This article made me feel like I was reading the Times or the Post. It's like Lauren just couldn't bring herself to say anything positive about the Dems, or offer any hope. She even talked about the Dems who "fled" TX, after Lizzie Fletcher was on w/ Sarah and specifically pointed out that they didn't flee anything. They legally left the state to call attention to the incredibly dangerous authoritarian takeover - thank goodness! I thought they were incredibly courageous.
I wish TB would find someone else to do the reporting on what's happening w/ Dems. Lauren seems to have an inherent bias against us.
TO THINK ABOUT, "AT-LARGE" REPS. Advice from my map-minded spouse-- Consider some at-large reps for Texas right now. Consider them again, next year, for a National Fair Voting Act.
GOAL. The idea? As done in earlier decades in Texas, keep any higher population metro area inside its containing county. No metro district drawn to fit an "ideal size" would be allowed to have its boundaries cross a county line. (Current "ideal" set at 766,987, per the 2020 Census.)
As of 2020, the TX population justified 38 reps. (38=Total TX population, divided by the "ideal" population size per rep of 766,987. That's meant to give each state a number of reps in proportion to state's population size.)
Currently, having 38 reps allowed for TX is read as needing TX divided into 38 districts. The alternative? Have fewer than 38 districts. The math is simple. If, say, 28 districts were right to put wrongly separated parts back into the same district and the same county, producing 38 reps total for the state means there would be 10 excess reps. (The 10 "at large" could mean statewide, as with Senators. Or, multi-county regions smaller than the state might work, each multi-county region, equal-sized on population, having one at-large rep each. )
INCUMBENT REQUEST. If staying inside a county, an at-large merge could be done to avoid a divisive gerrymander. For example, maybe any line wiggling that moves an incumbent's house out of their former district would be sufficient for the affected incumbent to request an at-large re-draw. (Two separate districts oddly divided , each of ideal size, would be merged into double the ideal size. Their merger would need two seats, producing two at-large reps.)
LIZZIE FLETCHER. Consider Lizzie Fletcher's old #7, combined with her newly assigned #38, lines wiggled, her house in the same place, but the line redraw meant to separate her from her old neighbors. She can be with them again, if the two districts are merged. Voters inside now choosing two seats, it's possible they could elect two Dems. Lizzie re-elected. It's possible they could instead elect two Repubs, Lizzie excluded. It's possible if independent, they could do "switch voting", pick the better one of two Dems, maybe Lizzie, and the better one of two Repubs. )
TEN COUNTIES BIG IN POPULATION. The state's most populous counties show ten with populations greater than 766,987, the ideal voter count, explained above. The top ten counties, ranked by size, range from Houston to El Paso: https://www.texas-demographics.com/counties_by_population
*1 super-large county, Harris (Houston metro) has a bit over 5 million. Its size merits six reps with ideal sized districts devoted to that county alone. If stopped at six districts, the district lines would not need to cut across the county boundaries.
SOME WAYS TO DO HARRIS (COULD BE OTHERS)
For Harris, its population of 5,009,302, divided by 766,987 the ideal size. would mean 6.531 reps. Six reps could serving their county and no other.
That leaves an excess of 0.531 reps. Not left just for Harris, impossible to have a partial rep, the excess would contribute to some at-large pool, the total excesses across multiple counties added up.
VARIATION. Four of the allocated six might be used per the Voting Rights Act and the remaining two non-partisan.
VARIATION. It might be a seniority system, to be set up so more delegates once in Congress can be eligible for chairman of some committee. EXAMPLE:
*one to two seats reserved for candidates with over 10 years of service and over age 60,
*up to two seats reserved for candidates with two to ten years of prior service and age 40 or over,
*one seat for anyone, with less service or age.
*remaining seats totally at large
UNLIKELY?? Too hard to make fair choices? No redistricting would ever be needed if Harris County could have all 6 be at-large seats, selected by all voters in the county.
As voters then pick the politicians, they could chose all six to be Repubs, all six to be Dems, or do "switch votings". SWITCH EXAMPLE--If Independent, voters could pick the best four of one party first, then switch to picking the least bad two of the other party.
