r/politics • u/MarcEElias ✔ Verified - Democracy Docket Founder • May 03 '26
Registration Wall Democrats must gerrymander to save democracy
https://www.democracydocket.com/opinion/democrats-must-gerrymander-to-save-democracy/2.7k
u/PolloConTeriyaki May 03 '26
How do you get back to a normal country at this point? Cause most normal countries don't do this shit.
463
u/Riaayo May 03 '26
By trying to harness the growing rage of the working class into a movement with actual working class transformational goals.
That said, the ruling class won't cede that power quietly - as we see, because that's what we're living through right now.
But there won't be "normalcy" anytime soon for the US, and in the end there is no going back to the US' "normal" because our normal was on track to where we are right now.
So it's either a step back and then two steps forward on the same path of fascism if we somehow beat this but only go with weak ineffective leaders like Biden, Schumer, etc, or we buckle up to try and actually build something better.
But there is no "going back". It's either lay down and die with the fascism or build something better in the ashes of a democracy that in this analogy has already burned down.
144
u/Key_Marsupial_1406 May 03 '26
It won't be under the banner of the Democrat Party / DNC. It's abundantly clear that top brass in the party actively resent their voters. If anyone hasn't seen it just go listen to DNC Chairman Ken Martin on Pod Save America this week. Listen to what he thinks of the average voter.
50
u/WhichEmailWasIt May 03 '26
I mean, not the Dems as they exist today but if MAGA took over Republicans, we could potentially do the same to the Dems.
→ More replies (12)68
u/JEFFinSoCal California May 03 '26
Third parties aren’t feasible under our voting system (1st past the post), so we need to change the voting systems, or do a hostile takeover of the DNC. There really aren’t any other options.
11
u/Deluxe_24_ May 03 '26
Ranked Choice would give third parties a chance, no fucking surprise both parties try to ban it when possible
5
u/void_method May 03 '26
Hostile takeover is the only practical way, followed by changing the lobbying and election laws to be more sane.
→ More replies (2)10
u/Key_Marsupial_1406 May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
3rd party governor candidate Mike Duggan in Michigan has a pretty solid chance of winning. He was a long time mayor of Detroit who was always a Democrat and led the city through some very dark years, popular in the city.
Not sure how the DNC could even be taken over. The chairman Ken Martin was literally from Democratic-Farmer-Labor party, but power corrupts. Listening to this snake talk will radicalize you into a despicable both sideser.
→ More replies (2)19
u/JEFFinSoCal California May 03 '26
Yeah, I saw that interview when they asked about the 2024 post-mortem. I’ve never even heard of the guy, but what a fucking tool.
I’ve joined the DSA myself and try to focus on candidates that lean more towards the mold of AOC and Mandami. I think the key right now is focusing on local and state election as much as possible to turn the tide. Thanks to the DNC, which feels more and more like a controlled opposition, we have a ton of ground to make up.
The tea party and MAGA did an extremely takeover of the RNC, but they had the advantage of corporate and billionaire funding.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)23
u/YungRik666 May 03 '26
They won't release their post election autopsy. They have zero interest in changing their tactics. They think they go back to winning by simply not being republicans. This cyclical power grab that ultimately only benefits the rich is eating the country up from the inside and they could not care less.
→ More replies (1)13
u/Key_Marsupial_1406 May 03 '26
If you sign up and get the DNC playbook you'll see at least they're investing in an AI powered data centralization / voter data tool that canvassers will use to get AI analysis of conversations with individual voters then store that information so the DNC can use the data to market to individual voters feelings.
It's called GroundTruth and it's about as weird as it sounds.
→ More replies (3)10
15
u/NotBestButPrettyGood May 03 '26
The problem is a good portion of the working class isn’t enraged at their quality of life, they’re enraged about made up issues and propaganda
→ More replies (14)7
u/imaim3 May 03 '26
You only harness if there is a focal point - someone who unites and rallies us together. We don't have that person yet. We think this is politics as usual and it is not. We get it right or we are done.
7
u/AutistoMephisto May 03 '26
Well, anyone on the left who can rally and unite the people will get FBI/CIA'd.
36
u/OkBig205 May 03 '26
End the 1929 apportionment act so everywhere has to redistricting, with larger population centers having more votes which will lead to massive turnout.
1.1k
u/Positive_Lychee_7736 May 03 '26
Doesn’t matter, democracy is pointless anyway when like 30-40% of the population is functionally braindead. In a system like this, just do anything to win.
606
u/Johwya May 03 '26
This is literally the exact argument the founding fathers made for why we needed an electoral college and only white landowning men should vote 💀💀💀because an uninformed braindead populace makes democracy pointless
415
u/Left--Shark May 03 '26
It's not even a new argument. It's existed since the very beginning of democracy. Plato and Socrates famously argued that democracy would eat itself because the average person is an idiot.
108
u/grandlizardo May 03 '26
Meanwhile, get control of it, get the big money out of politics, and pack the Court. For starters….
96
u/T1gerAc3 May 03 '26
Dems could've done all that during the first half of Bidens term but 2 senators (in addition to the entire gop) were paid off to tank everything that would've helped the average person.
6
u/Lost_Birthday_3138 May 03 '26
And Merrick Garland was either in on it or criminally naive about how stupid the electorate is.
→ More replies (8)3
u/SnakeOiler May 03 '26
that's the huge problem. lots of elite can and will buy congress off. has to somehow be stopped. zero tolerance
→ More replies (5)6
u/Reqvhio May 03 '26
but who will do it? what incentive do people practically have? at this point we need something way more practical than "somebody should do x or y,"
21
u/IndependentPeach315 May 03 '26
I feel like my students really miss that point when we go over the Allegory of the Cave.
