Should the Democrats gerrymander ever state they have a trifecta in? Why should they put themselves at a disadvantage in the 2028 presidential elections?

Democrats now can remove all of the gerrymandering in the states they currently have control over. The districts would be redrawn by the state legislature to be more fair. They would remove all the GOP gerrymanders.

But if Trump and Republicans opposes the democrats legislation the democrats will heavily gerrymander all the states they currently have control over and change the retirement age of the state supreme courts.

So if Trump vetoes legislation Democrats heavily gerrymander one state. If he vetoes more legislation they gerrymander another state. If he vetoes more legislation they change the retirement age and appoint their own justices.

They could later negotiate with republicans to pass new Civil Rights Act banning all forms of gerrymandering and voter suppression.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Uh, yeah, they should, and it should be done luridly and absurdly and grotesquely, because hey, it’s legal. The Tribunal of Six thinks political gerrymandering is perfectly fine, so let’s fucking go. And it’s not even hard to construct a rational narrative around it:

Democrats have, for decades, been trying to increase the fairness of the vote, very much including fighting gerrymandering. However, due to the increasingly blatant and indefensible ideological partisanship of the Supreme Court, the act of gerrymandering has been repeatedly reinforced as perfectly legal, so long as it is not done on the basis of a protected class. Thus, faced with a wildly and still increasingly unfair electoral landscape, the Democratic Party has been forced to effectively either concede defeat across vast swaths of the country, or resort to the same tactics. Resorting to gerrymandering, while absolutely not the end goal of our party’s policies, has now become an unfortunate - yet extremely necessary - component of our tactics on a national scale. Today we will begin resorting to those tactics.

But, to my Republican colleagues, know this: we are going to do it way more aggressively than you are, and way more aggressively than you can - because, as of 2025, there are 37.4 million registered Republicans in this country, and 44.1 million registered Democrats. Not to mention, scientists and engineers, as a demographic group, tend to skew to the left politically, so we will leverage that advantage in our own interests as well - and, not to mention, in the interests of broadening and deepening the small-d democratic process in the long term as well.

Ultimately, we are aiming to implement politically partisan gerrymandering in such a lurid and grotesque fashion with the intent of achieving either of the following two scenarios: that the current politically partisan and hyper conservative Supreme Court is forced to concede that political gerrymandering is not only deeply undemocratic, but unconstitutional, and thus outlaw it entirely; or, that the political landscape is changed so tectonically that we can simply pack the court with justices who are not only competent and rational, but meaningfully impartial and without any concern of political fallout, and then outlaw it entirely. Those of you who have served as enlisted members of the military, or who have friends or family that have, may recognize this as a particularly aggressive form of malicious compliance - and yes, that is precisely what it is.

Make no mistake: this is now, in a political sense, total war. But it is quite necessary to point out that you started all of this, and you started it a long, long time ago. You wanted gerrymandering. You will get gerrymandering until you cannot stand it any longer.

Edit: And yes, I did have fun writing that :)

  • source