It is the same old stand-by for leftists when the will of the voters is against them: Turn to activist judges, who are more than willing to make findings in democrat states that conservative judges wont do in red states.
Posted on 08/28/2025 8:44:30 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Democrats are staring down a gerrymandering Armageddon, and don’t have a lot of good answers. But if they think this current moment is frightening, just wait until the coming reapportionment apocalypse.
Their current gerrymandering problem threatens their hopes of taking back control of the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterms. Reapportionment could be much worse than that, potentially an existential threat that pushes them into a minority for another decade.
How leading Democrats address these two significant challenges will determine whether they can pry back control of Congress, state legislatures and even the White House. But as Republican gerrymanders threaten to metastasize uncontrollably across the national map, Democrats don’t seem to fully understand the math or the depth of their difficulties.
Any day now, Texas will enact a new congressional map that nets as many as five additional GOP seats. This brazen mid-decade power grab will enhance the Republicans’ slender, three-seat majority in the U.S. House — and it won’t stop there. Ohio, Indiana, Missouri and Florida will go next, grabbing the GOP perhaps another six seats. Should Republicans decide to play serious hardball, they could remap North Carolina, Kentucky, Kansas and New Hampshire too.
Democrats have more limited options. In California, voters will be asked this fall to suspend the state’s independent redistricting commission and allow the legislature to enact a new map that adds five blue seats in retaliation for the Texas gerrymander. If voters approve — and that’s not guaranteed — the two maps would cancel each other out.
But what’s step two? The trouble for Democrats is they have nowhere else to target if Republicans keep on escalating. Blue-state governors are talking tough and insisting they are at war, but that rhetoric is no match for reality. Democrats simply...
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
If Pennsylvania gets its cr@p together and get 2 more House seats and the Governors mansion, they could, (if not being total panty wastes), add to the R total!!
They only care about winning the gerrymandering PR war.
The democrats have already gerrymandered the limit and there’s nothing left ?
My pants are creaming reading this article.
Exactly right. Ultra blue states are already gerrymandered so 40% GOP voters in state garner less than 20% house seats. Law of diminishing returns is in play.
“Brazen” is not an adjective I associate with the GOP.
The article basicly says: what the Democrats need is a brilliant plan.
It gives no clue as to what the brilliant plan might be.
Yeah...and he actually says the truth. The dems already did what the GOP is doing now.
“Democrats simply control too few states, and they’ve pretty much maxed out the maps in the states where they hold trifecta power.”
The good news for the Democrats is that math is racist—so they can keep on larping away....
Fight, fight fight!
Lol.
and the REAL Democrat Armageddon arrives when the Trump Administration’s upcoming census excludes all non-citizens ...
The states are allowed district anyway they want. The only restriction (due to a Supreme Court ruling) is that every district must be numerical the same (or close to it). The one man one vote rule.
California has already been sliced and diced. The only thing the Democrats can do is redraw the lines to take the Republicans from the Central Valley and northern California and add them to existing Democrat districts. If it was not for the one man one vote rule it would be easy, but since most districts are Democrats when you add Republican voters you dilute the number of Democrat voters and if it is a close race the Republican could win in was once a secure Democrat seat.
So they have two problems, one get the voters to agree to the change, and two trying to divide the pie so they control everything. Not going to be easy and in today’s world it will end up in court.
Jerry Seinfeld graphic
“Aww, that’s a shame”
The Dems already benefit from gerrymandering, often via court orders based on the Civil Rights Act. These contorted the maps in vrious southern states to assure election of racial minority, i.e., Democrat, candidates. The Dems can’t squeeze more out of this than they already have, without losing electoral majorities elsewhere — but there is lots of room for Republicans to gain from un-gerrymandering. What a shame.
And Californians seem displeased with the Dem’s trying to undo the Constitutional measure that took the districting power away from corrupt officials and gave it to something akin to the People.
Democrats can’t win the gerrymander war
Regarding gerrymandering, there never seems to be any mention in mainstream media of possible MAJOR problems between gerrymandering and Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (14A), that section a penalty for states where ballot box fraud has occurred.
From related threads...
Here's a general definition of gerrymandering.
The manipulation may involve "cracking" (diluting the voting power of the opposing party's supporters across many districts [all emphases added]) or "packing" (diluting the voting power of the opposing party's supporters across many districts). Gerrymandering can also be used to protect incumbents. Wayne Dawkins, a professor at Morgan State University, describes it as politicians picking their voters instead of voters picking their politicians. —Gerrymandering (Non-FR)
Let's contrast gerrymandering with the zero tolerance, "hair trigger" wording of Section 2 of 14A, misguided Democrats ultimately positioning themselves to actually lose House seats in the 2026 primary elections for unconstitutionally weakening the voting power of Trump supporters imo.
Excerpted from 14A:
"But when the right to vote at any election"
"is denied to any"
"or in any way abridged,"
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election [all emphases added] for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Apportionment of Representatives]
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
While elite, lawless Democrats continue to shoot their feet off, gerrymandering an example imo, Trump supporters need to concentrate on a related issue imo, preserving Trump's legacy, starting with the 2026 midterm elections.
Trump's red tsunami of supporters, evidenced by his record-breaking win in 2024 elections, need to permanently preserve his legacy by making the repeal of the 16th Amendment (16A; direct taxes) the main talking point of 2026 elections. More specifically, Trump supporters need to primary all candidates for state and federal public offices who refuse to publicly promise to support a resolution to the states in January 2027 for a new amendment to the Constitution that repeals that amendment.
The 16th Amendment is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for organized crime, front-ended by the deep state Congress's ongoing abuse of that amendment imo.
16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived [emphasis added], without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States. —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous [all emphases added], (as for instance, for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles. — Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2 (1833).
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen [all emphases added], under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country. —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
Consider that a resolution to repeal 16A was introduced as recently as 2021, but was unsurprisingly ignored.
We'll call the repeal amendment Trump's Boston Tea Party II Amendment.
The 17th Amendment, popular voting for federal senators, needs to disappear too.
Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves [emphasis added]. It seems to be the law of our general nature. —Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)
Once unconstitutional federal taxing and spend is stopped, the states will ultimately find a tsunami of new revenues that they probably won't know what to do with imo, healthcare, including taking care of the poor, and education, on the short list of priorities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.