201 Comments
User's avatar
MPC's avatar

Looking at that TN congressional map Rs pushed through, there’s definite dummymander potential if Democrats show up in Memphis and Nashville.

MPC's avatar

If TN Rs think they can get 2024 numbers this year, they are dreaming.

michaelflutist's avatar

Let's please use "dummymander" precisely. No, there is no dummymander potential in TN. There is a (slim, I believe) possibility that there will be a big enough wave to defeat the gerrymander this year.

MPC's avatar
May 12Edited

We have better than a slim chance of flipping the House. Voters are fed up and when you have Republicans pulling outrageous and wildly unconstitutional shit like they're doing in LA, TN, AL and FL, they will crawl over broken glass to vote them out.

This is a midterm, some Republicans can (and will) sit this out. And if GOP polling couldn't predict two state FL legislative seats flipping in R-favorable districts, Rs are going to have a really bad night on 11/3/26.

michaelflutist's avatar

Why did you think I was suggesting there is only a slim chance to flip the House? That aside, historically, voters don't care enough about gerrymanders for them to affect their votes. This year might be different, but I think what will be driving votes is not "inside baseball" stuff like that but rising prices, rising unemployment and other things that they can see directly affect them and their families.

MPC's avatar

That's what I'm counting on. If there was an opportunity for 2026 to be 2010 in reverse, this is it.

michaelflutist's avatar

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with whether the terrible gerrymanders in TN would be effective in other than a Democratic tsunami year.

Guy Cohen's avatar

The bluest seats on here are only marginally redder than the old Ogles seat, so if there was a chance then there may be one now.

michaelflutist's avatar

"There's a chance to defeat the gerrymander this year" is not a counterpoint to my remark.

FeingoldFan's avatar

Is there? Even Bredesen only won one of the districts in 2018. Unless if we’re within 10 points of flipping Tennessee statewide I doubt we’d win more than 1 House seat at most.

Skaje's avatar

Yeah. People are looking for silver linings but gerrymanders are getting way more effective than the maps of 10-20 years ago. Effectively these maps don't crack unless we're actually close to winning statewide. It's a Trump +30 state, just a brutal margin to overcome even if nationally it's a D+13 tidal wave and we're flipping 30 house seats and 7 senators. The steadfast belief some have in the risk of "dummymanders" to constrain GOP maps is unhelpful, we should recognize how badly these maps are eroding democracy and eliminating the voice of black voters in existing compact seats. The only answer is federal reform once we retake power.

Mark's avatar

Do you think even in a scenario where we enacted federal reform that it would be Supreme Court-proof though? As partisan as this Court is, I struggle to see how the Court wouldn't put their thumb on the scale ahead of official reapportionment.

Skaje's avatar

It's bleak. The Rucho decision held that partisan gerrymandering is non-justiciable under current law, but seemed to invite Congress to actually set standards. Should Congress do so, its a legitimate worry the court will then hold any such standards cannot be enforced (like what is about to happen with Florida's supreme court). Hate to say it but court reform might be an unavoidable part of unwinding this madness.

Johnny Neumonic1's avatar

Its not justicible under the 14th Amendment. But Congress does have the authority to regulate House elections (and to limit SCOTUS authority to even review such a law)

michaelflutist's avatar

They would have to enforce their power through impeachment of justices and their removal from office if they overturn Congressional action, and that's not happening. Enlarging the court would be easier, though still difficult.

Louise Purfield-Coak's avatar

It would be a good time to work on petition drives to enact Non Partisan Independent Redistricting Drives in every State that allows citizen petitions. Put them on the ballots in 2028. The Supreme Court can't touch them and neither can Appeals Courts. Neither can State Legislatures. That along with Court Reforms at SCOTUS would solve the gerrymandering problem in the vast majority of States for good. Just like it did for the abortion issue. As I pointed out yesterday or the day before, Petition drive volunteers just have to remind voters that the opposite party will gerrymander too if given the chance. Voters in vast numbers of both parties rushed to put their signatures on the petition then overwhelmingly approved it in the election,here in Michigan. And it worked. After 40 years of Republicans controlling the Michigan Legislature, Control flipped marginally to Democrats. It also seems to have had some effect on the Mi. Republican Party, because marginally their candidates are slightly less MAGA and slightly more moderate where they have won. With Districts split 50/50 by party voting records, both parties have to appeal to the middle Independents.

Mark's avatar

Hard to see how even a victory wouldn't be a two-year rental with those margins....unless some of Nashville's suburbs start realigning.

