Nov.19

electoral-vote.com

Dem 47

   

GOP 53

Gerrymandering, Part IV: Democrats Gone Wild?

We thought we would try out a little thought exercise. Let us imagine a world where redistricting turns into a true arms race, and EVERY blue state decides to do whatever it can to maximize the number of Democrats it sends to the House. We reached out to reader and redistricting-website-guru A.B. in Wendell, NC, who did yeowomanlike work in helping us to visualize a strongly blue-gerrymandered world.

We are going to start with states that already have a Democratic trifecta. Note that we are assuming that, for purposes of our thought exercise, if there are any laws or other barriers in the way of a gerrymander, those laws/barriers will be set aside, like what just happened in California. At worst, there might be some delay to allow for an initiative to be put before the voters to remove the barrier. We are also assuming a target date of 2028, since many states would not be able to get new maps in place by 2026.

Here is the rundown of Democratic-trifecta states that could potentially become more blue-gerrymandered (excluded are the Democratic-trifecta states of Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico and Rhode Island, which already have 100% Democratic delegations). Click on the state name if you would like to see/tinker around with the map that A.B. came up with (and, in particular, to create some "Goofy kicking Donald Duck" districts, which A.B. avoided doing):

State: California Current delegation: 43D, 9R Gerrymandered delegation: 52D Net gain: +9D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): CA-01 and CA-23, both 49.7% Democratic, 49.6% Republican
State: Colorado Current delegation: 4D, 4R Gerrymandered delegation: 7D, 1R Net gain: +3D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): CO-01, 49.6% Democratic, 49.5% Republican
State: Illinois Current delegation: 14D, 3R Gerrymandered delegation: 15D, 2R Net gain: +1D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): IL-01, 48.8% Democratic, 48.7% Republican; IL-03, 48.7% Democratic, 48.6% Republican
State: Maryland Current delegation: 7D, 1R Gerrymandered delegation: 8D Net gain: +1D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): MD-01, 50.7% Democratic, 47.2% Republican
State: New Jersey Current delegation: 9D, 3R Gerrymandered delegation: 12D Net gain: +3D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): NJ-11, 49.7% Democratic, 48.2% Republican
State: New York Current delegation: 19D, 7R Gerrymandered delegation: 22D, 4R Net gain: +3D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): NY-08, 49.4% Democratic, 49.2% Republican
State: Oregon Current delegation: 5D, 1R Gerrymandered delegation: 6D Net gain: +1D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): OR-03, 47.5% Democratic, 47.3% Republican
State: Virginia (as of January 2026) Current delegation: 6D, 5R Gerrymandered delegation: 9D, 2R Net gain: +3D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): VA-03, 49.6% Democratic, 48.9% Republican
State: Washington Current delegation: 8D, 2R Gerrymandered delegation: 9D, 1R Net gain: +1D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): WA-02, 49.5% Democratic, 49.4% Republican

If all of this was to come to pass, then the Democrats could gain a total of 25 seats. That would, of course, come with the risk that even a fairly mild red-ripple year could prove disastrous.

And now, the states where the Democrats might possibly claim a trifecta in the next year (though it would take a blue monsoon, in some cases):

State: Arizona Needed for trifecta: 3 seats in the state Senate (up in 2026), 4 seats in the state House (up in 2026) Current delegation: 3D, 6R Gerrymandered delegation: 8D, 1R Net gain: +5D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): AZ-03 and AZ-04, both 49.9% Democratic, 48.9% Republican
State: Michigan Needed for trifecta: 4 seats in the state House (up in 2026) Current delegation: 6D, 7R Gerrymandered delegation: 10D, 3R Net gain: +4D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): MI-09, 49.4% Democratic, 47.8% Republican
State: Minnesota Needed for trifecta: 2 seats in the state House (up in 2026, including two up in special elections in January) Current delegation: 4D, 4R Gerrymandered delegation: 7D, 1R Net gain: +3D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): MN-02, 48.5% Democratic, 48.1% Republican
State: Nevada Needed for trifecta: The governorship (up in 2026) Current delegation: 3D, 1R Gerrymandered delegation: 4D Net gain: +1D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): NV-02, 48.0% Democratic, 47.9% Republican
State: North Carolina Needed for trifecta: 6 seats in the state Senate (up in 2026), 12 seats in the state House (up in 2026) Current delegation: 4D, 10R Gerrymandered delegation: 11D, 3R Net gain: +7D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): NC-03, 48.8% Democratic, 48.8% Republican (but with 1 more Democrat than Republicans; 176,623 to 176,622)
State: Pennsylvania Needed for trifecta: 3 seats in the state Senate (up in 2026) Current delegation: 7D, 10R Gerrymandered delegation: 12D, 5R Net gain: +5D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): PA-08, 48.9% Democratic, 48.9% Republican (but with 101 more Democrats than Republicans; 163,383 to 163,282)
State: Wisconsin Needed for trifecta: 2 seats in the state Senate (up in 2026), 5 seats in the state House (up in 2026) Current delegation: 2D, 6R Gerrymandered delegation: 6D, 2R Net gain: +4D Riskiest gerrymandered district(s): WI-02, 50.2% Democratic, 48.9% Republican

If all these changes were to come to pass (not bloody likely), that would be +29 seats for the Democrats.

From this exercise, we would make five observations:

1. Among the states that already have a Democratic trifecta, the biggest prize is... still California. However, that would obviously require Gavin Newsom to go to the well again, which would be a tough sell.
   
   
2. Among the other states that already have a Democratic trifecta, or soon will, Virginia and Colorado look to be the most promising for the blue team, with New Jersey not far behind.
   
   
3. On the other hand, while the governor + laws combo in Illinois might be well-suited to a more aggressive gerrymander, the map is not. Central-western Illinois is basically East Iowa and East Missouri, while southern Illinois is basically North Kentucky. Picking up more than one seat would require salamander-like district boundaries, and even then, it might not be doable.
   
   
4. The REAL prizes are the states that do not currently have Democratic trifectas, particularly Arizona, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Democrats should be going all-in to flip the seats in the state legislatures they need to flip in order to take over the legislatures in those places. That's not too likely in North Carolina, but the other two states are doable. If you want to help out, you could toss some of your soon-to-be-obsolete-but-still-legal pennies over to the DLCC, which helps Democrats in state legislature races. If you want to prevent this from happening, the RSLC will spend your donation to help elect Republicans to state legislatures.
   
   
5. Looking at our hypothetical Pennsylvania map (or the actual Pennsylvania map), you can see what James Carville meant about the state being Pittsburgh and Philadelphia with Alabama in between (or, alternatively, what the state's residents mean when they call it "Pennsyltucky").

Not all of these states will indulge in gerrymandering shenanigans, though some of them will, either in the immediate future, or before the 2028 election. And, ironic as it is, supporters of democracy should be rooting for as aggressive an arms race as is possible, as that is the only thing that will give Congress the political capital necessary to enact gerrymandering legislation at the national level. (Z)