Jun.11

electoral-vote.com

Dem 47

   

GOP 53

Poll: Democrats Are Fine with Eliminating Black Districts to Get More House Seats

One issue that is about to crop up, and that will come up big-time in 2027, is whether blue states where the Democrats have the trifecta should try for the maximum number of House seats (maybe even all of them), even if that means getting rid of majority-minority districts. It's a hot issue. Politico sponsored a poll on this, and asked voters who voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 how they felt. The results were interesting, but not in the way Politico was expecting.

Harris voters were asked to choose between two courses of action:

1. Democrats should create as many Democratic seats as possible, even if it means reducing the voting power of Black voters and other racial and ethnic minorities.
   
   
2. It's important to protect the voting power of Black voters and other racial and ethnic minorities by creating majority-minority districts, even if it means not drawing as many Democratic seats.

With these propositions, 26% of Harris voters went for #1, 54% went for #2, and 20% didn't know.

Then the pollsters rephrased the statements as follows:

1. The Democrats should counter Republican efforts by drawing their own maps that create more Democratic seats, even if it means reducing the number of majority-minority districts.
   
   
2. Democrats should keep the number of majority-minority districts, even if it means limiting the number of Democratic seats they can create

Now #1 got 45%, #2 got 32%, and 23% didn't know. These two different questions show two things. First, many Democrats are probably not even aware of what the Republicans are doing and, in the abstract, they favor keeping majority-minority districts. After all, why not? But when they are made aware of why this is even an issue, all of a sudden their opinion changes and they want to fight back.

Second—and this is something we have known for a long time and often mentioned—the exact wording of a question in polls matters a lot. Here are four questions that are likely to get different answers when asked of Texas voters:

1. Will you vote for James Talarico or Ken Paxton for the Senate?
2. Will you vote for Ken Paxton or James Talarico for the Senate?
3. Will you vote for Democrat James Talarico or Republican Ken Paxton for the Senate?
4. Will you vote for Republican Ken Paxton or Democrat James Talarico for the Senate?

It shouldn't matter, but long experience shows that it does. How a question is phrased often has a major impact on the results of the survey. Pollsters know this and try to deal with it as best they can. Rotating the names so half the people get one ordering and the others get a different ordering is common.

Democratic politicians already understand the problem but the voters are lagging behind. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D), a Black woman who represents a D+33 district covering part of Los Angeles and Culver City, said: "This is madness, and all this is doing is unraveling democracy." Then she added: "It's existential at this point, and this is a larger battle that we're fighting for." Basically, she understands that having her district, which is 54% Latino and 22% Black, carved up is necessary for the greater good of the party and the country. This doesn't necessarily mean she is out of a job, but she might have to run in a majority-white district against one or more white candidates next time.

When broken down by ethnicity, pluralities of Democratic voters of color agree that more blue seats is top priority. This holds for Black voters (48%), Latinos (45%) and Asian Americans (48%). Oddly enough, among white voters, only 39% are willing to carve up majority-minority districts to get more House seats. Nevertheless, while there are pluralities for maximizing the number of seats, there are also plenty of Democrats who don't want to go down that road. It is not going to be easy. (V)