BIG counties In addition to Harris
*3 large counties, Dallas, Tarrant (Ft Worth metro) and Bexar (San Ant. metro) with more than two million each. (Each 1.53 million in population merits two reps per county, at-large if desired. )
*6 counties with under 1.53M population, Travis (Austin), Collin and Denton with over a million, then Fort Bend, Hidalgo and El Paso Counties with over 800,000
TX BACKGROUND. Texas has vague wording in it's Constitution of 1876. The interpretation early was understood to mean keeping whole any high population counties. There was NO dividing of any county into parts. Any "excess reps" justified by the state population became "at-large" reps, counted, labeled as "at large", put on a cycle's districting map. At some point, the "at large" counts disappeared. Each redistricting bill then contained a possibly arbitrary and amendable line or lines early in the text (warning, I'm not a lawyer). These say, for example, it's enough to give each county just one rep, shared with other rural counties.
A big contribution of the TX Dems leaving the state? Their flight drew attention to some things too few people understood earlier.
NATIONAL ACT NEEDED. Voters more aware, the US Congress can try again to pass the National Fair Voting Act. Made it through the US House TWICE as an addition to the Voting Rights Act. The US Senate was the obstacle, so SENATORS NEED TO CHANGE. (US Senators almost passed it in the first attempt, but second time a few filibustered it "ad nauseum", until too late, so had to be returned to Committee. Blame was placed on two Dem Senators who wanted fair districts, but voted against to stopping filibusters. Both changed from Dem to Independent. Neither is in office now. (They were J.Manchin of WV and Arizona's K. Sinema. The Arizona Senator is now replaced by Dem R. Gallego. It's time to try again.) Until then?
BIG BENEFIT-MUSCLE GOVS NOW AWARE. States with "political muscle" are those with large populations and thus lots of reps. Several key ones receiving the beleaguered TX reps. They understand their independent commissions for re-drawing lines need to be TEMPORARILY "turned off", until bully states like TX and FL and OH start to behave, or, even better, a national policy stops the misbehavior for ALL states.
BENEFIT- GENERAL POPULACE AWARE.
(A) TX TRICK, SHAPES EXTRA-BAD. People earlier barely knew what a serious gerrymander looked like. (TX has a more than average number, especially in or across metros. These shapes are snakes, urban doughnut holes, plus deliberate wigglings to put current house member into a different district each election, forcing House reps to sell houses and move, to keep their old voters. The beloved Lloyd Doggett had this done to him twice. Now, for a third election, he is pitted by line changes against another snake-trapped Dem.).
(B) TX TRICK, EXTREME OVER-PACKING. People EARLIER did not know how the odd shapes were made much worse by the trick of "overpacking". That's line wiggle that squeeze too many of the attacked party into the malignant shape. It's done in order to reduce their number of reps.
See Planscore.org--Packing is expected for the newly proposed TX Congressional districts 7 vs 9 (7 expected to be Dem vs 9 to be Repub., as both packed at the 99% level with 2020 voters of the targeted party.) Overall, Repubs are assigning seven reps to new districts. If both Dem and Repub incumbents are moved into a new district with too many Repub voters, then fewer Dem incumbents get re-elected, no matter how loved by their old voters.
Dems are the minority party but that does not mean the state gets to send only GOP to Congress. There are over 8M Democrats and they are constituents of Texas leaders and the President - and THEY NEED TO BE REPRESENTED. The lawyers of Texas are a disgrace - they need to stop this cheating by their fraternity - and all in the judicial system need to work to remedy this CHEATING.
Abbott and Paxton have gone too far - they also took an oath to support the Constitution.
It was wrong for Trump to ask them to cheat - but we have seen much support of corruption and bribery from him and the GOP. This is not the country character we want -75% of the people are vs corruption and cheating.
What di we expect? Dems did this in WI in 2011 to fight GOP ending public sector labor unions. Same result. Same time line. Delays but does not prevent.
