Of course @Redistrict took today to spout more nonsense about gerrymandering because he doesn't understand "ability to elect" & how race & partisanship are intertwined in the modern era. The GOP will now defend their racial gerrymanders as partisan & SCOTUS may look the other way
A key reason why plaintiffs had successes this decade challenging GOP racial gerrymanders is because the GOP wrongly thought making it explicitly about race would shield them from partisanship charges. Now, GOP can try to defend racial gerrymanders as partisan thanks to SCOTUS
That strategy may not succeed given the Supreme Court's past jurisprudence on racial gerrymandering, but at the very least, GOP legislators aren't going to be foolish enough to loudly lie that their partisan gerrymanders were just complying with the VRA
Last year you said you wished you could wave a magic wand & just draw districts without regard to partisan & racial fairness & just maximize compactness & fewest county splits regardless of how biased the lines were. Hard pass. Maps should treat both parties & all races fairly
California's nonpartisan redistricting commission did a great job on criteria such as communities of interest & equitable racial representation, which is why the lines don't fixate on compactness or adhering perfectly to county lines. But they didn't account for partisan fairness
You can follow @PoliticsWolf.
Tip: mention @threader_app on a Twitter thread with the keyword “compile” to get a link to it.
Enjoy Threader? Sign up.
Since you’re here...
... we’re asking visitors like you to make a contribution to support this independent project. In these uncertain times, access to information is vital. Threader gets 1,000,000+ visits a month and our iOS Twitter client was featured as an App of the Day by Apple. Your financial support will help two developers to keep working on this app. Everyone’s contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support Threader by becoming premium or by donating on PayPal. Thank you.