Macro scale doesn't have to mean national. There are many precincts per district, and many districts per county, etc. > So in terms of actual representation, i

Macro scale doesn't have to mean national. There are many precincts per district, and many districts per county, etc. > So in terms of actual representation, it would actually be better to have a district that voted nearly unanimously for candidate A, and another district that voted nearly unanimously for candidate B, because then the vast majority of people would be getting the representative that they voted for, and represents them. No, only the throwaway districts in gerrymandered maps are represented, all other districts swallow up many more unrepresented voters. > In the scenario where every district is purple, fully half the people have no representation of their interests in congress. But you missed the point, not every district can be purple. In absolute terms, more people would be represented than the status quo. It's better than gerrymandering. But again, not my prefered solution.