The "Pyrrhic victories" Lauren describes demonstrate that most current Democratic Party leaders have no idea how to stand up to Trump and the Republican Party. Complaining/rationally arguing how bad they are; lauding someone who throws a sub at police as a folk hero; running away from direct confrontation as evidenced in the Texas legislature; and holding up signs in protest marches are like "bringing a knife to a gunfight." I believe we should be looking for more Democratic leaders like Governor Newsom and Congresswoman Slotkin how are developing strategies to "fight fire with fire."
The Demopublican strategy of too little and too late continues to deliver for the Republicrat rollout of Project 2025. No mid-terms needed, the 'election' will be in the bag for the T. Rump criminal enterprise. If you do not like what the Republicrats are selling quit buying it.
Steve Bannon has already stated that active and effective opposition to the Republicrat takeover will be met with bloodshed. This is in my opinion not a bluff by a barely functioning alcoholic but an instruction for constructing an effective opposition. After all, the MAGA base is firmly attached to the idea of blood and soil and they are not likely to abandon that viewpoint anytime soon. Approval of the duly elected administration is still above the approval of the Reichstag after the 1933 election. We all know how that ended.
I had posted earlier about Democrats needing to trumpet the fact that Trump has done some unpopular things. And today I saw 2 things that should be added to the list of Dem complaints about Trump and his Republican Congress. Trump wants to eliminate paper ballots and voting machines. Gosh, I wonder why? 🤔
And I read about electricity rates skyrocketing, partly because of data centers. I don’t pretend to know much about this; if data centers are using a lot of electricity, then why are the rest of us paying for it? I understand that we need more sources of power, but someone has to make AI pay for most of it.
These Are the Voters Who Should Scare Democrats Most
"To him, the Democratic Party seemed increasingly focused on issues of identity at the expense of more tangible day-to-day concerns, such as public safety or the economy."
Well that is the Republican narrative. AS IF it wasn't possible to do BOTH at the same time. Nothing in politics is an either/or. There is plenty of room for both/and. Weirdly they also can't understand that ALL politics is, and always has been, about identity in one way or another.
Also my question to my fine working class comrades: When was the last time you considered joining a labor union? Why do you insist on the Democratic Party (or the Republican one for that matter) to do for you what labor unions once did for you? Of course the window has closed on the opportunity you once had to unionize. By the end of this administration unions will exist on paper only and will be just another sock puppet.
The Fool’s Gold of Midterm Success
The only fool's gold is that there will ever be another free and fair election that Democrats can win outside of about the 13 states they control. There are 40 seats in the House that are truly competitive with 21 of these historically leaning toward one of the parties and ONLY 19 are considered actual toss ups. In the Senate there are 3. IF Democrats win all three they will still only have 48 seats. They would need to miraculously flip 3 more seats to take the deciding vote out of the hands of JD Vance.
One thing that might work to the Democrats advantage (if they can turn out their own voters) is that low information, uneducated and those not liking Trump's policies might not show up to the polls. Especially those 1st time voters who voted for Trump in 2024. Trump not being at the top of the ballot is a real advantage.
a big part of the strategy surely must be repeating long and loudly to everyone that the GOP has silenced the people's voice - today one group, tomorrow maybe others, and created a pattern that can be repeated by any group in power. The public doesn't like to have things taken away from it, even by its chosen reps. Stress on the taking away: health care, personal autonomy, the trustworthiness of authorities, retirement security, economical food, the vote, public lands, civil servant assistance to get benefits, access to a choice of media, ability to have one's story included in the nation's history...this will perhaps even win over some frustrated Republican voters, esp. those independent-minded Texans.
Anyone living under the belief that Trump will be gone in 2028 should pull off their rose colored glasses and grab their pitchfork. Much of the posturing and emergency enactment of city takeovers is just a rehearsal for the “emergency” that cancels the 2028 elections.
This article made me feel like I was reading the Times or the Post. It's like Lauren just couldn't bring herself to say anything positive about the Dems, or offer any hope. She even talked about the Dems who "fled" TX, after Lizzie Fletcher was on w/ Sarah and specifically pointed out that they didn't flee anything. They legally left the state to call attention to the incredibly dangerous authoritarian takeover - thank goodness! I thought they were incredibly courageous.
