being represented in Congress by a Black person. It's that Bennie is the shabbiest member of that shabby institution. His conduct during the J6 hearings was disgraceful, an embarrassment to the state, and proved he's just a useful idiot for the Democrats.

I'm sure this expression of your sentiment is what will keep Tater up all night - for weeks on end; not! But I guess it makes you feel much better to spew off over 'the flag' from six years ago along with the 'multiple thousands' of our 1.8 million voters that are still angry over how "HE" handled it - along with the assistance of multiple thousands of voters throughout the state.

Believe whatever your lying eyes want to believe, as to what the result of a redistricting would be. Fact is, it would no doubt create two purple districts; now who would win those two districts is TBD, most likely would depend on the candidates.

Mr. Drane. It was my intent to let my speaking on this subject be contained in the article, but since you make such a damning misstatement, I have chosen to respond.

No, I have no feel, no tinge, of white guilt. I don't view Thompson in anyway as someone who needs pity or prayers. Sorry you evidently have trouble comprehending statements that don't fit your narrative or desire.

My comments posted have nothing to say about Thompson and whether he should stay in office or not; they only refer to the process of how, and more specifically WHEN, any changes should be made.

And following the law is not a coward's approach, but actually is a basic Republican principle. We are a party of laws, and not of men - just as the Jaycee Code from my younger days taught me.

Yes, I recognize that once the Dems take over the House this fall as it seems destined to be, thanks to some idiotic moves being made by my party in DC, Thompson will once again become Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security. And there is nothing that I can do about that other than vote and hope that my party gets its act better in line and retain a majority. But, again - I didn't speak to the consequences of following the law, just the fact that the law does exist and in Mississippi, we have no choice.

I'm sure when you wished for a unicorn for Christmas and didn't get it you had the opportunity to come to realize that no matter how much you might want something in life it doesn't mean you can have it. That's where we are in Mississippi in May 2026 - we don't have the opportunity to do anything to our congressional districts to be in place for November 2026.

And as to 9:52's comments - I didn't support at the time and don't support today our state's early qualifying period that were put into place as an incumbency protection plan. But, just because I didn't support them doesn't mean that they don't exist. As said above, they are the law and we are supposed to be a party supporting law and order; unlike evidently some other folks, I don't have the authority to change any of these laws.

Dr Drane put that in your pipe and smoke it!

Hey Roger Wicker, your buddy Cornyn got SMOKED.

Although I wish Shad was right, he is not. Pete Perry is absolutely correct in what he says about why The Governor is wise not to call a special session now. The litigation would quickly undo that result. So we can want something to be true, but that does not make it so.

Mississippi is purple. No matter what your bubble tells you.

Once again the solution to the problem is term limits.

Pete Perry said: “we are supposed to be a party supporting law and order.”

Democrats lost the House, Democrats the Senate, Democrats lost the White House, and Democrats lost the SCOTUS, all via elections. And afterwards, what does the Democrat Purposeful Crime Party tell their criminal constituents to do? They say put your body on the line. They say you might have to do something. They say you might have to make some sacrifices. And their criminal constituents listen, and resort to violence.

Like 5-year-olds Democrats want what they want and they care nothing for the law, except when it benefits them to do so. So, if or when the Democrat Purposeful Crime Party takes control of all U.S. Federal Government branches, and as an example, let’s say they provide federal funding for, and make it mandatory that all pre-school aged children participate in “Drag Story Hour.”

Will Republicans remain spineless? Or will they take Hakeem “Walmart Obama” Jeffries’s statement “We are in an era of maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time” seriously?

Benny is and has been Mississippi’s clown for years. One thing I’m glad about is he no longer represents me. But u can bet the republicans aren’t much better. They will gerrymander and put in the person they deem worthy. This is a good ole boy state and the politicians are in for themselves. And Mississippians continue to vote what their leaders tell them to do. While politics is nasty everywhere, there are better places that aren’t so corrupt. And the representatives act and look more like me.

7:48 AM, the fact that you think its ok for the Democrat Purposeful Crime Party to “gerrymander,” but it’s not ok for Republicans to get into the gutter with Democrats and gerrymander as well, proves our Education System just Is Not Working.

7:59: Do you get paid a commission for every time you post online the phrase "Democrat Purposeful Crime Party"?

7:59 - in states where democrats control the process, they do draw districts to their advantage, just as republicans do in states where they are in control (except on both levels, some states have independent commissions established to conduct the process and in those states neither have a particular advantage, except of course this year where a couple of those states, both republican heavy, overruled their independent commissions and drew new lines for their benefit).

