Nathan Lewis

If liberals were good at coordinating activities together, Soros would pay to have a couple million retired Californians move to Wyoming, Montana and North Dakota so that Dems would win the Senate indefinitely, but...

Not sure that it's the blue voters that are moving.

And fantasy sports?

I assume the 4 elections the chart refers to are the last 4 Pres elections? How much of the #'s are then just partly about people not being old enough to vote in 1 or more of the previous 3 elections? I'm well aware there is a huge nonvoting population, but it's damned hard to get them to vote.

The 5% of people who decide elections are pretty fickle. Vibes are very difficult to get right, and unfortunately the RW has the built in advantage of having the media go along with their lies.

You know everything. Take care.

Have a nice night.

It's not. We're done here.

You refused to read the article I presented. You know everything already. Take care.

Hope... Great plan... With no evidence...Have you read Project 2025? Trump didn't write that...

You're not addressing anything.

Not unconstitutional, and you completely made up what the result would be. You don't have any clue what the result of letting in other parties would be. You have no ideas of how to actually save democracy other than appealing to fascists to be 'bipartisan'. Great strategy.
Can we end this already?

Why? Because Dems are feckless?

What the f are you talking about? The Fair Representation Act has been introduced in Congress like 5 times or something. If you don't give a shit, just say you don't give a shit. If you aren't willing to think of ways to save democracy, just go live in your defeatest world.

Not Constitutionally legal. This at least attempts to keep some of the 'locality' argument. A better question you could of asked is why not statewide? May get a little confusing on the ballot in a state like Texas or California with so many candidates.

Why would I? Cause I f'ing care about f'ing democracy. And if you give a shit, if Dems ever get back in, and they nuke the f'ing filibuster, this is one of the first f'ing bills they should pass. Or we can just us vs. them against the fascists forever.

Let's pass the bill and see what happens.

That's not reality. There are districts in states except for single member states. And, if, like you say, R's are more prevalent in 'natural gerrymanders' (like my District), then D's would have to win closer elections. If you want to direct me to an article on what you are getting at, feel free.

But there's more representatives. Which can mean better *representation*. My MAGA representative doesn't represent me at all, even though he lives just a few miles away. I'm sure conservatives in San Francisco feel that way as well.

Why The Two-Party System Is Effing Up U.S. Democracy As the “Big Lie” of a stolen election continues to dominate the Republican Party, GOP-controlled states enact restrictive voting laws and pursue preposterous el…

One of my favorite articles-
fivethirtyeight.com/features/why...

Not sure why you think it would have increased Rep majority necessarily. Maybe a few libertarians or greens or Independents would have won. We have to break this two party mentality and this is the best way I've seen.

?? End local representation? I'd say it would increase it. For instance, in West Texas where I'm at, we'd have 3 or 4 reps. One would prob be from El Paso and be a Democrat. That would mean one of my reps (of the 3 or 4) would actually be someone I respect. I think that's *more* representation. ...

First step- pass the Fair Representation Act to have multi member districts. Wouldn't help the problems with the Senate or Electoral College, but it's a 1st step.

'Natural gerrymandering ... favors Republicans' -that's the point. If R's are running up advantages in natural gerrymandered places (more lopsided victories), Dems would have to win closer elections which would mean R's could win the popular vote and still lose the House. Rightly or wrongly.

Ad hominem

1) There should not be only 2 parties. There is no reason the *Republican Party* (a fascist party) has to exist. See the Fair Representation Act above to see the 1st step in getting other parties (and Independents) more power.
2) I'm glad you support eliminating it now.

In the news: The Fair Representation Act and an end to gerrymandering - FairVote Action The Fair Representation Act would stop gerrymandering and make every congressional district competitive.

And if Dems really wanted to do the right thing they would pass the Fair Representation Act-
fairvoteaction.org/in-the-news-...

No it isn't. Wyoming has one Congressional seat. All of their votes could go to the Republican and no gerrymandering happened. Drawing 'fair' lines doesn't mean you have to make every election try to emulate the last popular vote in the state. Geography, civil rights protections, etc...

Trying to prepare for the future. Your theory is to continue to try to have 'bipartisanship' with fascists, while I'm saying, if there is ever a chance in the future to eliminate the filibuster and try to protect this f'ing democracy, f'ing do it. No one believes in silly bipartisan BS anymore.

If you want to change the way the House is elected, fine, but it's obvious that the popular vote could be extremely lopsided and still tip the other way even without gerrymandering. Just imagine that every district R's won there were zero D votes and every district D's won was by 1 vote.