Goldenhawk99's avatar

News from the North: in a brazen attempt to influence the composition of the House of Commons, a man going by the alias of "Goldenhawk" filled out his 2026 Census form by indicating he had 100,000 people living in both his attic and his basement. The new ridings of Upper and Lower Goldenhawk are both expected to swing Liberal based on the actual number of voters (2, maybe 3 if his son has turned 18 by then.)

michaelflutist's avatar

That sounds like a gag. Is it a crime?

Goldenhawk99's avatar

No, they are all white so it's fine.

Zack from the SFV's avatar

It is the Great White North after all...

It is interesting that they do a census in the middle of a decade. Is it decennial or on another schedule?

Henrik's avatar

Every five years

michaelflutist's avatar

Dunno what to think of this...

Goldenhawk99's avatar

It's a joke. Gallows humour based on recent events.

D S's avatar

Are their controversies/concerns about overcounting?

Goldenhawk99's avatar

Not really, if anything the efforts to make sure everyone is counted are far more robust.

Mike Boland's avatar

Democrats in Virginia need to wake up and lower the age for retiring judges to 70 or 65.I am urging donors, both large and small to boycott Virginia Democrats for their cowardliness in responding to the GOP dominated Virginia Supreme court. The Dems have been shown a way to respond and so far have not endangering democracy in light of the southern states power grab against Black and Brown congressional and legislator districts. There are other Dems across this nation that need our support!!! No donor money for Virginia Dems!!!!

FeingoldFan's avatar

That seems like a weird way to do this. If we think we should ignore the court, just do it and ignore them, don’t do weird procedural stuff around the edges like this.

David Nir's avatar

Despite what many commentators have claimed, there's no real way to just "ignore" the court—at least, not in a way that would redound to Dems' benefit. Quinn and I discussed it at length in our livestream on Saturday: https://www.the-downballot.com/p/how-virginia-democrats-can-retire

Guy Cohen's avatar

I also agree there are more effective ways to change the court’s composition.

Guy Cohen's avatar

Why should we boycott VA Democrats? We should do everything in our power to help get the map back in place, and it doesn’t have to be for this cycle. They eventually came around on joining the redistricing fight in the first place so if we apply pressure we can do it there too.

I agree 54 might have been a bridge too far but 70 could work.

FFFFFF's avatar

Some bonkers crosstabs in there.

FeingoldFan's avatar

A 15-point win nationwide would be the largest margin for either party since 1974. I have to imagine that would be enough for some of the gerrymanders in places like Texas and Florida to break.

MPC's avatar

A 15-point win would overcome some of the gerrymanders in TN as well.

FFFFFF's avatar

Josh Stein won 12 house seats in NC with similar numbers.

FFFFFF's avatar

Yes. All but the 3rd and the 8th.

MPC's avatar

A similar wave would definitely reduce the GOP majority in the state House. Wonder how many state Senate seats would be flipped in that wave.

Kevin H.'s avatar

Lol it's not going to be 15, but what would we win if it was 15?

FeingoldFan's avatar

If we win the generic ballot by 15, I think we’re looking at flipping the governorships in Alaska, Nevada, Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, and New Hampshire, flipping at least 10-12 Senate seats (Alaska, Montana, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Maine, and potentially Mississippi and South Carolina), and gaining 60+ House seats as gerrymanders break.

michaelflutist's avatar

There probably wouldn't be uniform swing, though.

FeingoldFan's avatar

Sure, and that could be good or bad for us. If we’re at +15 because of a disproportionate rural white backlash to Trump for example, that could put a lot of Midwestern and mountain west seats on the map that otherwise wouldn’t be. If it’s because Black turnout exceeds white turnout, we could potentially flip some southern Senate seats we’d otherwise have no chance in. If it’s because of the Hispanic vote being bluer than it was in 2016, we could get a trifecta in Texas.

Louise Purfield-Coak's avatar

Don't forget really angry farmers who are now paying an arm and a leg for what fertilizer they can get. Deasel prices through the roof for farm tractors and trucks. Not to mention the markets Trump destroyed. I passed the farm action place the other day, and there were at least just 15 pickup trucks sitting waiting for auction. And farm implements up the wazoo! I have been passing the same auction place for 20 years or more. I have never seen such a sight by a long shot. The pickups way out numbered the sheep on site.

JanusIanitos's avatar

No, there won't. But it's a good tool for back of the envelope estimates. As long as we understand it's not a perfect match to reality it's good enough for this level of prediction.

