this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
208 points (98.6% liked)

politics

24960 readers
2442 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] macaro@lemmy.blahaj.zone 32 points 6 days ago

Just goes to show how gerrymandering limits free speech.

[–] Coskii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I for one would really like for us to move to an open source algorithm based redistricting as seen in this video:

https://youtu.be/Lq-Y7crQo44

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 6 days ago

"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy."

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

Republicans would fight that harder than ending child marriages.

[–] KarlHungus42@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Republicans will do literally anything to win, aside from actually changing any of their decades-old shitty policies.

If non racist democrats drew the maps...

[–] Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

It is the most undemocratic act. Its only use is to manipulate the result of elections.

[–] Dragomus@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Yes ofcourse, in short the party elects who is allowed to vote for them....

We probably need an amendment to actually do redistricting fairly, but as long as one side is abusing the process, it doesn't make sense for the other side to try to continue being 'fair'. You're just bringing a fart to a shit slinging contest.

[–] oppy1984 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Districts should be just counties or groups of counties, based on population. You set minimum population and a maximum population and figure out how many what a representative gets. You can adjust once every census and that's it.

[–] Hylactor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Just devil's advocate, then these soulless pricks would play their games with the census instead to fudge their numbers.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 4 points 6 days ago

I'm pretty sure they also try to fuck with the census

[–] oppy1984 1 points 6 days ago

True, but I would think it would be easier to protect the census than 100's of congressional districts.

[–] womjunru@lemmy.cafe 3 points 6 days ago

Sometimes I can’t believe this is actually 2025

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

How Undemocratic Is Gerrymandering?

Well yes, obviously.

Look at How Blue Texas Could Be if Democrats Drew the Maps.

I think that's the wrong way to think about this.

But yeah, Gerrymandering should be illegal (as it is in other states and frankly most of the world), and I hope that's the call to action Texas Democrats take from this.

edit: hmm, even if that works out there's the question of what to do with the already gerrymandered areas. Maybe I spoke prematurely.