I'm not sure if you've discussed gerrymandering before, but there is one particularly insidious aspect of it you left out in your otherwise cogent analysis: it encourages extremism. Once a district is safely Red, it is easier for a Trumpist to win. The same could be said for Blue districts and radical progressives, but clearly the biggest threat to American democracy at this point is Trumpism. Somehow, Democrats have to reach out to the remaining sane Republicans to agree together to reverse this trend. But it may be too late.
I also think Democrats didn't lose out as much this cycle because the GOP had such a head start on gerrymandering that it was hard for them to carve out a significantly greater advantage. In NC, for example, the GOP could gerrymander in 2010 to turn a 6-7 deficit to a 10-3 advantage for most of the decade. They can't engineer a 14-0 sweep this time.
I'm not sure if you've discussed gerrymandering before, but there is one particularly insidious aspect of it you left out in your otherwise cogent analysis: it encourages extremism. Once a district is safely Red, it is easier for a Trumpist to win. The same could be said for Blue districts and radical progressives, but clearly the biggest threat to American democracy at this point is Trumpism. Somehow, Democrats have to reach out to the remaining sane Republicans to agree together to reverse this trend. But it may be too late.
I also think Democrats didn't lose out as much this cycle because the GOP had such a head start on gerrymandering that it was hard for them to carve out a significantly greater advantage. In NC, for example, the GOP could gerrymander in 2010 to turn a 6-7 deficit to a 10-3 advantage for most of the decade. They can't engineer a 14-0 sweep this time.
Spot-on.