Unpopular position - NY Dems should gerrymander the crap out of the state in 2020

[Non Swing Voter]

I'm so sick of Dems unilaterally disarming on everything.  It makes the whole country have to cater to completely out of touch people.  They need to gerrymander NY to counteract what is obviously going to happen in TX and FL.

Don't tell me climate change is an existential threat but you're going to give the GOP more power than they are owed based on principles. 

[Damocles]

Or we could have proportional representation.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm thinking a 22-4 map.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Is this really an "unpopular" position?

[Mr. Illini]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

[Non Swing Voter]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

Virginia would be another easy one to gerrymander too.  Not sure how this commission will play out but my understanding is that the courts could have the final say and I believe Dems are packing the courts here so theoretically it's possible they could gerrymander the state and they really should.

[Zaybay]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

Virginia would be another easy one to gerrymander too.  Not sure how this commission will play out but my understanding is that the courts could have the final say and I believe Dems are packing the courts here so theoretically it's possible they could gerrymander the state and they really should.

The VA supreme court is currently R majority-appointed (6 R vs 1 D) and that number is unlikely to change at all. Luckily for the Democrats, the VA Supreme Court is known for being rather non-partisan, so even though it has a conservative bent, the map will likely be rather even and fair.

Unfortunately, NY, MD, and IL are really the only states Dems have mapping control over that could cause a seat-change (with NY having an asterisk due to the commission), and even then there aren't that many seats to pry from the GOP here.

[Annatar]

Here is an interesting factoid, if you compare the seats Republicans have right now, 213 to the ones they had after 2004, 232, the entire difference of 19 can be accounted for by basically the 3 big blue states of CA, IL and NY, the GOP has lost so many seats in these states over the last 2 decades that they can only lose a few more.

The GOP had 40 members from 3 states after the 2004 election, currently they have 23, so a net loss of 17 seats across 3 states, across the rest of the country they hold essentially the same amount. If dems in IL and NY gerrymander hard, the GOP could drop down to the high teens from these states even as they take the majority in 2022.

[TheReckoning]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

Anyways, the only thing that should be done regarding gerrymandering is ending it.

[Del Tachi]

Maps that would maximize partisan advantage for the Democrats in states like NY, CA and IL are politically unpalatable because they would require unpacking VRA-protected urban districts to more efficiently spread those voters around, which is not something that minority reps in those states' legislatures are going to acquiesce to.

One reason that GOP legislatures (especially in the South) have historically been able to erect such egregious gerrymanders is that they can often count on the tacit support of Black Democrats, who like being drawn into 70-30, majority-Black vote sinks.

[Del Tachi]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

Virginia would be another easy one to gerrymander too.  Not sure how this commission will play out but my understanding is that the courts could have the final say and I believe Dems are packing the courts here so theoretically it's possible they could gerrymander the state and they really should.

Virginia now has really bad geography for the Republicans, since most of their excess votes are logically packed into 2 Appalachia-based districts.  A proportional map of Virginia would ostensibly be a Republican gerrymander, so a commission-drawn plan should naturally overrepresent Democrats.   

[Brittain33]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

Unilateral disarmament is a fool’s choice.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Democrats should gerrymander while also pushing foe such maps to be illegal. Republicans are plying by their rules and we should too until we can force them to play by the right rules

[Suburbia]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

I would like to see blue state Republicans and red state Democrats. DuPage County and Harford County are red suburbs, they need representation....

Just like the rural D areas in Wisconsin need representation....

Gerrymandering is stupid

[TheReckoning]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

[Brittain33]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

I understand why a Republican would advocate for Democratic unilateral disarmament, but I’m not receptive to the argument.

[TheReckoning]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

I understand why a Republican would advocate for Democratic unilateral disarmament, but I’m not receptive to the argument.

First of all, who says I’m a Republican?

Second of all, following the rules is not “unilateral disarmament.”

[Brittain33]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

I understand why a Republican would advocate for Democratic unilateral disarmament, but I’m not receptive to the argument.

First of all, who says I’m a Republican?

You have an R avatar.

[TheReckoning]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

I understand why a Republican would advocate for Democratic unilateral disarmament, but I’m not receptive to the argument.

First of all, who says I’m a Republican?

You have an R avatar.

By that logic, S019 is also a Republican?

[Nyvin]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

There's one party that actively works towards ending gerrymandering and voter suppression and it sure as hell isn't Republicans.  Also let's not forget Jan 6th.  Democrats are the party that's pro-democracy nowadays and that's not an exaggeration.

[Brittain33]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

I understand why a Republican would advocate for Democratic unilateral disarmament, but I’m not receptive to the argument.

First of all, who says I’m a Republican?

You have an R avatar.

By that logic, S019 is also a Republican?

I’ve been here almost 14 years. I don’t really keep track of who most people are on this forum. I don’t even know who S019 is or why he’s obviously not a Republican.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

One is capable of holding two thoughts at once.

It’s not hypocritical to say that cheating shouldn’t be allowed and that we need to do it as long as the other side does.

[politicallefty]

Maps that would maximize partisan advantage for the Democrats in states like NY, CA and IL are politically unpalatable because they would require unpacking VRA-protected urban districts to more efficiently spread those voters around, which is not something that minority reps in those states' legislatures are going to acquiesce to.

One reason that GOP legislatures (especially in the South) have historically been able to erect such egregious gerrymanders is that they can often count on the tacit support of Black Democrats, who like being drawn into 70-30, majority-Black vote sinks.

I would agree with you about IL. The geography there has been bad for Democrats, though not as bad since they've been able to win the Chicago suburbs. Remember that the current IL-06 was drawn to be a Republican vote sink. I think a commission-drawn map would yield Republicans one seat, maybe two at best.

California had a 46-7 partisan advantage for Democrats after 2018. The geography for Democrats is not bad. I think the swings in 2020 were just bad luck because the overall vote share was almost unchanged. Democrats won the House popular vote by about 32-33% both years. It's just that a couple of the marginal wins barely swung the other way.

As for the South, the problem there is that the VRA districts are inadequate. Louisiana and Alabama should have another VRA district each and South Carolina should probably have another one as well.

[Non Swing Voter]

All this does is proves that, indeed, “both sides are the same”.

One party is promoting anti-gerrymandering legislation in Congress, the other is 100% blocking it.

And OP is encouraging Democrats to abandon their principles in order to get unnecessary amounts of power.

The average Democrat is more concerned with forcing America into becoming a one-party state than actual good governance.

This is nonsense and ignores my entire point.  Can you please stop muddying up the thread?  thanks.

[Non Swing Voter]

Illinois and Maryland, too. Hopefully gerrymandering is ended by 2030 nationwide, but for this round, there's no point in voluntarily disarming.

Virginia would be another easy one to gerrymander too.  Not sure how this commission will play out but my understanding is that the courts could have the final say and I believe Dems are packing the courts here so theoretically it's possible they could gerrymander the state and they really should.

Virginia now has really bad geography for the Republicans, since most of their excess votes are logically packed into 2 Appalachia-based districts.  A proportional map of Virginia would ostensibly be a Republican gerrymander, so a commission-drawn plan should naturally overrepresent Democrats.   

Yes.  A fair map under current 2010 population numbers should really be 3 very conservative districts, 5 safe Democratic districts and 3 somewhat competitive districts. 

Under 2020 numbers there could really be 6 safe Democratic districts (4 anchored in Northern Virginia and 2 around Richmond/Virginia Beach).  2 of the safe districts would "only" be +10 Dem or so (outer parts of NOVA) while the safe GOP districts would be 50 margin vote sinks.