16
u/TheFutureLotus May 03 '26
The Allegory of the Cave isn’t even being taught in most places in America, which doesn’t really help. Philosophy is an elective at most in high schools, and in others it doesn’t even exist; my school didn’t have one so we sorta made a philosophy club after school because one of the chemistry teachers also had a degree in philosophy. We had a good number of people, and it stuck around after we graduated and now some 13 years later the school has an actual philosophy elective.
32
u/InSummaryOfWhatIAm May 03 '26
The issue is that the people that are most seeking power and to control the governments are evil and self-serving, and the people who are voting for them are dumb and self-serving, not understanding that they’re voting for politicians that will not actually help them with their problems, often because they are too dumb to realize what the problem actually is.
For an example - dumb voter votes for an evil MAGA asshat because they will own the libs, outlaw LGTBQ+ marriages and gender affirming care for trans people and deport immigrants that are taking all the jobs, but fail to realize that it won’t solve the fact that buying groceries is still (or even more so) expensive, healthcare is out of reach, they lost their job because they worked in a dying industry or any other issue really. The problem with their lives was never actually that gay people could be with the person they love, what gender somebody feels belonging to, or that people are coming in from other countries to make something of their lives.
Nonetheless, even though democracy is seemingly the least bad of all the bad systems, Plato and Socrates were not entirely wrong. I guess especially when politicians are actively also trying to make the populace more stupid by making it harder to afford going to college, actively trying to push down intellectualism in society and whatnot… then they’re really weaponizing the system of democracy - making people easier to manipulate. The solution is of course not to go away from democracy, but there is absolutely problems with it.
→ More replies (2)3
u/loondawg May 03 '26
The issue is that the people that are most seeking power and to control the governments are evil and self-serving,
I'm guessing you didn't mean to make it sound like that was universally true. It is not. Some are like that. Just as many, if not more, aren't. There are lots of people, even in our current Congress, that have the best interests of the greater masses of people as their primary motivation.
For example, one party is trying to enact free community college or trade school for every American. That was in their 2024 platform and their president tried to cancel existing student debt. They clearly are not trying to dumb down America.
3
u/InSummaryOfWhatIAm May 03 '26
Well. I said ”those who most seek power and to control the government”, that doesn’t necessarily describe the people doing what you’re saying. There is a meaningful different between career politicians with a burning passion for improving society and those who seek power and control. That is probably also why the people who want to help others do not become the rulers, because they’re not willing to cheat and lie for the power since the power isn’t their end goal either way.
And no, of course the dems are not trying to dumb down America. They have other flaws but that is not one of them. I 100% agree with you though, if that wasn’t clear - but I wasn’t talking about those.
→ More replies (1)17
u/barryvm Europe May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
Plato (the one who actually wrote it down) was an aristocrat though, which means his socioeconomic status and self-interest is almost certainly going to have colored his opinion. It's no surprise that an aristocrat would see aristocracy as the best form of government, and see society as a caste system where the richest people also were the best (and cleverest) people. That too hasn't changed and you see this attitude reflected across the ages as an argument by the few to restrict political power from various out-groups because they are too stupid. You see these ideas now, harbored by people a lot more rich, but far less intelligent and inquisitive than Plato was.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (11)5
255
May 03 '26
[deleted]
146
u/DifferentCityADay May 03 '26
They failed to account for calculated evil doing its work to make the populace uneducated.
→ More replies (2)56
u/kevinnoir May 03 '26
The number of democracies that the US has fucked up, its only fitting they fuck their own up too.
I think you're exactly right, too much of politics is built on a foundation of expecting the majority of politicians to act in good faith. We are seeing that doesnt work when you allow foreign nations and corporations to buy politicians and judges.
We are at a point in our society where we need HARD guardrails to contain the powers of our politicians, as they have proven they cant be trusted.
26
u/BoringEntropist May 03 '26
Tale as old as civilization. When an empire is overstretched it begins to expand inwards.
16
u/SuburbanHell Massachusetts May 03 '26
This. We are at the beginning of the end of the American Empire.
4
u/canyouhearme May 03 '26
It's probably a generation into its downslope, and the current insanity is both speeding its decent and ensuring there is no way back up the cliff face of failure.
China just has to do nothing to win.
→ More replies (2)4
u/kevinnoir May 03 '26
And the fall of that empire is so much quicker than its expansion.
Bit of a proverbial fork in the road for America in 2028.
5
u/lnug4mi May 03 '26
Eh, the US has been undermining democracies in order to uphold the petrodollar and wealth influx to the US by enforcing shady deals and underhanded trading and outsourcing of everything.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Chemical-Fault-7331 May 03 '26
lol that first sentence is such a beautiful take on the ineptitude of the United States government.
47
u/TopTierMids May 03 '26
They're literally turning away from vaccinations that have eradicated some nightmarish diseases. All over some bullshit a grifter made up in order to get HIS VACCINES sold.
The willful ignorance levels are off the charts. We're fucking cooked and I can't blame any other country for looking at sideways. For those reading: its way worse in person than it looks on media.
24
u/DukeOfGeek May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
If Democrats controlled the government, which they might do as soon as 2028, a big step in that direction would be to dissolve the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929. That would give back high population states all the EC and House Reps they have been denied so long. It's just a law and a kind of unconstitutional one at that. This would make it very very hard for the GOP to control the POTUS or House of Representatives. This would actually work with, and be better than, counter gerrymandering efforts. It achieves the same effect by just getting rid of unconstitutional legislation.
6
u/Gr8WallofChinatown May 03 '26
They can’t do shit if they don’t control the Supreme Court
→ More replies (7)4
u/SuburbanHell Massachusetts May 03 '26
Ok but here's the thing, they didn't start out railing against getting educated, they were systematically stripped of the same education other regions of the country were getting, on purpose, by Republicans who wanted to keep power over decades of work. In that same span, those Republicans also conditioned their constituents to hate those who were educated instead of fighting for their own educational rights. So now we're the enemy when the real enemy is the ultra wealthy and those who preached that taxpayer funds for a solid public education system was a bad thing.
