Republicans held a Trump +22 seat — but by only 9 points. A swing half as large would give Democrats the U.S. House in 2026, and put the Senate clearly in play
I was wondering how exactly do you gerrymander when the data you use is older and doesn’t reflect the shift to Dems that is seen in all the special elections. Given the unknowns of who has shifted it is highly likely that whatever new boundaries imposed unintended consequences will ensue. How about not only creating less safe Republican districts but actually carving out new Democratic ones in red states where the gerrymanders are happening.
Specifically Texas. Texas is tending toward swinging. The gerrymandering could backfire in a huge way. Imagine redistricting where your data is 6 points wrong. Now imagine if it’s 12 points wrong due to variance in who voted as indicated in the special elections. Imagine that polling hasn’t captured a shift in the immigration issue or a shift in the trust of the current administration. How deep will the impacts of Epstein material releases or even non-releases due to judicial shenanigans?
If nobody knows the how can gerrymandering achieve the desired result?
The answer is it can’t possibly achieve the desired results. Period. It is exactly targeting a moonshot on the position of the moon a year ago. 0% chance it just works.
Much much greater chance it makes things worse for the Republicans.
I predict they will succeed in making lots of swing districts and their candidate choice will lead to a slaughter. May even turn Texas blue. Lock in Democratic Presidents for a generation.
Just you wait. This gerrymandering will buy the Republicans an unprecedented disaster. Get Trump impeached and convicted. Then it’s prison time for Donald except he’ll be confined in a hospital in Dubai watching reruns of golf tournaments he won.
I cannot imagine a world in which Jasmine Crockett wins a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, even with Ken Paxton as her opponent. I'm also bearish on Dems' chances in the Maine Senate general election and worried about Michigan.
On the other hand, Alaska could be promising if Peltola runs.
I mean, sure, but this is one instance where I fear Dem primary voters might not be focused enough on electability. I know it's still early, but those primary polls are concerning!
Texas Democrats have good choices. The most recent poll I can find (Oct 29) has James Talarico leading Colin Allred 48-42 but that's before Crockett. The primaries on both sides will be very interesting. And they're coming soon - March 3.
For redistricting, it's more than just Texas and Indiana. We've also got:
- California: there's still a chance the Supreme Court could put redistricting on hold. It seems unlikely, but with this Supreme Court, who knows?
- Missouri: the gerrymander is being challenged both in state court and by a potential ballot measure. Betting markets seem to think MO's new map ultimately won't be used, but I'm not sure why.
- Ohio: there will certainly be a new map more favorable to Republicans, but in a wave election will probably only net them one additional seat.
- Florida: likely to redraw at some point; seem to think they can net up to 5 more seats, but most independent observers seem to think it will be more like 3.
- Virginia: likely to pull a California, gaining Dems perhaps another 2 seats.
- Utah: +1 safe Dem district going into the midterms.
- Wisconsin: litigation could yield 1-2 more Dem seats, though unlikely (but not impossible) the new map will be ready for the midterms.
Threatened redistricting in Illinois and Maryland probably won't happen. New York redistricting probably will, but not in time for 2026.
In addition, there's the question of how far the Supreme Court will go in further weakening the VRA, and how quickly. I have to think, though, that a full-frontal assault on the VRA would spur a post-Dobbs-like electoral backlash...
I'm imagining a scenario in which SCOTUS dismantles the VRA sooner than expected. Then, a bunch of Southern states rush to undo majority-minority district, and Democrats fail to retake the House despite winning the popular vote by a wave-ish amount.
It's hard to think of a situation more conducive to civil unrest!
True, although if one holds it will be California because it was a voter approved partisan gerrymander and the Robert’s court previously said that was ok.
In concurring with SCOTUS' decision upholding the Texas gerrymander yesterday, Alito, joined by Gorsuch and Thomas, called it "indisputable" that "the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple."
So, the new maps will survive in both Texas and California. Always the most likely outcome.
I look forward to the nearer term benefit of prompting more Republican House retirements. Eliminating incumbency can only help. May R's enjoy their holiday and the inevitable prayerful consultation with family and K Street, blah blah blah.
