Saturday, January 16, 2016

Just a reminder as to what this country would look like without gerrymandering.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:

In his State of the Union speech, President Obama called on lawmakers and the public to take a number of steps "to change the system to reflect our better selves" for "a better politics." The top item on that list was to end partisan gerrymandering: "we have to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around," Obama said.

In most states, state legislatures draw the district boundaries that determine how many delegates the state sends to the U.S. Congress, as well as the general partisan make-up of that delegation. State legislatures are partisan beasts, and if one party is in control of the process they can draw boundaries to give themselves a numeric advantage over their opponents in Congress.

As you can see from the chart up above if we passed laws against gerrymandering the progressives would have a much fairer shot and would more than likely control both the House and the Senate.

And if the conservatives were so confident that the country is mostly made up of like minded voters they would support doing away with gerrymandering as well.

But instead they fight the idea tooth and nail.

Gee, it couldn't be that they're afraid of fair elections now could it?


  1. Progressives pick and choose the causes and elections they want to be involved in. As a result, not bothering to show up for a seemingly unimportant school board or assembly seat only adds to the problem of conservative control. These minor offices often lead to more important ones. Progressives are often their own worst enemy. Conservatives are never off message and work to win every elected position, no matter how insignificant. I dislike gerrymandering, but I am not terribly sympathetic to progressives who believe that something philosophically right should be embraced by all. Conservatives don't play that way. They will not be satisfied until the democrat party can no longer win an election of any kind. Progressives need to quit bitching and start laying the ground work as the conservatives did decades ago.

    1. EXCELLENT COMMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      SPOT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      It's past time for us Democrats to stop whining, pissing, and moaning.

      There's a very relevant line in the movie "The Outlaw Josie Wales:"

      Josey Wales: " Now remember, when things look bad and it looks like you're not gonna make it, then you gotta get mean. I mean plumb, mad-dog mean. 'Cause if you lose your head and you give up then you neither live nor win. That's just the way it is. "

  2. Anonymous6:30 AM

    Whereas U.S. congressional districts along with state assembly and senate districts are affected by gerrymandering, U.S. senate races are not since they are state-wide races. Democrats do not win these races because we fail to vote.

  3. Maple7:39 AM

    It's ludicrous that individual states get to determine the borders of congressional districts for a FEDERAL election. It's also ludicrous that the Federal Elections Commission is essentially toothless because of its 3 Dem, 3 Rep makeup. This is not how a democracy is supposed to work, folks.

  4. Even a step further, redraw state lines (ain't gonna happen, but just an interesting thought experiment) into similar economic zones.

    One of my statistics professors had us model New York state with different scenarios. Tri-State area, Long Island, Upstate and so forth. Really interesting data came out of that.

    tldr: statistics are cool, gerrymandering is obscenely unfair

  5. Anonymous1:29 PM

    If you want to see gerrymandering in action--look at Maryland's congressional district borders which were drawn in favor of the democrats in the state. Both sides are equally guilty of the offense.

  6. And of course it is that last example that red states use to keep themselves red.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.