3 ms·

I live in one of the most gerrymandered states in the US. The district lines drawn since 2010 have been struck down by courts repeatedly, but there is no legal

I live in one of the most gerrymandered states in the US. The district lines drawn since 2010 have been struck down by courts repeatedly, but there is no legal mechanism to force the legislature to draw them in a more fair way. On top of that, one of our two state house reps for the city I live in switched parties after being elected. Now the state legislature has a governor-veto-proof majority, and our state doesn't have recall elections. I vote in every election. But in this instance my vote didn't matter in a very literal sense. Depending on what laws they pass next year I might not be able to access necessary medical care or even safely live in the state anymore. I don't plan on stopping voting, as I consider it my civic duty, but with political shenanigans like this I don't blame younger generations for feeling like their vote doesn't count.

the_snooze 3y ago
>I vote in every election. But in this instance my vote didn't matter in a very literal sense. I'd argue that gerrymandered votes matter more in primary elections for the dominant party. Primaries tend to be thinly attended, so a concerted effort by, say, Republicans in a heavily Democratic district would have a far better chance of ousting the Democratic incumbent in the primary than in the general.
bryanlarsen 3y ago
Gerrymandering can make it easier to flip a district. Gerrymandering means a small number of districts with a large advantage for party A and a large number of districts with a small advantage for party B. So in a normal election party B gets more districts than they should. However, if sentiment swings enough to overcome the "small advantage" then party A can sweep the state. And if sentiment swings significantly towards party B they now no longer have the ability to steal a seat from party A.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Gerrymandering can make it easier to flip a district. Only if you do a bad job of it. > Gerrymandering means a small number of districts with a large advantage for party A and a large number of districts with a small advantage for party B. No, it doesn't. Suppose you had a 5-district, 50-50 population state, with the population distributed homogenously enough that without weird district lines you would get 5 competitive, near 50-50 seats. An effective partisan gerrymander might make one 70-30 seat for the disfavored party and four 55-45 seats for the favored party, every seat being less competitive than without a gerrymander.
  - bryanlarsen 3y ago
    > with the population distributed homogenously enough that without weird district lines you would get 5 competitive, near 50-50 seats. Sure, if you assume something that never happens, then I would be wrong. In practice all states have D cities and R rural areas. To increase the number of R districts they create a bunch of districts that are mostly rural along with enough of the cities that instead of a small number of solidly R rural districts they have a larger number of mixed districts that lean R. (And D's do the inverse).
- LexiMax 3y ago
  Gerrymandering is just one mechanism to rig elections. Voting laws can be changed to disproportionately affect certain demographics, and districts can even be targeted with special unnecessary "oversight." This is happening all across the country, and it reeks of a political and ruling class who is unwilling to cede power to fresh faces.

the_snooze 3y ago

>I vote in every election. But in this instance my vote didn't matter in a very literal sense. I'd argue that gerrymandered votes matter more in primary elections for the dominant party. Primaries tend to be thinly attended, so a concerted effort by, say, Republicans in a heavily Democratic district would have a far better chance of ousting the Democratic incumbent in the primary than in the general.

bryanlarsen 3y ago

Gerrymandering can make it easier to flip a district. Gerrymandering means a small number of districts with a large advantage for party A and a large number of districts with a small advantage for party B. So in a normal election party B gets more districts than they should. However, if sentiment swings enough to overcome the "small advantage" then party A can sweep the state. And if sentiment swings significantly towards party B they now no longer have the ability to steal a seat from party A.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Gerrymandering can make it easier to flip a district. Only if you do a bad job of it. > Gerrymandering means a small number of districts with a large advantage for party A and a large number of districts with a small advantage for party B. No, it doesn't. Suppose you had a 5-district, 50-50 population state, with the population distributed homogenously enough that without weird district lines you would get 5 competitive, near 50-50 seats. An effective partisan gerrymander might make one 70-30 seat for the disfavored party and four 55-45 seats for the favored party, every seat being less competitive than without a gerrymander.
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  > with the population distributed homogenously enough that without weird district lines you would get 5 competitive, near 50-50 seats. Sure, if you assume something that never happens, then I would be wrong. In practice all states have D cities and R rural areas. To increase the number of R districts they create a bunch of districts that are mostly rural along with enough of the cities that instead of a small number of solidly R rural districts they have a larger number of mixed districts that lean R. (And D's do the inverse).
LexiMax 3y ago
Gerrymandering is just one mechanism to rig elections. Voting laws can be changed to disproportionately affect certain demographics, and districts can even be targeted with special unnecessary "oversight." This is happening all across the country, and it reeks of a political and ruling class who is unwilling to cede power to fresh faces.