Aaron Apollo Camp's avatar

Once you get to a 15-point margin, a lot of gerrymanders invariably fail, or are at least at serious risk of failing, even if they're not really dummymanders.

JazElections's avatar

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/11/opinion/maureen-galindo-antisemitic-conspiracies.html

TX-35: It could be a coincidence, but The New York Times published an opinion calling Maureen Galindo an "antisemitic sex therapist" seemingly after The Downballot did.

michaelflutist's avatar

The poll showing a 5-point lead for Osborne with him at 47% is tremendously exciting! I hope there really is a possibility that he can win.

JazElections's avatar

Burbank needs to win that nomination tonight. I have no doubt that she won't, as Democrats should know better, but still.

michaelflutist's avatar

What about the voters in the general election? They might pretty much ignore the Democratic nominee.

FeingoldFan's avatar

Not enough of them would, it would be like the Maine gubernatorial race in 2010 (though given what happened to Eliot Cutler, it’s a good thing that he lost).

Johnny Neumonic1's avatar

Yep. Dodged a bullet with that creep.

Mark's avatar

I've been more bullish on NE than OH or TX for a couple of months now. It'll have to be a perfect storm though.

FeingoldFan's avatar

https://www.cnn.com/2026/05/12/politics/cnn-poll-midterms-affordability-politics-impact

CNN has us only up 3 on the generic ballot, 45-42. Trump’s approval is at 35%, so it’s weird to see our generic number doing so badly.

MPC's avatar

CNN is obviously weighing it more to Republicans thanks to all the rampant gerrymandering blessed by the MAGA SCOTUS.

Everyone else has it at D+10 or more.

FeingoldFan's avatar

None of that makes sense to me - how does gerrymandering weight a generic ballot poll, and why would weighting the poll cause the generic ballot results to look like this but not impact Trump’s approval rating in the poll?

MPC's avatar

I don't know CNN's formula for getting to D+3, but I'm positive that's an outlier. Like the recent batch of elections show a much bigger disapproval gap than predicted, like Spanberger and Sherrill's blowout gubernatorial wins last year.

Mike Johnson's avatar

a lot of pollsters are weighting to 2024 - is CNN doing the same?

Mark's avatar

Probably. There's a real chance that 2004 poll weighting will greatly undersell the magnitude of the tide on election night. Or not....I've given up trying to figure out polling trends.

Oggoldy's avatar

I feel its important to note that the Democratic Party is not viewed positively by the middle or far left, and is hated by the right, and only looks decent when compared to Trump.

AnthonySF's avatar

The most improtant thing is the GOP at 42%, similar to the AtlasIntel poll (40%) and most of the others. It just seems like CNN didn't push their undecideds much and/or most of the undecideds this year will lean Dem.

JazElections's avatar

https://x.com/Justinjpearson/status/2054200925221179590?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

TN-9: Democratic state Rep. Justin J. Pearson will still run here, regardless of the map.

Techno00's avatar

Good. Even if he loses, he should run out of spite.

JazElections's avatar

Gloria Johnson, one of the other Tennessee Three, had a statewide campaign for Senate that failed terribly. But she ran. Maybe 2028 is Justin Jones's cycle to run?

Zero Cool's avatar

Johnson’s election results against Senator Blackburn back in 2024 though weren’t too far off from what Marquita Bradshaw got as a Democratic challenger to Senator Hagerty back in 2020.

Unless there’s specific things Johnson did in her campaign that were unsuccessful?

JazElections's avatar

She narrowly underperformed Kamala Harris, even though statewide elections allow candidates of the opposite party a better chance to compete than presidential races.

Zero Cool's avatar

May have been her visibility and how low on the radar the Senate race was at the time. If Johnson performed slightly below Harris, that’s a problem.

I’m annoyed when we have the TN-07 special election which gets more attention in the news but previously in 2020 and 2024 the Senate races in the state didn’t receive much coverage. Hopefully from the special election Democrats can improve on their margins and win more elections.

JazElections's avatar

Hagerty is up again this year and Bradshaw looks like she'll be the nominee again.

schwortz's avatar

What's being done or can be done to counteract and prevent the potential DOJ national voter purge? At the very least, its good to see that Democrats control the secretary of state office in many states, including crucial swing states like Nevada, Arizona, Wisconsin and North Carolina.

