Here's the exchange mainiac is complaining about:
Isn't the incumbency victory rate like 90%? It's ludicrous
It's ludicrous that voters dont massively change their opinions every two years? While the redistricting process has problems, this is a horrible metric of those problems.
Yeah, it's so much more believable that the population has self-sorted into preexisting political districts which have been drawn by legislators. I know *I* choose my home/apartment/tent-down-by-the-river based on it having an electoral representation that perfectly mirrors my own views.
Oh hey, nice to see you returning to intentionally misread something I said. It's been too long man.
Then enlighten me as to what you were actually saying. Because it *looks* like you're handwaving the incumbency rate and saying that it's not the fault of redistricting/gerrymandering.
Bestow your wisdom on an unwashed prole like myself.
Here we can see mainiac giving a somewhat unsubstantial response, wherein he argues that reelection rates are a terrible metric of gerrymandering.
Redking makes a sarcastic response, effectively arguing that the incumbency victory rates are absurd and gerrymandering is a clear culprit.
mainiac takes offence, criticising Redking's reading comprehension.
Redking explains his interpretation of mainiac's argument, blaming mainiac for being unclear.
...
As far as I can see, neither of you are 100% at fault. Sarcasm isn't a bad thing but you need to avoid using it where it can be seen as confrontational.
You also need to stop taking issue with tone and instead address arguments. Bickering doesn't help anyone and frankly it's pretty annoying for people trying to talk politics and have other people getting all antsy.