zoraniko
21440
672
15
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/25/us/politics/texas-democrats-redistricting.html
Jul 27, 2025 4:08 AM
zoraniko
21440
672
15
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/25/us/politics/texas-democrats-redistricting.html
theomni
There is some small hope as well even if Texas does this without blue states matching. Texas is already gerrymandered, so there is only so much more they can squeeze out. The more gerrymandered a state is, the less the margin for error. Opposition parties tend to do well in midterms, especially during unpopular presidencies. There is a chance they'll cut it too close, the extra turn out for the Dems flips some of the seats they thought were safe.
MatureDendriticCell
don't threaten, do
huffnpuff72
US needs an independent federal body to draw electoral boundaries and oversee elections.
Navrodel
Damn, wish they had the balls to do that over a year ago when there were a dozen states where the Republicans overstepped so much that Dems were given carte blanche to redraw, and chose actually fair maps instead of taking the advantage that their opponents just showed they were taking constantly.
Maybe we wouldn't have lost all three chambers and would actually have a wait to fight at the federal level. Instead...
someboreddude
This would only effect the House.
zafner
Please fucking do it immediately. Please all blue states do this immediately God damn it do it now
He's building a fucking gestapo, do you understand? It's the end of the United States. These motherfuckers have been hitting us forever. Hit back
pirateninjaunicornattacksquad
While I 100% agree with what they are doing as a logical response, the answer to reacting to a broken system should not be to breaking it more.
But since the SCOTUS said gerrymandering is fine, here you guys are.
PanNonOpticon
Except if one side overwhelmingly uses broken system to their benefit, and the other one doesn't, and fixing system needs both sides, breaking it more is the only answer.
verbeckpaul1960
Exactly what should be done! Every time the Christofascist Republican Nazi Party tries to cheat by redistricting the democrats need to counter by doing exactly the same thing! If democrats end up ahead so much the better but if nothing else keep it on a fair playing field.
FlintNorth44
If the trump admin keeps breaking the rules...then why should anyone follow the rules?
ReySolo
NJ said they're down too
sirbartonslady
No worries, they'll make it illegal to do this if you're not on Their Special List of Okay People To Trust, or whatever.
friendsofsandwiches
DON'T fucking BLUFF!
Just GODDAMN <> it!
You're trying to negotiate with fuckers who don't negotiate.
DO it, and THEN tell them, "THIS is what happens when you fuckers fuck around!"
you CANNOT be in any way shape or form, NICE to them.
paragch
yep, JUST DO IT.
The Democrats have been too soft, playing by the rules and being nice and pretty. Its time to come out and have some hard fun. Roll up your sleeves and get dirty, meet fire with fire.
Aspernari
Texas will redraw. Democrats will have their bluffs called, and nothing will come of this.
quietwalker
Do it.
djangojazz
OMG the Democrats will copy the GOP! Next up when hit in the face, Democrats may hit back.
kriswinters
The headline actually says, "Two Democratic Governors Say if Texas Redraws Congressional Maps, They MAY Too" (Emphasis mine).
Even making a threat, they can't follow through. GROW SOME EFFING BALLS!
ColdCast
They already did this in 2020. Texas and Florida's gerrymandering netted the GOP 5 new seats, which has locked in their control of the house in the 2022 and 2024 elections. The GOP has done this a variety of states for more than three decades at this point, and you people are just getting around to countering it NOW? This is announcement might as well be Neville Chamberlain's piece of paper. Appeasment and inaction by democrats will slowwalk us into a fascist dictatorship.
Aimlockbelch
About fucking time!!
Skawomplious
So red states get redder and blue states get bluer. I understand the sentiment, but this is not a solution. If it's wrong when the GOP does it, it's wrong.
ministerm
Gotta love the people defending gerrymandering when THEIR side gets to do it.
Daliena06
Well when the options are "Regressives gerrymander and suppress votes, and thus keep gaining more and more power, while Dems don't" or "Regressives gerrymander and suppress votes, and Dems gerrymander right back to try and protect at least one or two of people's rights from sociopathic ghouls", is it really that surprising that people might defend it?
I daresay a lot of us would love no gerrymandering or suppression, at all, but good luck making that happen. ESPECIALLY with regressives in power
ministerm
How about the option of actually running a democracy instead of a duopoly?
Daliena06
Yet another thing that I'm sure many people would love, but again, how do you propose to get there, ESPECIALLY if you allow the regressives to keep seizing power, because they absolutely will not tolerate such a thing?
Genuinely, the first step has to be to stop the bleeding and deal with the MAGA nutters. One way or another.
ministerm
The same way the majority of European countries got there. No point waiting for the Dems to change anything as they've proved time and time again they're more than happy to keep the duopoly going.
Daliena06
The Dems aren't likely to change a great deal, but do you think you'll be luckier changing things under outright fascists than you would be under the Dems? Or would you like to have a go at that the way Germany circa the 40s got it's government change?