I wish TB would find someone else to do the reporting on what's happening w/ Dems. Lauren seems to have an inherent bias against us.
TO THINK ABOUT, "AT-LARGE" REPS. Advice from my map-minded spouse-- Consider some at-large reps for Texas right now. Consider them again, next year, for a National Fair Voting Act.
GOAL. The idea? As done in earlier decades in Texas, keep any higher population metro area inside its containing county. No metro district drawn to fit an "ideal size" would be allowed to have its boundaries cross a county line. (Current "ideal" set at 766,987, per the 2020 Census.)
As of 2020, the TX population justified 38 reps. (38=Total TX population, divided by the "ideal" population size per rep of 766,987. That's meant to give each state a number of reps in proportion to state's population size.)
Currently, having 38 reps allowed for TX is read as needing TX divided into 38 districts. The alternative? Have fewer than 38 districts. The math is simple. If, say, 28 districts were right to put wrongly separated parts back into the same district and the same county, producing 38 reps total for the state means there would be 10 excess reps. (The 10 "at large" could mean statewide, as with Senators. Or, multi-county regions smaller than the state might work, each multi-county region, equal-sized on population, having one at-large rep each. )
INCUMBENT REQUEST. If staying inside a county, an at-large merge could be done to avoid a divisive gerrymander. For example, maybe any line wiggling that moves an incumbent's house out of their former district would be sufficient for the affected incumbent to request an at-large re-draw. (Two separate districts oddly divided , each of ideal size, would be merged into double the ideal size. Their merger would need two seats, producing two at-large reps.)
LIZZIE FLETCHER. Consider Lizzie Fletcher's old #7, combined with her newly assigned #38, lines wiggled, her house in the same place, but the line redraw meant to separate her from her old neighbors. She can be with them again, if the two districts are merged. Voters inside now choosing two seats, it's possible they could elect two Dems. Lizzie re-elected. It's possible they could instead elect two Repubs, Lizzie excluded. It's possible if independent, they could do "switch voting", pick the better one of two Dems, maybe Lizzie, and the better one of two Repubs. )
TEN COUNTIES BIG IN POPULATION. The state's most populous counties show ten with populations greater than 766,987, the ideal voter count, explained above. The top ten counties, ranked by size, range from Houston to El Paso: https://www.texas-demographics.com/counties_by_population
*1 super-large county, Harris (Houston metro) has a bit over 5 million. Its size merits six reps with ideal sized districts devoted to that county alone. If stopped at six districts, the district lines would not need to cut across the county boundaries.
SOME WAYS TO DO HARRIS (COULD BE OTHERS)
For Harris, its population of 5,009,302, divided by 766,987 the ideal size. would mean 6.531 reps. Six reps could serving their county and no other.
That leaves an excess of 0.531 reps. Not left just for Harris, impossible to have a partial rep, the excess would contribute to some at-large pool, the total excesses across multiple counties added up.
VARIATION. Four of the allocated six might be used per the Voting Rights Act and the remaining two non-partisan.
VARIATION. It might be a seniority system, to be set up so more delegates once in Congress can be eligible for chairman of some committee. EXAMPLE:
*one to two seats reserved for candidates with over 10 years of service and over age 60,
*up to two seats reserved for candidates with two to ten years of prior service and age 40 or over,
*one seat for anyone, with less service or age.
*remaining seats totally at large
UNLIKELY?? Too hard to make fair choices? No redistricting would ever be needed if Harris County could have all 6 be at-large seats, selected by all voters in the county.
As voters then pick the politicians, they could chose all six to be Repubs, all six to be Dems, or do "switch votings". SWITCH EXAMPLE--If Independent, voters could pick the best four of one party first, then switch to picking the least bad two of the other party.