I don't see where 7:48 made any such claim as you attribute to him and whatever this DPCP you refer to but I assume that 2:22 must be on track in his question - you are only throwing out the talking points from MAGA HQ without even having a comment made where you can use this 'response'. But that is ok because most of the comments on this post have not been made in response to the question - whether Mississippi should have attempted to redistrict and hold new elections prior to November 3rd - rather, they all seem to do nothing but spew their hatred of Bennie Thompson.

There's a difference between propriety and legality. Mr. Perry, as usual, waxes eloquently and holds his own as a part time comedian; however, he never bothers to cite any law or any federal or state constitutional authority that prohibits redistricting any time they wish, between the ten year censuses.

Between waxing, in fact, he states that he's only interested in 'following the law'.

If he thinks that redistricting now would be unwise, fine, say that. But to claim it's illegal, unless he can cite current law to that effect, he's wrong.

Here's all I could find, but I don't pretend to be a lawyer:

"Does Mississippi law explicitly prohibit mid-decade congressional redistricting? No, Mississippi law does not explicitly prohibit mid-decade congressional redistricting.

The state's legal framework surrounding this issue includes:

Lack of Restriction: Neither the Mississippi Constitution nor state statutes contain provisions that ban the legislature from redrawing congressional boundaries between federal decennial censuses.

Legislative Authority: In Mississippi, congressional lines are drawn as a regular statute by the Standing Joint Legislative Committee on Reapportionment & Redistricting and passed by the legislature, subject to a gubernatorial veto. Because there is no specific mid-decade restriction, the legislature retains the authority to pass new maps at any time."

Of the states that have recently redistricted in order to get under the November wire and those on the verge of doing so, have any of them already held primaries? Not sure, but it doesn't appear to be illegal if they have. All the states falling into those two categories, are, no doubt, lawyered up beyond Facebook and Blog 'attorneys'.

The post to which you refer is 'all wet' and will not light.

Pete is in the room. All him to speak for himself.

Your premise is invalid. Trump Districts, as you call them, are not drawn by race. You didn't know it but blacks support Trump too. Drawing a district that requires a black voting majority, is by definition illegal.

3:27 PM, your House Minority Leader Walmart Obama Jeffries (D-NY) stated “We are in an era of maximum warfare, everywhere, all the time.” We do appreciate Hakkem’s candor, the fair warning, we take him at his word, and we should respond accordingly.

Bennie needs to go as his district is just another Purposeful Democrat Violent Crime Haven by design to keep his voters poor and dependent, while pushing those that do not vote Democrat out. These are the same crime tactics used to keep Jackson in the hands of Democrats forever. The children that have died from stray bullets or murdered are not even enough to keep Democrats from using crime as a control measure.

Hakkem says we’re at war, so separating is the next step. All White Liberal Democrat Hypocrites (the one’s Malcom X warned us about) need to live in their Violent Crime Democrat controlled cities and districts.

Mr. Drane, you don't even wax eloquently as you post the results of your Google search or ChatGPT legal review, but you miss the point. Not surprised though, probably because you don't give a damn about the point under discussion as you try to reframe the issue.

No, there is no restriction on redistricting between the censuses, and I don't see where Perry even suggested that was the case, although it is the only focus of your extensive legal research

The point of the argument was that Mississippi, unlike the other states that had been cited by those pushing for a mid-census redistricting, had already begun the election process. Mississippi had held party primaries to select the nominees for the Congressional seats several months earlier. If you read Perry's statement, that was the reason that it would be illegal to conduct a redistricting now, which is not the question you Googled.

Perry not only waxed eloquently as you say, he focused on the issue at hand, not the one that you and others might want to argue while tilting at windmills trying to achieve status with Trump and his minions.

Let me try to restate it for you, in very very simple terms since in your current state that appears to be what is necessary for you to understand. In Mississippi, the election process had begun and primaries had been held. In some of the other states their early voting had begun but the election had not been held, nobody had won their primary, been certified as the party's nominee, In order to redistrict at this point, those elections, including the time and effort spent by the candidates and their campaigns would be lost; there would be specific damage done to those candidates who would have to start the process over with a new set of potential voters and a need to replenish the campaign bank account. Multiple claims for damages would likely ensue and challenges to the process in the form of election contests would be immediately filed by multiple parties.

You cannot change the laws governing elections after the process has begun. Our process had begun; other states had not. Just because 'they' could do it doesn't mean we could, no matter how much one screams on social media.

So, get over your simple-minded concept of can redistricting be done any time other than following a census; nobody said it couldn't. Perry damn sure didn't say that. Read the comments and try to understand them. All that was said pertained to the fact that our election process was underway and to change the rules, processes, or requirements to qualify at this point violates Mississippi election statutes.

But thanks for providing us with a nice bit of your wonderful, possibly done with some assisted influence, insight into your comprehension abilities. Next time I don't need a lawyer, I'll keep you in mind.