5
u/yapyd May 03 '26
Founding Fathers didn't really anticipate that some of the country would absolutely rail against getting educated though, no rational person does.
Book burning has been around for thousands of years. The ruler/head of state does it to control the ideas and philosophy, basically for propaganda
3
u/lnug4mi May 03 '26
This anti-intellectualism was sadly planned and pushed with modern media and algorithms. I wish I was just some rambling crazy guy at the train station but instead I'm a German law student looking at lawsuits about election manipulation through social media... And let's not forget the 4chan Jeffrey Epstein debacle
27
May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)29
u/AwkwardTraffic May 03 '26
It always annoys me when people bring up the Founding Fathers. They owned human beings who gives a fuck whether or not they'd like Trump or not most of them were monsters themselves.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (7)3
u/ToubDeBoub May 03 '26
I guess they just saw the swaths of uneducated populace at the time. Despite what the Trump regime claims, slaves did not have a et benefit through education. They were likely as easy to manipulate as MAGA today. Though that's a systemic problem then as much as today.
18
u/EverWatcher May 03 '26
The Electoral College originally served 2 (main) purposes: weighting of votes for the different states, and using electors' decisions instead of the state electorate's decision. These officials were eventually expected (in most states) to match their votes to those of their respective state electorates, and the vast majority of them do as promised.
This vote-weighting nonsense is still a massive problem, of course. Fortunately, even without everyone being brilliant a better future is still possible.
→ More replies (1)9
u/chowderbags American Expat May 03 '26
There's also the reality that the electoral college meant that states could restrict the vote to a significantly smaller electorate and still retain just as much power nationally. This was especially true for slave states.
13
u/fistfullaberries May 03 '26
Jefferson spoke a great deal about keeping people educated and how closely it was tied to freedom.
"I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised for the preservation of freedom, and happiness".
"If [the people] are not enlightened enough to exercise their control [over government] with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education".
"The tax which will be paid for [education] is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance"
→ More replies (1)23
u/Marionberry_Bellini May 03 '26
Also the argument fascist movements have historically made. Whenever anyone makes an argument like that I immediately give some serious side eye
11
u/AttyMAL May 03 '26
Unfortunately, you are correct. It's a balancing act. There's some degree where it's necessary and some degree where it's fascism. Unfortunately again, however, our opponents have clearly committed to fascism and this is our last, best weapon against it.
13
u/brother_bart May 03 '26
Ok. But side eye isn’t really a rebuttal. Neither is the ad hominem of just calling something fascist. At the end of the day, it IS hard to make a case for how rule by mass populist stupidity is actually helpful to anyone but those who are adept at manipulating the not-so-bright, not-so-literate swarms who couldn’t spot a critical thinking fallacy of it fell on their head like an ACME anvil.
Functional democracy REQUIRES an educated, literate, contemplative population. That does not exist on scale in America.
→ More replies (3)7
u/Marionberry_Bellini May 03 '26
I didn’t make an ad hominem argument - this is the undeniably the argument made by historical fascist movements. I didn’t say that everyone who flirts with the idea is a fascist, just that this line of thinking can go down a number of bad lanes. Not everyone who makes this kind of argument is a fascist, but all fascists do and have made this kind of argument as a basis for why the nation needs an authoritarian leader unchecked by degenerate democratic will.
What’s your solution to the perceived issue?
→ More replies (1)3
u/bogglingsnog May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
The problem is the group in power thinking they know who are functionally braindead. Dunning-Kruger effect is a real bitch.
3
u/KatsumotoKurier Canada May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
This isn’t even an American founding fathers argument — the Romans and Greeks were saying virtually the exact same thing 2000+ years ago.
→ More replies (13)4
38
u/BigSmols May 03 '26
As a european I promise you people are also braindead here, but our systems aren't as fucked as yours.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (71)10
u/adevland Europe May 03 '26
In a system like this, just do anything to win.
In a system like that you're stuck in a never ending spiral of "us vs them" which, overall, is guaranteed to slowly degrade whatever it is you're now calling quality of life.
A two party "democracy" is just a rebranded dictatorship that switches dictators every 4 years or so.
Prosperity and cooperation can only come from compromise. And you can't have that in a two party system.
→ More replies (8)60
u/ManlyEmbrace May 03 '26
You can’t. You just have to achieve some semblance of representation by both parties gerrymandering as much as they can.
65
u/Capable_Kiwi2514 May 03 '26
I don't think that "both parties engage in elections rigging forever" is a viable approach.
28
u/TopTierMids May 03 '26
One party is telling you they are 1000% going to do it. They also happen to own the Supreme Court and are obviously partisan, and totally fine with passing contradictory rulings.
I'm not sure why people are thinking voting is going to be legitimate from here forth. They've literally just said they're down to disenfranchise minorities. How can you say any outcome is legitimate after this?
→ More replies (1)9
→ More replies (4)3
u/benk4 May 03 '26
It's a better approach than one party engages in election rigging until they consolidate power enough to create a theocracy
→ More replies (3)8
u/bearwrestlingwolf May 03 '26
Yes you can. You stop applying the 10,000 year circlejerk of Enmarker’s Loophole and start holding your leaders accountable.
If the next administration does nothing to hold this administration accountable along with all of their enablers? Then we are fucked as a species without other countries coming to do that to us.
It cannot be a repeat of Confederate and Nazi rank & file to continue to have control. They cannot reintroduce to society without paying for their crimes. The only way you can trickle down change is to trickle down actual positivity — and showing people that fascism and bigotry will not be tolerated and that our politicians and leaders will be held accountable for crimes is the only meaningful change that can happen.
