Essentially, US elections don’t go by the populous vote, but rather the number of jurisdictions voting for something. This scenario matters less for the Presidential elections (because of appointed electors), but absolutely affects local>state>congressional elections.
Imagine picking teams in gym class, but one team gets to pick all their players first. That’s the TLDR of gerrymandering.
In North Carolina, there are more registered Democrats than Republicans in the populous. Republicans were able to gerrymander the districts and skew the demographics so much that it’s almost impossible for a Democrat to win this year, turning the majority control over the the GOP.
I think ABCDE is asking about how this matters for President. Since North Carolina is not Maine or Nebraska, winner takes all. So if you’re right, and more Dems turn out than Reps in NC, then even as NC goes redder in the House, it’ll still deliver its ECs to the Blue…assuming of course the now gerrymandered State government doesn’t call the election stolen and refuses to certify the vote.
I think that’s what we’re going to actually see more of. A partisan power-grab by Conservatives by refusing to listen to the will of the people.
TL;DR: in every state except Nebraska and Maine, the popular vote determines the electoral college vote for the state. So no matter how badly gerrymandered the districts are, the presidential candidate elected by the state is NOT affected!
Does that mean each little area contributes a point to the states total? Is that for local and national elections?
You mean how gerrymandering works? Kind of.
Essentially, US elections don’t go by the populous vote, but rather the number of jurisdictions voting for something. This scenario matters less for the Presidential elections (because of appointed electors), but absolutely affects local>state>congressional elections.
Imagine picking teams in gym class, but one team gets to pick all their players first. That’s the TLDR of gerrymandering.
Sorry, I get gerrymandering, I mean how it works in that state specifically for presidential elections.
In North Carolina, there are more registered Democrats than Republicans in the populous. Republicans were able to gerrymander the districts and skew the demographics so much that it’s almost impossible for a Democrat to win this year, turning the majority control over the the GOP.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/anatomy-north-carolina-gerrymander
I think ABCDE is asking about how this matters for President. Since North Carolina is not Maine or Nebraska, winner takes all. So if you’re right, and more Dems turn out than Reps in NC, then even as NC goes redder in the House, it’ll still deliver its ECs to the Blue…assuming of course the now gerrymandered State government doesn’t call the election stolen and refuses to certify the vote.
I think that’s what we’re going to actually see more of. A partisan power-grab by Conservatives by refusing to listen to the will of the people.
Hey, I just made a post about this the other day! https://lemm.ee/post/39037973
TL;DR: in every state except Nebraska and Maine, the popular vote determines the electoral college vote for the state. So no matter how badly gerrymandered the districts are, the presidential candidate elected by the state is NOT affected!