Republican Led Effforts At Gerrymandering Are Backfiring Horribly–And Here’s Why

0
366

As America continues to grow more and more diverse, Republicans seem to regress and regress. The diversification of the American voter has forced Republicans to do the one thing they can do to continue winning elections: cheat by gerrymandering the hell out of their voting districts.

Since 2010, Republicans have enjoyed a huge advantage from gerrymandering. According to an estimate by the Brennan Center for Justice, Republican gerrymandering accounts for 16 or 17 GOP seats in the current Congress that the party may not otherwise control. But a series of state Supreme Court decisions, including a big one in Pennsylvania, has severely hindered their ability to cheat by gerrymandering. But Democrats also happen to be running in their erstwhile safe congressional districts in record numbers.

Many of the once-secure 55-45 Republican districts are now up for grabs, even in states that have not had competitive congressional races since 2012, which is when the new maps were installed. Republican districts in North Carolina and Ohio are prime examples of their gerrymandering efforts gone amok.

The math that was used to create these districts was the same math that was calculated in the anti-Obama era, said Paul Shumaker, a Republican consultant based in North Carolina. But now, he continued, because of the way the maps have been drawn and the environment that Republicans are facing, you have a whole bunch of Republicans who have never been in a competitive race in their life, who are running [in one] right now.

Republicans currently face an electorate very hostile to their policies and a president who’s given poor job ratings by a majority of Americans. As much as they love rewriting history, the fact remains that people vote in the mid-terms on results, typically punishing the incumbent party. They thought they could continue manipulating the electorate through cynical gerrymandering, but even that appears to be biting them in the a$$.

 

 

Comments

comments