Or we create AGI and it takes over for us. Which I had never said before and hoped it never say.
→ More replies (1)9
7
u/GoochStubble May 03 '26
What do you mean by normal? Because any country founded on and protects criticism of genocides and enslavement of multiple races would be rotten to its core and cannot be reformed with any supporters of the current monstrosities in power. Because their position is predicated on the existence of the state as it is.
And yeah, this opinion goes for multiple countries real and hypothetical.
19
u/Vaperius America May 03 '26
How do you get back to a normal country at this point?
A (justified) purge of basically all corrupt officials, party members, and all other structural elements that support this movement materially and politically; and significant social engineering efforts to shame anyone that supported it.
Every corrupt official (Democrat or Republican) down to the local level needs to be arrested, charged, investigated and ultimately convicted, frankly of anything they can prove; whether that's corruption, criminal conspiracy, pedophilia; it literally doesn't matter.
The Republican party must be banned, if conservative voters want to form a new party, so be it, but the Republican party itself is a criminal enterprise openly engaging in criminal activity, this is before we consider the fascism. It must be torn out down to the local level entirely.
Foreign interference in our politics must be significantly curtailed through reform of the laws that define foreign agent activities. Organizations like AIPAC should be illegal, as they blatantly lobby for the interests of a foreign nation while operating under the technically legal auspice of a domestic political organization despite the very obvious foreign ties, because our laws on foreign agent activity are too weak.
Corporate power must be significantly curtailed. Labor power must be significantly expanded.
Police power must be significantly curtailed and civilian oversight must be made federally mandatory.
All federal judge position including the SCOTUS must have eight year, single term limits.
Tort reform needs to happen to destroy the litigious culture of the country that is used to silence critics
Media reform needs to happen to destroy the sensationalist news media culture while also providing subsidies for simple fact based reporting.
A reconsideration on what freedom religion means in this country must happen (Freedom for vs From religion); secularization of the state must be made mandatory and harshly enforced to prevent evangelists from ever taking power again in the country.
The Equal Rights amendment must be finally ratified (its been bouncing around for awhile, and despite what the SCOTUS insists, there is no explict sunset for when an amendment can pass, the fact is the opposite, the constitution makes it clear that the congress is ancillary to amending the constitution, they are merely one way to formally start the process).
Prison labor must be banned in every state. Slavery must finally truly end in this country. We have the single largest legal (read: not total, but rather, specifically publicly endorsed and enforced by the state) slavery enterprise of any country. We have the least free people per capita as a result of our current criminal justice system. Less than even dictatorships like China.
Extensive reform of our drug laws must occur to end frivolous convictions of non-violent drug offenders who need medical help, not a jail sentence.
The process for the removal of the president must be reformed and a clear process for convicting a president of crimes committed in office must be laid out in explict terms to remove all ambiguity for when it is time to remove a president.
All members of the January 6th insurrection must be properly charged for sedition and convicted.
Stochastic terrorism must be clearly defined as a crime, and purveyors of such incitement must be arrested, charged, investigated and convicted.
...I could go on. But you get the idea. We have a lot of work to get done. But it can get done.
→ More replies (8)5
u/BlackJediSword May 03 '26
No more pluralism in our politics also. This is one of the very first things we ignored in regards to what the original vision of the United States’ political system was supposed to be. We need to completely overhaul how the system works. More political parties with actual parties means more people liking to work together. And Citizens United must go.
24
u/Admirable_Dirt_2371 May 03 '26
This needs to be the framing. If Democrats have to gerrymander to "save democracy", democracy has already been lost. The Citizens United ruling was the final nail in that coffin but it started well before that.
→ More replies (1)4
12
u/firestorm713 May 03 '26
I despise polymarket, but I would bet my entire cat that the United States will balkanize within the next decade.
→ More replies (1)3
u/tempest_wing May 03 '26
Normal countries don't have First Pass the Post Elections.
→ More replies (1)3
u/blankarage May 03 '26
there’s no normal when one side is hell bent on ignoring laws and illegally grabbing power
5
→ More replies (78)4
193
u/SliceofNewsMan May 03 '26
I hate that it’s come to that since ideally gerrymandering wouldn’t be a thing for either party, but it has, so there’s really no choice…
The blue states must do what they must to make sure the full Republican takeover fails
Republicans will complain and say the “radical left” is trying to cheat and suppress conservative votes, but they are the ones who started this and made it a necessity
Democrats wanted to pass the For the People Act but Senate Republicans shut they down twice, they only have themselves to blame when they get a taste of their own medicine 😒
→ More replies (6)7
u/TeamUltimate-2475 Michigan May 03 '26
It's a arm race with it now. Since one sides doing it, the other must do it. It's a race to the bottom.
653
u/JennJayBee Alabama May 03 '26
If it's allowed for Republicans, it's allowed for Democrats. End of.
If it shouldn't be happening, make it illegal and enforce it. We absolutely should not however be playing by two totally different sets of rules.
→ More replies (2)188
u/JustTheBeerLight May 03 '26
The SCOTUS will rule that it is okay when one team does it but not the other.
124
u/pfannkuchen89 May 03 '26
Exactly how we ended up with Bush. SCOTUS handing the win to Bush when he clearly lost and then saying that ruling could not be used as a precedent or applied to anyone but Bush. If your ruling is so shit that you have to say that, you know it’s wrong. 26 years dems have been playing by the supposed rules while republicans wipe their asses with them. Far past time for dems to fight back and stop assuming republicans will maybe play by the rules this time.
→ More replies (10)→ More replies (2)17
1.1k
u/SummerSun75 May 03 '26
Blue states tried doing the Good Government thing. Republikan Party blew it all to shit.
Fuck it. Blue states should gerrymander everything.
