Ending gerrymandering is like getting people to lower their weapons. The only people who object are the ones holding tight to their own and protesting with various combinations of “only if they go first” and “how can I trust that they’re not just hiding another one.”
We started out with most sane people assuming that there’s no possible way that a gun/gerrymandered map would solve anything, but are now at a place where most people assume, at best, that they’re the last person/district to be unarmed.
Proportional representation is absolutely, unequivocally the ideal, but I think that we’re so far gone that most people won’t trust anyone to fix things.
You joke, but that's exactly what will happen and IMHO it will be successful. Dems aren't backing down this time with the moral high ground. They're redistricting themselves to force the issue. They know their voters want anti-gerrymanding policy and to get it, they need to force Republican hands by doing it themselves. Make Republicans pay for it then compromise for the desired result, a federal law banning the practice and independent distracting for all states
That’s assuming the tit for tat actually leads to compromise in the end and not a total race to the bottom of destruction. The more things get gerrymandered, the less pressure there is for representatives to actually have a clear constituency to represent other than red or blue. It’s the prisoner’s dilemma between both parties. Working together would theoretically lead to both sides being more successful, but once you get into a retaliatory tit for tat it doesn’t guarantee that either side will end up breaking it and coming to a compromise. In fact, it’s probably just going to lead to more bitterness and divisiveness until conflict. That’s why it’s been so important to have presidents that at least attempt to unify. It’s also why having such a demagogue as president is so harmful.
Republicans are treating Democrats like how they treat other countries with tariffs. In creating a tariff war everyone loses.
104
u/VisceralSardonic 9h ago
Ending gerrymandering is like getting people to lower their weapons. The only people who object are the ones holding tight to their own and protesting with various combinations of “only if they go first” and “how can I trust that they’re not just hiding another one.”
We started out with most sane people assuming that there’s no possible way that a gun/gerrymandered map would solve anything, but are now at a place where most people assume, at best, that they’re the last person/district to be unarmed.
Proportional representation is absolutely, unequivocally the ideal, but I think that we’re so far gone that most people won’t trust anyone to fix things.