...course this year where a couple of those states, both republican heavy, overruled their independent commissions and drew new lines for their benefit ...

Which states?

Pete has always proven completely capable of speaking for himself. Butt out.

12:19 AM, “which states” you ask? Who Cares!?

The Democrat Purposeful Violent Crime Party….
on record that they “are in an era of maximum warfare” when speaking of redistricting Republicans out of office in Democrat states, and….
on record that they “will stack the SCOTUS” (a literal act of treason and war, no different than making the votes in Dem states count more than in non-Dem states in order to create a dictatorship)….

are here, on JJ, lecturing Republicans, as to why Keep His People Poor and Dependent via Violent Crime Bennie Thompson, should not be sent home via redistricting?????

LMAO….you really cannot make this ____ up.

Prove it. There is no law or constitutional clause that prohibits redistricting any time a state chooses to. So, you are 'absolutely wrong'.

Anon at 8:59 wasted a lot of space and hot air defending Perry. Anon claims Perry never insinuated there was any prohibition of Mississippi redistricting now. That's a lie.

Perry mentioned "The law" at least five times. Here's one: “But, again - I didn't speak to the consequences of following the law, just the fact that the law does exist and in Mississippi, we have no choice. But, again - I didn't speak to the consequences of following the law, just the fact that the law does exist and in Mississippi, we have no choice.

And following the law is not a coward’s approach, but actually is a basic republican principle and we are a party of laws.”

No need to argue anon's inability to read. Perry said what he said. If his hesitancy is based on "Propriety" instead of referring five times to nonexistent law, fine. But he claims nonexistent law drives his cowardice.

A majority of conservatives, republican voters and fence riders would prefer to move ahead with redistricting, but, we have no say in the matter. A handful of more intelligent men will be responsible when Thompson re-assumes the mantle of Homeland Security Chief and continues in office for two or four more years.

8:36/3:42, Redistricting after voting has started could cause votes already cast to be invalid, because the voter may no longer live in the same district in which they initially voted.

Candidates would have to re-qualify for their new districts, if they no longer live in the same-number district.

It would require new ballots and new polling places.

Primaries would have to be re-run.

It could be an unconstitutional violation of the rights of voters, as well as the rights of candidates.

Long story, short, it would be a sh*t-show, resulting in years of litigation, and uncertainty about the validity of the election results.

Here's some information, if you are actually interested:

https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/after-redistricting-is-done-election-processes-and-implementation

Thank you 12:47, in addition to the folks you answered, it saved having to answer Drane about 'what law' while he tries to provide answers without knowing the question. But, even thoughh he might surely suggest you also waxed eloquently in your post, neither Drane nor the Anon's you responded to will pay much attention to the obvious.

Actually Drane is correct. There is no such law as the imaginary one eluded to by Perry. It's noted that his apologists don't have the balls to post using their own names. There's no shame in being wrong or being cowardly as long as you're anonymous.

12:29, From one anonymous poster to another, it isn't so much the redistricting, itself, that would be illegal.

It's the effect that redistricting would have, if done after voting has already started, that would likely be illegal.

It occurs to me there's a broad difference between something 'likely' being illegal and there being a law against redistricting at this juncture. That seems to be the point of the conversation.

11:58, The point was actually whether the state should go head with redistricting at this time, not who's right based on semantics.

Although, that is apparently what this debate has devolved into.

When a noted scholar, one who is the past head of the Republican party in this state, is invited to opine and bases his opinion on claiming five times that a law exists when there is no such law...That's certainly not semantics.

The debate between Perry and the Auditor was indeed about the pros and cons of redistricting. When Mr. Perry bases his argument on a claim of a law that does not exist, the conversation departs from pros and cons and enters the realm of make believe.

The anonymous apologists are part of the same crowd who will not allow the citizens of this state the right to initiative and referendum.

Would it not have been much better for Mr. Perry to simply have based his viewpoint on the potential danger (as he perceives it) of rooting Thompson out rather than claiming some law prohibits the state from moving forward? It's a fact that there is no such law.

7:36, Redistricting after the primaries would result in throwing out votes that have already been cast, and disqualifying candidates who have already qualified to run.

That would be illegal. If you want to know which laws it would violate, do your own damn homework. You could start with the 14th Amendment, and spend more than 30 seconds reading a Google AI summary from a loaded-question search query.

If it weren’t so, the party in power could just redraw district maps any time an election wasn’t going in its favor, or if it didn’t like the results of the primaries.

Or any time a judge orders redrawing in order to favor a black candidate. Ask Hayes Dent. Or ask Bennie Thompson. Republicans have adopted the status of kucks, letting democrats drag them around by the balls. Federal level and state level.