The Dems will not change it, but they're at least marginally less resistant to others changing it. That bar is buried *deep* in Hell, of course, but I don't really believe accelerationism is a great option either.
Fentex
I read an opinion by a math professor who maintained it's easy to put a single number on the eccentricity of any map - and it would be practical to write a law that simply said "Draw bounday's however you like, biut no district may have more than 'n' eccentricity" and have math enforce the standard. Sounds a good idea for the U.S to solve this issue.
wannasee
An idea for those here who have the privilege to do so:
You may not vote in republican states/districts, but fElon taught us your money can speak as much as a vote. Call republican reps and let them know you are donating BIPOC socialist democratic candidates in their state/district and across the country.
Bonus points if you offer out of state services to their constituents and can redirect money out of their district and towards politicians who can be more fiscally responsible!!!
arghthisissohard
The USA should make its democracy representative as a basic standard of being a democracy. Gerrymandering is built into their terrible system. Their system was designed by colonisers to preserve coloniser power. I’m white Zimbabwean, I can see what the USA is with clear eyes.
SkinnerTBD
Newsom really wants to run for president.
zachform
Not a huge Newsom fan but he would be better than any republican.
slinkydust
Newsom is clearly center right and only cares about his image.
leechdemon
Center right is better than alt right...
sjs9702
Pritzker has the same ambitions. Personally, I like the way Pritzker had handled Illinois during his term.
zelda633000
Although I am hesitant about the idea of having another billionaire in office, I agree that Pritzker would be a very good choice. I did read, however, that his plan is to run for Illinois governor again, rather than looking toward the presidency. (In '28 anyway, assuming we have an election again...) As all politicians, he's not perfect, but as far as billionaires go, he seems like a pretty stand-up guy.
DontKnowTheSource
The electoral college is outdated and needs to be destroyed
Mithi
The whole voting system that makes gerrymendering even possible needs to go.
magicrhombus
This has nothing to do with the electoral college, but yes, gerrymandering sucks, and the EC also sucks.
DontKnowTheSource
I'm aware. I just shout it into the void every once in a while
Thefreeeezian
Please add the politics tag. Thnx
DarthGoodguy
Fucking seriously. Please do it, guys.
DirectorFury
You are responsible for your own experience on the internet
GarmBlack
We need states to make reasonable voter line plotting rules. Ridiculous that they can just be redrawn willy nilly and however one wants.
ProbablyWrong524
One problem is it's important to be able to redraw a map when populations shift, both in terms of number of people and in terms of demographics, but there's little we can do to then limit redrawing districts for corrupt reasons.
For reasons you can't just divide territory with clean, even rectangles, see Africa.
unluckyandbored
Have a computer do it. Write a program to divide the map with the following conditions (in order). A: As close to the same number of people in each district as possible. B: As small of a space as possible. C: As few number of border lines as possible. Some districts will probably still be heavier one side to the other, but there's nothing we can do about that.
sleepinggreenidea
Honestly, we need to amend the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 to include the language prior decennial apportionment acts included: "compact and contiguous". While we're at it, that bill should be amended to at least double the size of the House - that, too, would mitigate a lot of problems arising from the current setup.
someboreddude
Exactly. Our lower house is absurdly tiny compared to other countries. It's bizarre.
sleepinggreenidea
It's also a big part of why the electoral college is such a mess. If we doubled the size of the House to 870, CA would go from its current 1 rep per ~760k to something like ~390k. The impact of the electoral college would also be a lot less severe - CA would go from 1 EC vote per 730k to 1 EC vote per 380k. That'd mean we'd go from a WY voter having 3.8x as much impact on presidential elections vs a CA voter down to a WY voter having merely 2x the impact. Which ofc is why it can't happen...
sleepinggreenidea
(I'd be willing to maintain the imbalance a bit by simultaneously increasing the number of Senators though. Go from 2 per state to 6 per state, and have the top two vote-earners per state per 2y get elected. That'd take the CA-to-WY EC impact ratio from 2x back up to 4x, but it would also make it A LOT harder for states to have single-party Senate caucuses. Ideally, since all of this would be via amendment, we'd make state ECs votes be awarded proportionally, but that's a whole other matter...)
Eyeetsass
Fuck that. Do. It. Anyway. You have a small window with which to flex the power you are still allowed to have. Use it to form a fucking fist!
ps238principal
They'll start doing what the GOP has been doing for decades now?
torp
Yeah, but the new stuff is Democrats starting to understand it.
Friendlyhedgehog
Illinois and California have been gerrymandered (82% and 83% Democratic majority in their Congressional representation), more than Texas (65% Republican). The issue is moderate states (Wisconsin, North Carolina, Ohio, and Michigan) having sizable Republican majorities in their Congressional representation due to Republican gerrymandering in the 2010s (which is what started this).