I'd also love a deeper look at the effect if the GOP gerrymanders take hold. Many of their resulting districts have much smaller pro Republican margins than looks safe in light of the TN-7 outcome.
A highly creditable performance by Aftyn Behn, I hope we hear more from her in the future. Great analysis Elliott. There's a long way to go to the midterms and fingers crossed Democrats can keep up the pressure to reduce healthcare costs via ACA, reduce costs for domestic and trade customers by having a sensible policy on tariffs, reduce energy costs and create 100,000s of good jobs through development of renewable energy. 2026 will be a interesting year politically and psephologically!
"Psephologically" Thank you for adding this very useful and, especially now, highly relevant term to my vocabulary. (Not to mention the score in Scrabble!)
She did a great job in a R22 state but in next yr election there we need a more moderate D to actually win it! My guess would be a current D member of the Nashville City Council or a suburban district?
Oh, for heaven's sake. Stop the "need a more Moderate Democrat" stuff. Voters look at a Moderate Democrat, shrug, and say, well, the Republican fits the bill. That's how Joe Donnelly lost his Senate race to Mike Braun in Indiana.
I've been pessimistic about Iowa's statewide races in 2026, because of the enormous GOP voter registration advantage here. But I am bullish on Democratic prospects in IA-03 and IA-03, and I absolutely think IA-02 (an open seat because Ashley Hinson is running for Senate) would be in play, depending on the GOP nominee.
How worried is GOP incumbent Zach Nunn (who won IA-03 by less than 1 percent in 2022 and by 4 points in 2024)? He is now co-sponsoring a bipartisan bill to extend ACA premium subsidies for two years.
A lot of money spent on this election, particularly by Democrats. Sooner or later one of these deep red seats really will flip, as Trump's popularity continues to crater, and as Dems find more strong candidates to run who don't turn out to have an exploitable weakness (as Aftyn Behr did, after clips from her podcast got into the republican attack ads).
Republicans will always find something to exploit, and they spent more money on this race than the Democrats, most of it at the last minute. It's what they do to distract voters. Hats off to Astyn Behn for running such a strong race.
I was wondering how exactly do you gerrymander when the data you use is older and doesn’t reflect the shift to Dems that is seen in all the special elections. Given the unknowns of who has shifted it is highly likely that whatever new boundaries imposed unintended consequences will ensue. How about not only creating less safe Republican districts but actually carving out new Democratic ones in red states where the gerrymanders are happening.
Specifically Texas. Texas is tending toward swinging. The gerrymandering could backfire in a huge way. Imagine redistricting where your data is 6 points wrong. Now imagine if it’s 12 points wrong due to variance in who voted as indicated in the special elections. Imagine that polling hasn’t captured a shift in the immigration issue or a shift in the trust of the current administration. How deep will the impacts of Epstein material releases or even non-releases due to judicial shenanigans?
If nobody knows the how can gerrymandering achieve the desired result?
The answer is it can’t possibly achieve the desired results. Period. It is exactly targeting a moonshot on the position of the moon a year ago. 0% chance it just works.
Much much greater chance it makes things worse for the Republicans.
I predict they will succeed in making lots of swing districts and their candidate choice will lead to a slaughter. May even turn Texas blue. Lock in Democratic Presidents for a generation.
Just you wait. This gerrymandering will buy the Republicans an unprecedented disaster. Get Trump impeached and convicted. Then it’s prison time for Donald except he’ll be confined in a hospital in Dubai watching reruns of golf tournaments he won.
I cannot imagine a world in which Jasmine Crockett wins a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, even with Ken Paxton as her opponent. I'm also bearish on Dems' chances in the Maine Senate general election and worried about Michigan.
On the other hand, Alaska could be promising if Peltola runs.
Remember, Democrats in Texas still have to have a primary for that race..
I mean, sure, but this is one instance where I fear Dem primary voters might not be focused enough on electability. I know it's still early, but those primary polls are concerning!
Texas Democrats have good choices. The most recent poll I can find (Oct 29) has James Talarico leading Colin Allred 48-42 but that's before Crockett. The primaries on both sides will be very interesting. And they're coming soon - March 3.