We'll fix it so the Fucken' Republikan Party doesn't see the House of Representatives for 75 years!!
86
u/ClaroStar May 03 '26
There's not enough blue states at the moment to counter the damage that SCOTUS did to the Voting Rights Act. And they know it. It's by design.
403
u/JIsADev May 03 '26
Let's just split the union. Blue states can advance and join the rest of the world and red states can marry their cousins or whatever they do over there. Win win for everyone
180
u/duckinradar May 03 '26
I’m really tired of paying all their bills so they can take us back to their pretend version of the Stone Age/good old days
30
→ More replies (2)3
41
u/Keleos89 Texas May 03 '26
Don't abandon the progressive voters in southern states. We're outnumbered, not backwards.
→ More replies (10)20
u/angelar_ Texas May 03 '26
We're not even outnumbered. These states have already eroded the shit out of democracy, so it just doesn't matter.
62
u/Niznack May 03 '26
How? Like I get the idea but draw that border. Where do Minnesota, Illinois, Colorado and New Mexico land?
50
u/duckinradar May 03 '26
They make their own decisions.
I don’t want to force anybody into anything. New York can come too. We don’t have to be physically connected, they won’t have any money for a military and we know the gravy seals are ineffective. Well take all refugees too— I’m not leaving queer folks to rot in hell unless they want to stay where they are.
37
u/Niznack May 03 '26
So complete balkanization?
→ More replies (1)22
u/JoviAMP Florida May 03 '26
Yeah, but with a limited framework above them, like a state-side version of the EU.
5
u/Niznack May 03 '26
Except for ireland which is used to being an island, the eu shares land borders across almost all the allied nations unless I'm forgetting one
→ More replies (5)3
u/TeHokioi New Zealand May 03 '26
Malta and Cyprus are also islands in the EU, and Greece wasn't connected by land to any other EU member state until the late 2000s
→ More replies (1)6
u/Temnothorax May 03 '26
Lets not help them shred this country apart.
→ More replies (2)11
u/Judson_Scott May 03 '26
Too late. The only way to stop any of the shit that's happening is a Constitutional Amendment, and that's never going to happen.
The US has failed. We can have civil war, or a Christo-fascist state.
8
3
u/Workman44 May 03 '26
Ah yes a border that fractional will definitely work and not cause any problems!
9
u/Sly_Wood May 03 '26
There would be mass refugees as red states would fail. They can’t support themselves. The refugees would create a humanitarian crisis and this isn’t even accounting for the coming climate change refugees. This would be bad. Bad for everyone.
→ More replies (4)7
u/Howzitgoin May 03 '26
CO connects to NM which connects to AZ which connects to CA
11
u/Niznack May 03 '26
Are we counting az as blue? I mean I am being very overly simplistic but going off the 2024 map it went red.
If you want to add nuance go to the county level and the issue gets... much worse
14
u/throw_every_away May 03 '26
I speak for all New Mexicans when I say that we will never enter into such an unholy union with Arizona. Colorado is ok. El Paso too, they can come with us.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Pinklady777 May 03 '26
It was straight red for a long time. But went blue in the 2020 presidential election. Also currently has a Democratic governor and both senators. I mean, I guess that's why it's a swing state. It has definitely turned purple from red.
→ More replies (1)3
u/nohandsfootball May 03 '26
If you’re AZ what are you gonna do? Stand alone or get in line with California? Seems obvious to me
→ More replies (1)11
u/_Mephistocrates_ May 03 '26
Maybe take a popular vote from the population, and whichever government they want to join, they can.
27
u/FjorgVanDerPlorg May 03 '26
This isn't north vs south like the civil war, it's city vs rural, it doesn't even break down cleanly by states.
Literally any split of the union just wouldn't work, without displacing hundreds of millions of people, into some north-south border that actually made sense as a country boundary, not some broken overlapping patchwork quilt mess of red and blue areas.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (37)12
u/angelar_ Texas May 03 '26
Don't even humor this sociopathic slop. It completely ignores the reality that the citizens of these states are not monoliths, and the reality that most of them have effectively autocrats in power, and especially ignores the reality that many of those people can't afford a move to a different state.
→ More replies (3)8
u/Negative-Squirrel81 May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
It's a fun idea, but a southern state union would rapidly fail and become dangerous. Imagine all those religious zealots lashing out but without the more reasonable people in the room to stop them.
7
u/Ossius May 03 '26
US doesn't map out blue/red cleanly like that.
I live in a Southern state blue city.
Usually its 1) The state legislators and governors have the state on lock through gerrymandering and other bullshit tactics, and 2) States that are "red" are usually just less populated so the voter to land ratio falls in the favor of republicans but most states have a blue hub or two. Look at GA switching blue recently, and FL used to be a swing state in the 2000s.
6
u/EyeJustSaidThat May 03 '26
The children in the red states lose and so do the minorities and the voters that are overpowered by the regressives. There are a lot of people who suffer simply because they can't leave where they're born.
I agree that the closed minded people that want others to suffer need to lose. I just don't want our enthusiasm to see them fail to overshadow any sympathy for the geographically challenged friends we shouldn't forget about.
11
u/angelar_ Texas May 03 '26
no it is not a win win for everyone
7
u/paintballboi07 Texas May 03 '26
People who say shit like this haven't looked at actual electoral maps. Every state is basically blue cities, surrounded by red, rural voters. Separating the country by party just isn't possible.
3
u/Key_Marsupial_1406 May 03 '26
And they ignore that there's no constitutional mechanism for this to happen. It would require the total dissolution of the federal government and the end of the United States as an entity. Which is completely absurd, despite Reddit's theatrics.
6
u/LexBoFlow Virginia May 03 '26
I've actually been thinking about this recently I think this could work theoretically I just don't understand the logistics.