I'm just worried since places like Ohio, Alaska, Iowa, and Texas where Democrats have crucial statewide and house races. Surely we can do more than just raise awareness and hope that a voter purge doesn't sabotage those elections.

MPC's avatar

Unfortunately, the NC Secretary of State office is not in charge of voter rolls. The state auditor, who was illegally given that power via a GOP power grab, is overseeing our State Board of Elections (and our voter rolls). That power originally belonged to the governor via our state constitution (which GOP legislators and judges are ignoring).

schwortz's avatar

That's a damn shame. Hopefully there's actual ways to mitigate and circumvent this corruption. I know there's been major lawsuits that have been filed and at the very least, federal courts have been generally ruling against such nonsense, even the Trump appointed judges.

Mike Johnson's avatar

Wisconsin also, the SoS doesn't control elections, was stripped in the 90s.

David Nir's avatar

This is mostly a battle on the legal front, though obviously the more elections Dems win for gov, SoS, etc. in November, the better they'll be able to resist this. We discussed it with counsel for Common Cause on a recent podcast: https://www.the-downballot.com/p/good-riddance-to-eric-swalwell

Louise Purfield-Coak's avatar

Michigan, which has Congressional, Senate and Governor up for grabs, has the SOS currently involved in a lawsuit to stop the Administration from seizing our voter rolls and other information the Feds.are demanding. Our Dem. Attorney General is handling the case.

JazElections's avatar

https://www.al.com/politics/2026/05/alabama-republican-now-in-different-congressional-race-days-before-election-after-supreme-court-bombshell.html

AL-1, AL-2: Republican state Rep. Rhett Marques, a leading candidate for the open 1st district, will instead run in the 2nd, now that a new map has supposedly been installed.

The primary election is in a week. I'm unsure as to what major Democrats could run in the 2nd district, or what map they could run in at all. Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures represents the current iteration of the 2nd, but under a potential remap, he could live in the 1st.

Major Republican candidates in the currently open 1st district include former Rep. Jerry Carl, Green Beret veteran Josh McKee and businessman Austin Sidwell.

AWildLibAppeared's avatar

I suspect Rep. Figures would continue to run in the 2nd, even though he doesn't live in the district? That is legal.

JazElections's avatar

It depends on which district has a higher Black population and is more competitive for Democrats. Figures's base of support is in Mobile, where his parents have long been in local politics. Mobile was the base of the 1st district dating back to 1845 until the 2024 redraw, and is where Carl is also from.

Marques and Rep. Barry Moore, on the other end, hail from Enterprise, a small town usually located in the 2nd district until again, 2024.

I counted it up recently, and I'm sure there's some irregularities, but only 36 members appear to live outside of their district. It would be unorthodox for Figures to run in a seat he's not familiar with.

Paleo's avatar

Based on what was posted yesterday, 2 had a nearly 40% AA population. So I’m sure he’d run there.

Paleo's avatar

Figures won the district by 10 while Harris won it by 8. The AA population was just under 50%. In this year’s version, the AA population is about 10 points lower and Trump would have won it by 14.

JazElections's avatar

So Figures probably loses re-election (if he runs) by 5-8 points, overperforming both Trump's 2024 results and other statewide candidates like Kyle Sweetser.

David Nir's avatar

The 2nd is marginally winnable for a Dem in an exceptional year, but even then, very unlikely. The 1st is beyond hopeless even in a 1936-style wave.

JazElections's avatar

Maybe Figures will just retire, then.

David Nir's avatar

Just wanted to note that we've published a "rules of the road" for The Downballot community. I ask everyone here to read and abide. Thank you! https://www.the-downballot.com/p/the-downballots-community-rules-of

brendan fka HoosierD42's avatar

Love this!

Techno00's avatar

Thank you for doing this!

Zero Cool's avatar

Thanks!

Wolfpack Dem's avatar

Thank you what you do, providing us with a sane, civil corner of the political interwebs.

David Nir's avatar

That's extremely kind of you. It always means a lot when someone acknowledges the work we put in.

Johnny Neumonic1's avatar

Love this, and thank you for your work. My only thought (which may be stupid) is: Is there a way to limit the discussion to downballot races, a la SSP and DKE, so discussion isn't swallowed up by talk about Trump?

David Nir's avatar

Thank you so much! I don't realistically think we can impose that without very heavy-handed moderation, I'm afraid.

