Dem
47
GOP
53
Let us start this item with this note from reader P.F. in Goldvein, VA:
I wanted to write in with my experience voting in-person in my precinct this morning. We were there early, around 7:00 a.m., and it was almost deserted. I was informed that I was voter number 25 in our polling place. In last year's gubernatorial election, around the same time of day, the parking lot was full to bursting and there was a small line waiting to vote. I have read that early voting enthusiasm was on pace with the early voting for last year, but the in-person voting seemed depressed, at least in my rural precinct.
I was very torn about the referendum. As a state, we passed the 2020 amendment to form a bipartisan committee to determine congressional districts (with special masters actually making the map when the committee got stuck), which has turned out to be reflective of the voters of the Commonwealth. We currently have 6 Democrats and 5 Republicans in Congress which is a breakdown pretty similar to the recent presidential elections:
Year Democrat Republican 2024 52% 46% 2020 54% 44% 2016 49% 44% 2012 51% 47% 2008 53% 46% 2004 45% 54%
We are now a slightly bluish-purple state, represented by two Democratic senators since 2008, but also electing two Republican and three Democratic governors in that same timeframe, as well as swapping control of the House of Delegates and state Senate multiple times. So the current district design seems to be fairly representative of the state.
Switching to a very gerrymandered 10 D, 1 R Congressional representation seems like a major step backwards for us. But with the current Trump administration pushing for Republican-led states to silence any dissenting voices, our Democratic General Assembly leaders pushed this amendment to the Virginia voters. I did not like it, I do not feel it is fair, and I feel like it will result in Republican gains at the state level in 2027.
What finally pushed me to vote "Yes" on the amendment was not any love for the proposed gerrymandering, however, but instead the ridiculous amount of spam text messages I have received from the "No" camp and the numerous "Vote No!" yard signs in my conservative area. Apparently, "Trump" signs are currently a bridge too far with most of the Republican voters in my area, but they will use this election as a proxy of their love for him. And I needed to again cast my vote against Trumpism.
We received, formatted, and edited this letter at about 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday. In other words, we deliberately set this up as the lead-in to this item before knowing anything about the outcome of the vote. P.F.'s response makes clear something that is present in other letters we have run, and in various op-eds and social media posts we've seen: This is a very tough choice. Most importantly, it pits good governance against potentially reining in Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans. Most Democrats and independents, and some Republicans, want both of these things. But, in this election (and this era), they can only have one or the other.
Then, add in some of the other elements of the equation, like the unrelenting (and often dishonest) media blitz Virginians have been subject to, the possibility of a backlash in 2026, 2027 and/or 2028, the fact that "10 D, 1 R" is an aspiration and not a guarantee, and the realization that none of this might mean anything if the courts decide the proper procedure was not followed. Point being, the only outcome here that should be a surprise is a lopsided one in either direction. Following from that, we think we are on solid ground in asserting that the dynamics here are so different from a candidate vs. candidate election that one cannot consider the outcome to be predictive of... much of anything.
And now, we commence with the portion of this item that we wrote after we learned the results. As the polls very accurately predicted, the outcome was indeed close. But, once the dust had settled, the measure passed, 51.5% to 48.5%. Assuming the courts decide the process was kosher, then a fair guess is that this will net about 3 House seats for the Democrats.
We may learn a bit more, once the numbers are complete, and there's been time for a bit more crunching. However, there are two things that already leap out. The first is that rural voters showed up to vote in unusually high numbers, while the urban vote was more restrained. This is presumably because those rural voters suspect they are about to lose representation in Congress, and because the GOP's get out the vote operation was heavily focused on the rural-dwellers. Again, we do not believe this election is predictive. But if any reader thinks otherwise, then this would be a welcome trend for the GOP.
The second thing that is evident is that, despite some shifts on this issue, Democrats clearly still use early/mail-in voting more than Republicans do (at least, in Virginia). The 10% of votes that were mail-in broke 72% to 28% in favor of redistricting. the 30% of votes that were early in-person votes broke 52% to 48% in favor of redistricting. The 60% of votes that were Election Day in-person votes broke 54% to 46% against redistricting. As a result of this, "No" appeared to be headed for victory for the first hour or two after the polls closed. But then the early/mail-in votes were added, and that put it away for "Yes."
As we have noted a few times, this might be the final 2026 performance of the Cirque du Gerrymander. The only other state that might give it a whirl is Florida; Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) has called a special legislative session for later this month. The problem is that Florida is already pretty aggressively gerrymandered, and the only real option to make it more so is to give some Republican House members smaller margins of error. In view of what's happened in the various special elections this year, many members of the red team are nervous about turning R+10 districts into R+5, or R+5 districts into R+3. So, the legislature might well tell the Governor: "Thanks, but no thanks." After all, the governor is concerned about the national political implications of the map. The members are concerned about keeping their own jobs. (Z)