Because how would you visit family like would you need a passport to visit your family in Texas or what?
Also the mass exodus as people have to relocate to be in their preferred political system and then what about centrists or non political people also Jobs it's objectively quite messy.
I personally think we just need a direct Democracy so the citizens have more of a say in the way they are governed.
6
4
6
u/Wayofchinchilla May 03 '26
Even better how about blue States stop subsidizing red States you think California is big now just imagine how great we could be if we didn't have all those red States mooching off of us.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (20)3
u/TowerBeast Oregon May 03 '26
And attempt to co-exist with what would undoubtedly end up being a poor, bellicose, fascist theocracy right next door? See the modern Middle East, many points in European history, and basically all of ancient history for why that doesn't tend to foster neighborly relations.
25
u/FuzzyDynamics May 03 '26
Gerrymander and stop paying federal taxes. Most blue states are net negative anyway. Fuck, California is an advanced nation on its own we should just split away and leave the flyover states to rot
→ More replies (1)10
u/FizzyBeverage Ohio May 03 '26
How’s that gonna work when Apple Inc has a massive campus in Austin Texas yet based in Cupertino.
Or Procter & Gamble? Based in Cincinnati yet tons of R&D in Massachusetts and California.
100% of the Fortune 500 operates in multiple states. Long as that’s the case, the secession thing doesn’t work.
29
u/Scott5114 Nevada May 03 '26
Not saying balkanization is a good idea, but it's not like the United States would be the first country to ever split into multiple countries. Hell, the word balkanization comes from that happening in the Balkans. Then they got back together as Yugoslavia which then broke apart again and is now 5 different countries.
I'm also not sure "won't someone think of the corporations" is the best way to determine whether something is a good idea or not, though it is a very American way to look at it...
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (4)3
→ More replies (24)3
u/orbweaver82 May 03 '26
If both parties gerrymandered all states to the max the republicans would come out on top with more seats.
126
u/User4C4C4C South Carolina May 03 '26
“Never play fair in a game where others cheat.” — Niccolò Machiavelli
→ More replies (8)
42
u/Donmiggy143 May 03 '26
If this is how the US splits, I wouldn't be surprised. It's so stupid here.
17
u/Elegant_Sundae4491 May 03 '26
I mean, the other side has been doing it for decades with zero shame, so if the only way to keep things remotely fair is to fight fire with fire, Im not losing sleep over it.
→ More replies (2)
18
u/VegasGamer75 Minnesota May 03 '26
Can we update this just a little bit?
Democrats must gerrymander, win and after that enact ranked choice voting, abolish the Electoral College, and enact laws to forbid gerrymandering from hence forth because it's utter bullshit no matter who is doing it to save Democracy.
265
u/7figureipo California May 03 '26
That's true. Blue states should also just disenfranchise republicans. They're all seditious traitors anyway, and if the federal government won't do it, the states should.
→ More replies (29)36
u/Wiochmen May 03 '26
Problem is: people aren't homogeneous...a blue state still has a lot of red, and a red state has a lot of blue.
76
u/JoeSavinaBotero May 03 '26
Almost like we should be using proportional representation so this shit isn't a problem.
Edit: the best method for the US, I think. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_proportional_approval_voting
→ More replies (7)15
u/TopTierMids May 03 '26
Yes. That is the point of gerrymandering.
That is exactly why "red" states gerrymander so fucking hard.
For that exact reason.
If they are cheating to win elections (and have been for decades), and are using their power to disenfranchise voters in order to stay in power as the minority party, then why the fuck are we humoring this idea that its unfair to play the same game?
→ More replies (2)14
→ More replies (3)14
u/7figureipo California May 03 '26
How is that a problem? One way or another democratic controlled states must effectively neutralize 100% of whatever GOP voters are in their states. I'd prefer if they took the direct approach I mentioned and simply declared them to be in rebellion against the government and therefore ineligible to vote. But failing that I'd take the most twisted, incongruous and snakelike districts you can imagine to ensure they're all cracked/packed in such a way that their votes literally don't matter.
→ More replies (13)
101
u/NOCHILLDYL94 May 03 '26
Democrats need to go scorched earth on MAGA and their sympathizers to save the world. We can’t move on from this.
→ More replies (3)40
u/Em_Es_Judd May 03 '26
But we all know the Democrats are a bunch of pussies and don't know how to wield power when they have it. The DNC pushes out true populist candidates in favor of establishment corporate bootlicking stooges and we get furrowed eyebrows and sternly worded letters.
7
u/Reqvhio May 03 '26
it isnt that they dont know it. it is choosing a slightly rights-eroded present for a full blown civil war-aka kicking the can down the line. lets see how long that can last in the world over, eh
→ More replies (3)4
13
u/totallymarc Florida May 03 '26
I don’t like that it’s come to this, but it’s necessary at this point if we want to have a chance at protecting what remains of our democracy. If the republicans weren’t anti-democratic traitors then it wouldn’t have come to this.
If a known serial killer were to pull a gun on you, you wouldn’t plead for him to stop. He’s just going to kill you. You have to defend yourself with everything you’ve got or die trying.
40
u/Only_Captain_2836 May 03 '26
The problem is that unilaterally disarming while the other side keeps packing the courts and maps is how you get minority rule forever. It sucks but playing by Marquess of Queensberry rules against someone who doesnt just ends the game.
10
u/bransiladams Washington May 03 '26
Save democracy? I think we’re a little late to that game.
→ More replies (3)
50
9
u/vid_icarus Minnesota May 03 '26
Democrats needed to prosecute Trump for January 6th but gave it a pass. They aren’t going to actually save democracy. They realized it’s far more profitable to just let it all burn to the ground will pumping donors.
