Because disenfranchising people is the solution to disenfranchising people. But who knows - this may be the least bad option.
I don’t think anybody sane wanted to go there, but the reality of the right-wing’s willingness to stoop to whatever absurd thing it takes to ensure their power-grab is built to last has left little other option but to fight fire with fire.
I think you’re probably right, in the sense that not doing this would probably be even worse, but we’re destroying the town to save it, as the saying goes. Win or lose, there won’t be much left of a very important norm.
Is this gerrymandering? I’m not sure I understand.
Anyhow, even pro-democrat gerrymandering would be a plus at this point. Until it can be abolished completely.
Yes, it is fully gerrymandering. There is no other term for it.
It sucks but we had to do it. I voted yes, mainly since it plans to self terminate and aims to stop Texas, who didn’t let it’s citizens vote on the same issue.
Yes, the idea came from countering Trump’s gerrymandering push in Texas.
And I’m like 99% sure Texas didn’t get to vote on this matter. At least we did.
This was honestly the ballot item I was most concerned about. If we don’t retake the House in 2026 I’d say we’re pretty much cooked, and this at least keeps us in the game.
It alone won’t be enough. Motherfuckers still need to vote in the midterms.
Yeah, but if the dems aren’t progressive enough I won’t bother to get up off my ass to vote to stop fascism. It’ll be the dems fault for not enticing me to vote.
Edit: really? /s ffs
So you’re not willing to do the bare fucking minimum to oppose the current administration, and want to blame other politicians instead of using the best tool we currently have in a democracy. Got it.
I suspect they were being sarcastic.