For redistricting, it's more than just Texas and Indiana. We've also got:
- California: there's still a chance the Supreme Court could put redistricting on hold. It seems unlikely, but with this Supreme Court, who knows?
- Missouri: the gerrymander is being challenged both in state court and by a potential ballot measure. Betting markets seem to think MO's new map ultimately won't be used, but I'm not sure why.
- Ohio: there will certainly be a new map more favorable to Republicans, but in a wave election will probably only net them one additional seat.
- Florida: likely to redraw at some point; seem to think they can net up to 5 more seats, but most independent observers seem to think it will be more like 3.
- Virginia: likely to pull a California, gaining Dems perhaps another 2 seats.
- Utah: +1 safe Dem district going into the midterms.
- Wisconsin: litigation could yield 1-2 more Dem seats, though unlikely (but not impossible) the new map will be ready for the midterms.
Threatened redistricting in Illinois and Maryland probably won't happen. New York redistricting probably will, but not in time for 2026.
In addition, there's the question of how far the Supreme Court will go in further weakening the VRA, and how quickly. I have to think, though, that a full-frontal assault on the VRA would spur a post-Dobbs-like electoral backlash...
I'm imagining a scenario in which SCOTUS dismantles the VRA sooner than expected. Then, a bunch of Southern states rush to undo majority-minority district, and Democrats fail to retake the House despite winning the popular vote by a wave-ish amount.
It's hard to think of a situation more conducive to civil unrest!
True, although if one holds it will be California because it was a voter approved partisan gerrymander and the Robert’s court previously said that was ok.
P.S. I’m a Californian.
In concurring with SCOTUS' decision upholding the Texas gerrymander yesterday, Alito, joined by Gorsuch and Thomas, called it "indisputable" that "the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple."
So, the new maps will survive in both Texas and California. Always the most likely outcome.
I look forward to the nearer term benefit of prompting more Republican House retirements. Eliminating incumbency can only help. May R's enjoy their holiday and the inevitable prayerful consultation with family and K Street, blah blah blah.
I'd also love a deeper look at the effect if the GOP gerrymanders take hold. Many of their resulting districts have much smaller pro Republican margins than looks safe in light of the TN-7 outcome.
A highly creditable performance by Aftyn Behn, I hope we hear more from her in the future. Great analysis Elliott. There's a long way to go to the midterms and fingers crossed Democrats can keep up the pressure to reduce healthcare costs via ACA, reduce costs for domestic and trade customers by having a sensible policy on tariffs, reduce energy costs and create 100,000s of good jobs through development of renewable energy. 2026 will be a interesting year politically and psephologically!
"Psephologically" Thank you for adding this very useful and, especially now, highly relevant term to my vocabulary. (Not to mention the score in Scrabble!)
She did a great job in a R22 state but in next yr election there we need a more moderate D to actually win it! My guess would be a current D member of the Nashville City Council or a suburban district?
Oh, for heaven's sake. Stop the "need a more Moderate Democrat" stuff. Voters look at a Moderate Democrat, shrug, and say, well, the Republican fits the bill. That's how Joe Donnelly lost his Senate race to Mike Braun in Indiana.
I've been pessimistic about Iowa's statewide races in 2026, because of the enormous GOP voter registration advantage here. But I am bullish on Democratic prospects in IA-03 and IA-03, and I absolutely think IA-02 (an open seat because Ashley Hinson is running for Senate) would be in play, depending on the GOP nominee.
How worried is GOP incumbent Zach Nunn (who won IA-03 by less than 1 percent in 2022 and by 4 points in 2024)? He is now co-sponsoring a bipartisan bill to extend ACA premium subsidies for two years.
A lot of money spent on this election, particularly by Democrats. Sooner or later one of these deep red seats really will flip, as Trump's popularity continues to crater, and as Dems find more strong candidates to run who don't turn out to have an exploitable weakness (as Aftyn Behr did, after clips from her podcast got into the republican attack ads).
Republicans will always find something to exploit, and they spent more money on this race than the Democrats, most of it at the last minute. It's what they do to distract voters. Hats off to Astyn Behn for running such a strong race.
I wish she had done as well as Doug Jones winning Alabama in 2017, but I guess we can’t draw a Roy Moore in every race.