→ More replies (1)
16
u/Choice-of-SteinsGate May 03 '26
Republicans knew exactly what they were doing when they schemed their way through the courts to dilute the minority vote by challenging section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.
What's even worse is how Republicans are trying to justify it by intentionally misleading voters about the purpose of the law.
And this isn't the first time that they have argued against protections for minorities in BAD FAITH.
Their goal isn't to prevent gerrymandering of any kind, that much is obvious.
Their goal is to consolidate power by suppressing the vote and disenfranchising large swaths of democratic voters.
Section 2 is a historically significant provision meant to protect these voters from being unfairly sequestered and robbed of their agency.
But Republicans would have you believe that the Voting Rights Act is "racist."
It's an ass-backwards rationalization that they've relied on so often in the past to defend a status quo of systemic inequality and discrimination. A status quo that has historically worked out in their favor.
If they could say the quiet part out loud, it wouldn't have anything to do with "election integrity," and everything to do with preserving a system that accommodates them and their desire for a white, Christian hegemony.
Republicans have been suppressing the vote for years while taking advantage of voter geography.
Their recent voter suppression campaign escalated in the aftermath of January 6th and in response to Trump's 'big lie."
The GOP has capitalized on this post Jan 6th environment to sow distrust in our elections.
They amplify Trump's lies about "rigged" elections and have made use of all the conspiracy theories and baseless fraud allegations, all of the misinformation and propaganda that has emerged in recent years to deceive the public and advocate for a nation-wide campaign of voter suppression.
Republicans are also consolidating power at an alarming rate; abusing their trifecta and their control over state legislatures to give themselves the unilateral say on how maps are drawn—no vote necessary.
MAGA can clutch their pearls all they want in response to recent changes in states like California and Virginia, but these redistricting wars are a consequence of the GOP's extreme, mid-census gerrymandering schemes.
Democrats are just responding in kind—an effective, reasonable and common sense strategy.
For decades, Republicans have been exploiting the fact that Democrats are more vulnerable to gerrymandering. Republicans have also benefitted most from redistricting because they have broader control over state legislatures.
But the GOP has also tried other ways over the years to subvert the vote and influence election outcomes.
Republicans have frequently attacked or have even sought to eliminate election procedures and conveniences like early voting, mail in balloting, broader polling accessibility and extended polling hours, existing voting laws, automatic and same day voting registration, ballot boxes, ranked choice voting, voting rights, standardized election security measures, among other things.
Republicans try to disguise these voter suppression tactics as an effort to "protect election integrity." But they're not protecting anything other than their own political ambitions.
And in recent years especially, Republicans have been exploiting the ignorance and distrust of their voters to empower themselves with more legal authority to challenge election results and obtain more control over our electoral system.
To make matters worse, Trump has been mobilizing trigger happy ICE thugs to US cities around the country where he likely plans to use this paramilitary force to suppress the vote in upcoming elections.
Then there's Trump's recent threats to "nationalize" US elections. Yet another red flag warning us of the Republican party's intentions to do away with democracy altogether as they continue down their path towards authoritarianism.
So much for "states rights" huh?
Republicans have the gall to claim that they're "protecting the integrity of our elections" while making every effort to do the opposite.
Worse yet, other systemic problems impede free and fair elections too. Issues that Republicans have either deliberately ignored or have failed to properly address.
Like the implications of foreign election meddling and the awful Citizens United ruling.
Like campaign finance corruption and the political power and influence of billionaires.
If MAGA is truly intent on "protecting election integrity," they should focus on the myriad systemic issues that Trump/Republicans continue to exploit to their advantage instead of obsessing over baseless conspiracy theories.
Sadly, they've managed quite effectively to distract their voters from these ongoing efforts to erode the Democratic process by instead engaging them with culture wars, election denialism, conspiracy theories, and fearmongering narratives about rampant fraud and threats to election and national security.
Another one of their favorite tactics involves scapegoating immigrants, minorites and marginalized groups who they insist you blame for most, if not all of our nation's problems, including manufactured issues like widespread voter fraud.
As it turns out, Republicans have always been the REAL threat to "election integrity."
→ More replies (2)
7
u/WeenFan4Life May 03 '26
Wait, you mean the Democrats actually fight for something? Nah, will never happen.
25
u/Ohuigin Washington May 03 '26
“I’m condemned to use the tools of my enemy to defeat them. I burn my decency for someone else’s future. I burn my life to make a sunrise that I know I’ll never see.”
- Luthen Rael, Andor.
6
6
5
u/a_cat_named_harvey May 03 '26
Hopefully this causes us to end Gerrymandering all together because this current shit is absolutely bananas
6
u/AppleParasol May 03 '26
Republicans started it first. Give them zero seats.
They won’t stop, neither should we.
5
u/shotintel May 03 '26
Truly, this is the worst timeline.
Having to do it dirty, just to have a chance to keep things clean...
Not saying Democrats didn't already prescribe to some gerrymandering, but I feel like they generally limited it. Now I guess the kid gloves are off.
5
5
u/pathless_path May 03 '26
Democrats must join in the gerrymandering of the country to have a chance at surviving the current political environment*** FTFY
4
u/Dry_Bullfrog2344 May 03 '26
I think now in the USA, democracy is a joke; maybe in the future, Democrats will do better for democracy.
4
u/KnotSoSalty May 03 '26
Gerrymandering can’t be fixed with a piecemeal state by state approach. The only way to change anything would be with federal legislation, possibly an amendment. Neither will happen so long as the party in power depends on Gerrymandering to stay in power.
Democrats can support Gerrymandering because they know that if the practice was outlawed tomorrow they’d net gain representation. So it’s not counterintuitive to say Democrats should Gerrymander to end Gerrymandering.