BIG counties In addition to Harris
*3 large counties, Dallas, Tarrant (Ft Worth metro) and Bexar (San Ant. metro) with more than two million each. (Each 1.53 million in population merits two reps per county, at-large if desired. )
*6 counties with under 1.53M population, Travis (Austin), Collin and Denton with over a million, then Fort Bend, Hidalgo and El Paso Counties with over 800,000
TX BACKGROUND. Texas has vague wording in it's Constitution of 1876. The interpretation early was understood to mean keeping whole any high population counties. There was NO dividing of any county into parts. Any "excess reps" justified by the state population became "at-large" reps, counted, labeled as "at large", put on a cycle's districting map. At some point, the "at large" counts disappeared. Each redistricting bill then contained a possibly arbitrary and amendable line or lines early in the text (warning, I'm not a lawyer). These say, for example, it's enough to give each county just one rep, shared with other rural counties.
A big contribution of the TX Dems leaving the state? Their flight drew attention to some things too few people understood earlier.
NATIONAL ACT NEEDED. Voters more aware, the US Congress can try again to pass the National Fair Voting Act. Made it through the US House TWICE as an addition to the Voting Rights Act. The US Senate was the obstacle, so SENATORS NEED TO CHANGE. (US Senators almost passed it in the first attempt, but second time a few filibustered it "ad nauseum", until too late, so had to be returned to Committee. Blame was placed on two Dem Senators who wanted fair districts, but voted against to stopping filibusters. Both changed from Dem to Independent. Neither is in office now. (They were J.Manchin of WV and Arizona's K. Sinema. The Arizona Senator is now replaced by Dem R. Gallego. It's time to try again.) Until then?
BIG BENEFIT-MUSCLE GOVS NOW AWARE. States with "political muscle" are those with large populations and thus lots of reps. Several key ones receiving the beleaguered TX reps. They understand their independent commissions for re-drawing lines need to be TEMPORARILY "turned off", until bully states like TX and FL and OH start to behave, or, even better, a national policy stops the misbehavior for ALL states.
BENEFIT- GENERAL POPULACE AWARE.
(A) TX TRICK, SHAPES EXTRA-BAD. People earlier barely knew what a serious gerrymander looked like. (TX has a more than average number, especially in or across metros. These shapes are snakes, urban doughnut holes, plus deliberate wigglings to put current house member into a different district each election, forcing House reps to sell houses and move, to keep their old voters. The beloved Lloyd Doggett had this done to him twice. Now, for a third election, he is pitted by line changes against another snake-trapped Dem.).
(B) TX TRICK, EXTREME OVER-PACKING. People EARLIER did not know how the odd shapes were made much worse by the trick of "overpacking". That's line wiggle that squeeze too many of the attacked party into the malignant shape. It's done in order to reduce their number of reps.
See Planscore.org--Packing is expected for the newly proposed TX Congressional districts 7 vs 9 (7 expected to be Dem vs 9 to be Repub., as both packed at the 99% level with 2020 voters of the targeted party.) Overall, Repubs are assigning seven reps to new districts. If both Dem and Repub incumbents are moved into a new district with too many Repub voters, then fewer Dem incumbents get re-elected, no matter how loved by their old voters.
U
Dems are the minority party but that does not mean the state gets to send only GOP to Congress. There are over 8M Democrats and they are constituents of Texas leaders and the President - and THEY NEED TO BE REPRESENTED. The lawyers of Texas are a disgrace - they need to stop this cheating by their fraternity - and all in the judicial system need to work to remedy this CHEATING.
Abbott and Paxton have gone too far - they also took an oath to support the Constitution.
It was wrong for Trump to ask them to cheat - but we have seen much support of corruption and bribery from him and the GOP. This is not the country character we want -75% of the people are vs corruption and cheating.
Getting more than a little tired of your negative comments about how the Dems are just not up to par. Just what the hell is you expert advise?
What di we expect? Dems did this in WI in 2011 to fight GOP ending public sector labor unions. Same result. Same time line. Delays but does not prevent.
