Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ShadowLiberal

(2,237 posts)
1. This shows the problem with redistricting & gerrymandering, not so much with money
Sun Dec 23, 2012, 01:02 AM
Dec 2012

A lot of the state legislatures we lost were in the 2010 wave year that was really bad for us, especially since it was right before redistricting, which met republicans could quickly redraw the lines and we didn't have a chance to recover.

Gerrymandering is the reason why state legislatures rarely change hands. It wasn't until 2010 that democrats actually lost control of state legislatures in a number of southern states, despite republicans having a massive southern vote advantage for decades.

The same is true in some mid western and mid Atlantic states that are reliably democratic in presidential elections, like PA, & MI.

WI & OH are pretty badly gerrymandered as well, but control has switched hands in at least one house of the legislature for brief periods in the last decade.

Edit: This is the reason why I prefer a parliamentary system for the legislature, that makes it impossible to gerrymander, whoever gets the most votes wins if it's two parties. And it allows for third parties, so you aren't stuck in the middle if you hardcore agree on economics with one party but hardcore agree on social issues with the other party.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»ProPublica - "How Da...»Reply #1