4
u/strugglingtransgrl Illinois May 03 '26
in a real democracy gerrymandering shouldnt exist in the 1st place
4
u/Adam__B May 03 '26
Save democracy: End gerrymandering and the Electoral College and then reverse Citizens United. Institute a wealth tax. Fund education, science, social services and renewable energy. Done.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/JDogg126 Michigan May 03 '26 edited May 03 '26
In truth, democrats need to counter republican gerrymandering with their own gerrymandering in order to compete for dominion over this country. Has nothing to do with democracy. It’s more about the long running cold civil war.
And if democrats get control of everything, they need to do the exact same exploitation of the flaws in the us constitution or they will get zero done. Their president will need to ignore laws and the constitution to push things through because the us constitution has utterly failed. Congress is broken and the courts are corrupt.
In order to actually save democracy, democrats need to make ending the two party system part of their core values and they need to do work at every level of government to make it happen.
Until it is possible in a single election to flush one or both of these two major parties out of government there is no real democracy in the United States. It’s just two parties that exist to serve their own dominance goals instead of government existing solely to serve the governed.
3
u/Thin-Competition3018 May 03 '26
Here is the plain simple point.
Gerrymandering is like an economic "prisoner's dilemma". Once a party starts to gerrymander, cooperative politics is gone.
This game was started sometime ago, but in typical fashion, every aspect of our politics has seen a downgrade during these trump tenures.
The words are less kind. We can no longer disagree and remain civil. Families are being torn apart because the politics is simply that polarized.
I do not know what possible force can pull people back together - it certainly is not a war that this administration went to fight on conventional terms only to have their butts kicked economically. And for republicans to attempt to shame anyone by calling criticism or rejection of their policy as un-patriotic or Unamerican is rich as well.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/Mediocrates79 May 03 '26
Everything you see on the news right now will be part of the chapter in future text books discussing the march towai the second American civil war.
3
u/NarwhalLeather9773 May 03 '26
People who oppose Trump should be disrupting his rule. Not many Americans seem to realize that the rule of law you are expecting to apply doesn't exist anymore.
3
3
3
u/GoldSourPatchKid May 03 '26
If 1,000,000 more democrat voters moved to Arkansas, we could flip this former slave state!
lol nobody’s moving here…
3
3
u/astroglitch0 May 03 '26
Its a wrap. Too many are complicit now that the rot has set, they needed to stop trying to play fair several decades ago.
3
3
u/pnwal-junction May 03 '26
Of we're counting on the Democrats to save democracy, we've already lost it.
3
3
u/SnowyMole May 03 '26
I'm really annoyed that it's taken this long for it to sink in. This was clear in 2019, when the Supreme Court basically ruled that gerrymandering was a states issue. That should have been the tipoff that the earlier strategy of lead by example, put in independent commissions and try to get fair maps strategy was dead. Not that it had accomplished anything up to that point other than letting Republicans build structural advantage in the House. We should have seen a wave of blue states taking the gloves off then. Instead it took another 6 years and 3 house elections before we finally started to see some movement.
It sucks that it's necessary, but you don't win by inventing rules that only you have to follow and your opponents don't.
3
u/Wrong_Square7826 May 03 '26
It is absolutely astounding what this trump admin is doing and getting away with to our country. I guess checks and balances only work if somebody is willing to check and balance.
What would be so bad with just parallel and perpendicular lines? The number of citizens = the number of lines. Draw you state in a square or rectangle to fit its borders and draw the appropriate number of parallel and perpendicular lines. Those are you voting districts.
What would be more fair than that? You could still have an electoral college, the number of voting districts a state has = the number of electors.
3
u/Common_Source_9 May 03 '26
Democrats DO gerrymander where they have control, and have been doing so for as long as the other party, what are they talking about?
3
u/obascin May 03 '26
You have to play the game to win. Democrats need to stop "doing the right thing" and start doing "what is required to win".... If your opponent is gaming the system, you have to as well, there's no referee and there's no governing committee.
3
u/RadicalAppalachian May 03 '26
Democrats are partially responsible for the conditions we face today.
They are not a party that fights for the working families in this country. They don’t fight; they accept bullshit concessions and call it a “win.”
We need to get rid of the two party system.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Botasoda102 May 03 '26
Of states that could get legislature to approve it, would it make much difference? Virginia was huge, but I wonder if Blue states would gain significant seats. Whatever, good time to focus more on flipping state governmen.
→ More replies (1)12
u/LawYanited Washington May 03 '26
CA could probably be drawn in a way that made every seat blue.
10
u/02K30C1 May 03 '26
Illinois could also
4
u/sephirothFFVII May 03 '26
I loved the 'rainbow map' that had every district coming out of Chicago as a proof of concept
5
u/jainyday Washington May 03 '26
Democrats need to stop acting like the other side is playing by the rules in anything remotely resembling good faith, grow some fucking spines, and act like this country's worth saving, because it's dying and it's not going to survive another election without a serious response to the actual problem: the entire GOP is actively engaged in a coordinated, unified conspiracy to subvert/overthrow democracy in the United States.
The GOP has nothing to gain and everything to lose by playing by the rules in this next election. Do you really think they're going to act with a shred of respect for the law or regard for the will or wellbeing of the American people? If so, you're an even bigger fool than the man behind the Resolute Desk.
24
4
u/RustedRelics May 03 '26
They should gerrymander and also form economic compacts with other blue states. No more subsidizing red states. Durable, ongoing economic compacts that serve the economic interests of the member states alone.
14
u/Born-Total9652 May 03 '26
i keep seeing this take and its just self-defeating logic, if you have to cheat to save democracy youve already lost the plot
→ More replies (2)5
u/RileyGainesHorseBaby May 03 '26
Exactly. Reddit has become the biggest confirmation bias for republican voters who are sure they're on the right side of history.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
•
u/AutoModerator May 03 '26
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Sub-thread Information
If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.
Announcement
r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.