So I saw one discussion where someone pointed out that gerrymandered districts tend to backfire spectacularly. Basically as soon as there is any meaningful shif

So I saw one discussion where someone pointed out that gerrymandered districts tend to backfire spectacularly. Basically as soon as there is any meaningful shift in population, the districts that were carefully crafted to be safe for a specific party flip overnight with little warning. It's a thing you do to win short term gains, but you can't keep doing it over and over. It's also a great example of politicians choosing their voters. If we are going for this system, why not just do a state-wide popular vote election and choose the top N people as winners? Also, gerrymandering seems responsible for the candidates sliding further into extremism. Basically if you run in a freshly created district that you are reasonably sure will go to your party, your real competition isn't the Dem/Rep who is running against you. It's your opponents in the primary. So if you are a Democrat running against a Republican in a close to 50/50 split, you might be compelled to become more centrist to steal some votes. But if you are only concerned about the primaries, you will try to be the Democratiest Democrat ever.