The "Pyrrhic victories" Lauren describes demonstrate that most current Democratic Party leaders have no idea how to stand up to Trump and the Republican Party. Complaining/rationally arguing how bad they are; lauding someone who throws a sub at police as a folk hero; running away from direct confrontation as evidenced in the Texas legislature; and holding up signs in protest marches are like "bringing a knife to a gunfight." I believe we should be looking for more Democratic leaders like Governor Newsom and Congresswoman Slotkin how are developing strategies to "fight fire with fire."
https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/zelensky-and-us-allies-to-confront/comment/146655195?r=1metx&utm_medium=ios
This is my comment about what I think Democrats can usefully do right now.
The Demopublican strategy of too little and too late continues to deliver for the Republicrat rollout of Project 2025. No mid-terms needed, the 'election' will be in the bag for the T. Rump criminal enterprise. If you do not like what the Republicrats are selling quit buying it.
Steve Bannon has already stated that active and effective opposition to the Republicrat takeover will be met with bloodshed. This is in my opinion not a bluff by a barely functioning alcoholic but an instruction for constructing an effective opposition. After all, the MAGA base is firmly attached to the idea of blood and soil and they are not likely to abandon that viewpoint anytime soon. Approval of the duly elected administration is still above the approval of the Reichstag after the 1933 election. We all know how that ended.
I had posted earlier about Democrats needing to trumpet the fact that Trump has done some unpopular things. And today I saw 2 things that should be added to the list of Dem complaints about Trump and his Republican Congress. Trump wants to eliminate paper ballots and voting machines. Gosh, I wonder why? 🤔
And I read about electricity rates skyrocketing, partly because of data centers. I don’t pretend to know much about this; if data centers are using a lot of electricity, then why are the rest of us paying for it? I understand that we need more sources of power, but someone has to make AI pay for most of it.
Yet steak hit $36 lb at my local big chain grocery this weekend. I've never seen it that high. There's definitely things to talk about dems!
Keep up the good reporting work Lauren. We need to know reality, not paper over it with rainbows and happy talk. That's Trump's approach, not ours
These Are the Voters Who Should Scare Democrats Most
"To him, the Democratic Party seemed increasingly focused on issues of identity at the expense of more tangible day-to-day concerns, such as public safety or the economy."
Well that is the Republican narrative. AS IF it wasn't possible to do BOTH at the same time. Nothing in politics is an either/or. There is plenty of room for both/and. Weirdly they also can't understand that ALL politics is, and always has been, about identity in one way or another.
Also my question to my fine working class comrades: When was the last time you considered joining a labor union? Why do you insist on the Democratic Party (or the Republican one for that matter) to do for you what labor unions once did for you? Of course the window has closed on the opportunity you once had to unionize. By the end of this administration unions will exist on paper only and will be just another sock puppet.
The Fool’s Gold of Midterm Success
The only fool's gold is that there will ever be another free and fair election that Democrats can win outside of about the 13 states they control. There are 40 seats in the House that are truly competitive with 21 of these historically leaning toward one of the parties and ONLY 19 are considered actual toss ups. In the Senate there are 3. IF Democrats win all three they will still only have 48 seats. They would need to miraculously flip 3 more seats to take the deciding vote out of the hands of JD Vance.
One thing that might work to the Democrats advantage (if they can turn out their own voters) is that low information, uneducated and those not liking Trump's policies might not show up to the polls. Especially those 1st time voters who voted for Trump in 2024. Trump not being at the top of the ballot is a real advantage.
a big part of the strategy surely must be repeating long and loudly to everyone that the GOP has silenced the people's voice - today one group, tomorrow maybe others, and created a pattern that can be repeated by any group in power. The public doesn't like to have things taken away from it, even by its chosen reps. Stress on the taking away: health care, personal autonomy, the trustworthiness of authorities, retirement security, economical food, the vote, public lands, civil servant assistance to get benefits, access to a choice of media, ability to have one's story included in the nation's history...this will perhaps even win over some frustrated Republican voters, esp. those independent-minded Texans.
Anyone living under the belief that Trump will be gone in 2028 should pull off their rose colored glasses and grab their pitchfork. Much of the posturing and emergency enactment of city takeovers is just a rehearsal for the “emergency” that cancels the 2028 elections.