GreaterDog
I wanted to disagree with you on IL considering Pritzker is threatening to *start*, but looking at the most-recent 13th district is fucking bonkers. Putting Belleville, ESL, Alton, Springfield, and CHAMPAIGN-URBANA all in one district? My hometown and alma mater are 2.5 hours apart but they somehow speared one district straight through them, slicing the state in half. It's both laziness and probably a way to reserve campaign funds for more competitive races.
drunkbs
Yeah, Ohio used to be purple until they gerrymandered the fuck out of us.
alienstomper
Not so much michigan anymore. Its 7r-6d, which kinda fits since the idiots who live here voted for the idiotic pedophilic rapist
hogeyegrex
California’s districts are drawn by an independent commission and have been for over a decade. The fact is that the electorate is heavily Democratic. 47-24, D-R, with the remaining 29 independent. And the indies tend to swing Dem. Texas is 46-38-16. So, it really ought to be a lot closer. CA has no nightmarishly gerrymandered districts. Nothing vaguely resembling TX 33, 29, or the 90 mile long by, on average maybe six mile wide 35th. So, nice try. I award you no points.
1/2?
hogeyegrex
In all honesty, I don’t see how TX could redistrict five freshly Republican seats. That shit is already gerrymandered to fuck. CA could easily flip that many. NY could probably do four without going crazy. Illinois, less so. I still think it’s a head fake by the rumps. The TX districts are already packed and stacked. Not so in CA. If anything, the districts are too kind to Republicans. 7 out of the nine R districts are R+9 or less. Hardly packed. There’s one D district in TX that is.
2/3?
Pervaroo
But first, this sternly worded letter...
MyGreatestFearBoner
But only after approval is under 40%
Sydonis12
They will resolutely file a motion to change the name of the act.
tavisno
Dont forget they will sync up their attire before hand to show solidarity
TsubakiTragic
... and a bunch of "i'm so pissed off" memes.
spittleteets
Every state's majority party gerrymanders. Dems in NY were so "aggressive" that after multiple submissions, and being warned, the court assigned a 3rd party to draw up the districts. Then George Stantos was elected.
spittleteets
BetterDemosthenes
Where are you getting your data from. https://gerrymander.princeton.edu/redistricting-report-card/
spittleteets
NYS Court Of Appeals decision failure to remedy - https://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2023/Dec23/90opn23-Decision.pdf
HamAdvocate
SCOTUS will say it's fine for Texas but not IL and CA for reasons. They'll find some "originalist" context or some shit, or even say Texas used to be it's own country so the rules are different. And when IL and CA say "fuck you, we can ignore your ruling like Ohio did" Trump will send in thugs.
gayvillian
I think Alabama was ordered by the Supreme Court to redistrict and just never did. Theres no way for the Supreme Court to enforce rulings. Or they can just do it and say they'll undue it....after the elections. Gotta use every republican strategy here.
xj4low
Isn't that up to the state level courts? The US government doesn't have a ball in the game since it's up to the states to run their own elections. I know it's in the constitution but that won't stop the rt wing SCOTUS from over stepping their bounds.
HamAdvocate
It would 100% be taken to SCOTUS, and rapidly. Probably get emergency hearing status. Voting rights would be the issue. Roberts has gutted a lot of provisions, but he would love to do some fuckery on things like this, too. Good for me but not for thee.
kurastwolf
Didn't SCOTUS sunset voting rights laws a few years ago around the same time they got rid of affirmative action?
quade
"Well, redistricting is illegal in sanctuary states..."
NickRivieraMD
It'll be hard to do given their reasoning in Rucho. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rucho_v._Common_Cause
Cbouch4rd
And it will be once again up to the American people to put their government in check. At what point will the rage overtake them? Or will it? Stay tuned for season two of the decline of the American Empire.
fumpst781
Lol I'd love to see a showdown between trump thugs and il/ca.
DukeDarkwood
The Trump thugs haven't been doing to well in them thus far.
sleepinggreenidea
Ohio didn't ignore SCOTUS. Ohio ignored SCOOH. That's a rather significant difference.
Jyx123
I'm not familiar with what Ohio did.
What did Ohio do?
sleepinggreenidea
In the 2010s, Ohio passed 2 referendum anti-gerrymandering amendments (one for state leg districts, one for federal). When it came time to redistrict after the 2020 census, the GOP gov't used computer modeling to create *even more deeply* gerrymandered districts. They were taken to court, and SCOOH ruled (despite its GOP majority) that the maps were unconstitutional gerrymandering. The gov't responded by resubmitting functionally identical maps & running out the clock before the next elections.
Jyx123
Wait so the running out the clock after the resubmission meant that those second submission districts just gotta "automatically" approved or were those elections held with the original (already gerrymandered) districts or did it run some different way?
sleepinggreenidea
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/timeline-ohios-gerrymandered-maps-how-ohio-politicians-defied-court
erinaceus
i am in ohio and i attest to ^^^this message. we were fucked over by the statehouse and the governor.