• ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    ·
    8 days ago

    They didn’t need to be told. Frankly, I’m surprised Texas has room to be gerrymandered even more.

    • bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s a balancing act. To maximize likely seats won, they need to accurately predict who will vote on that election, which is difficult. Small predicted margins of victory now could evaporate and result in Democrats winning.

      • kata1yst@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yep, this is the thing people often forget about gerrymandering. The entire point is to take a large margin of victory in an area, and use it to offset your opponents margin in another area, usually by carving into your opponents margin with several of your own.

        The more gerrymandered a set of districts is, the more likely they are to be tipped by an unexpected change of turn out by a given group.

        One group gets complacent (my vote doesn’t matter in this state, since my party always wins!) or one group gets fired up… And suddenly the story flips.

    • loie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      If Barack Obama

      Told California Democrats

      To gerrymander their map so he wouldn’t lose the House

      Conservatives would have lost their goddamned minds.

      (Again.)

      • dhork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        8 days ago

        Of course. Those two scenarios are totally different, though. As different as black and white …

      • halferect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        I remember when new Mexico a strong blue state gerrymandering and even though we a Lil guy republican cried and cried but we just said we playing by your rules fuck faces

        • Rhaedas@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          There are different kinds of players in the same game. But I agree that the whole ability to bend districts in any favored direction should be removed. There are impartial ways to determine districts that change over time with the population, but neither side likes them because it’s a loss of control and potential loss of seats for both. The irony is that it would favor the left more, just like changing how we vote would favor that lean, but that gets into the issue of what “left” means in the US vs. reality, and maybe that’s part of the problem as well.

            • Zexks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              They tried. All those big ass states out west weren’t states at the time and they all said fuck you guys with all your people and shit. So compromises were made.

    • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      I live in California and I don’t recall the maps being drawn that way. At one point the State mailed a draft of the new map and explained that it was redrawn in accordance with the change in population. Overall it seemed pretty fair.

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 days ago

      I mean, New York is a close analog, and the relatively minor gerrymander in Democrats’ favor was struck down, which is a large part of why Republicans control the House.

      So you’re right that Democrats tried, but also Democratic (and democratic) judges nullified the gerrymander.

      I guess it’s classic that they gave up political victory to have the moral high ground. So might as well give them that much?

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Congressional maps have always been redrawn by the party in power to ensure that they remain in power. I would expect Democrats to be doing the same thing if we were talking about California.

      Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    • deranger@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      AFAIK it’s not enshrined in the Constitution, it’s a Supreme Court ruling that said federal courts have no authority to assess cases of gerrymandering.

  • LovingHippieCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    What they’re gonna do is redraw all the maps of the states they are in control of, and eliminate ALL Democrat districts. Every single one. They’ll do this and there will be challenges declaring it illegal but by the time it actually comes before a court it’ll be too late to redraw so they’ll just go ahead with the illegal maps and then Democrats won’t just not win the house, they will lose 30+ seats. All because the Republicans are fascists and people refused to vote for democratic candidates last election cycle.

    They might, might, leave one or two blue districts per state, but otherwise they will be gone. This is the plan in Ohio and in Florida, it’s happening. It doesn’t matter that it’s BS.

    Anyone who helped Trump win, including those who helped Harris lose, will be responsible for the downfall of the American democratic system.

    Guess it’s time for some successions.

  • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    At least he still thinks he needs control of Congress and sees them as a possible problem if Democrats were to retain control.