Johnny Neumonic1's avatar

Fair enough. And thanks again from KillaCity (at SSP)

jakkalskos's avatar

NJ-07: Tom Kean Jr. said he'd be back "very soon" after vanishing for more than a month. It's been a few weeks since he said that, and he still isn't back. He'll still return soon though, just trust him.

https://newjerseyglobe.com/congress/kean-will-remain-absent-this-week-as-office-continues-to-insist-hell-be-back-soon/

JazElections's avatar

I wonder if the issue is more serious than we think. If so, some clarity would be nice. We don't need another David Scott rolling up to the Secretary of State's office to file only to die 2 months later.

Paleo's avatar

At first I thought the hush hush nature indicated that it could be a hospitalization for depression. But I don’t think that would have lasted this long.

the lurking ecologist's avatar

Yeah, I thought maybe a substance abuse issue. But I guess we'll see

alienalias's avatar

Tbqh, I don't care if it's a Republican.

JazElections's avatar

Agreed, but I'd be surprised to see him go before his dad, who is now 91.

Henrik's avatar

Smoke where there’s fire, sounds like Starmer might really be about to actually have to resign

JazElections's avatar

Who could Labor pick to succeed him? Or will he just call an election instead of resigning?

Paleo's avatar

He’s not calling an election. That’s one thing for sure.

Henrik's avatar

Yeah def not. Not with polls where they are, Parliament good for another three years and a majority that big

Henrik's avatar

Andy Burnham would be my guess, a lot of ambitious Labour pols might not want the job in present conditions

Noah's avatar

He has to be a Labour MP to stand for the leadership election, last time he tried the Labour National Executive Committee (Led by Starmer) blocked him from running in a by-election, and there’s nothing indicating he won’t block him again.

Louise Purfield-Coak's avatar

My British Cousin informs me that Andy Burnham would be ideal, but he can't because Starmer blocked his candidacy for Parliament in elections a few months ago, fearing his rivalry for the PM. You have to be a member of Parliament to be eligible. Now Labor has really no good options to Replace Starmer. If Starmer quits, Reform will take over on the strength of their really big wins in the local Council elections last week. She is a bit beside herself, because that means Farage would be P.M. Labor can't afford to shed Starmer or hold Elections for Parliament.

michaelflutist's avatar

Can Labour change its eligibility rules?

Zero Cool's avatar

Hopefully the next PM after Starmer won’t pull stupid shit like arresting Brits for what they say on social media.

Don’t give Nigel Farage and Co. more to work with.

https://www.aol.com/keir-starmer-claims-not-censoring-154735021.html

JanusIanitos's avatar

I must have missed something -- what's the context for him potentially resigning? Is it his general lack of popularity, or some specific scandal?

Paleo's avatar

The party did terribly in the national local elections last Thursday

Paleo's avatar

looks like all 3 FL partisan gerrymandering cases will be consolidated with Judge Hawkes this week

https://x.com/nlvwarren/status/2054271258817106111?s=46&t=sbdQQeYBqp0h_Zql717iTw

JazElections's avatar

Hawkes is a DeSantis appointee and was briefly appointed by Trump to serve as an immigration judge, FWIW.

MPC's avatar

I expect him to rule in favor of the rigged maps; state anti-gerrymandering amendment be dammed.

Paleo's avatar

It’ll be appealed whatever he decides.

MPC's avatar

The FL Supreme Court will uphold the new maps. I doubt they'll uphold that state constitutional amendment, they'll pretzel themselves into saying "this doesn't violate it".

I would be genuinely shocked if they struck down the new maps.

Paleo's avatar

That’s going to be some pretzel. They might come up with their own Purcell and not rule on it till after the election.

JanusIanitos's avatar

Forced to guess, I'd expect them to say something like "it is impossible to judicially evaluate a gerrymander" and rule that the amendment stands but they have no way to measure it and thus it is unenforceable.

It's bullshit, but it's not out of hand for conservative jurisprudence.

Paleo's avatar

The Missouri Supreme Court is considering three challenges to the map. Two similar lawsuits argue that some of the congressional districts don’t follow the state constitution’s requirements that districts be as compact as possible.

A third lawsuit argues that the map shouldn’t be in effect for the 2026 election because opponents in December submitted more than 305,000 signatures seeking to force a statewide referendum vote on the lines. In the past, state officials have paused the implementation of measures subject to a referendum until a vote is held, but in this instance they say the new lines are active.

During Tuesday’s oral arguments, the judges sat almost entirely stone-faced as they listened. Only one judge asked a single question during arguments that stretched for more than an hour, offering no sense of how the court would rule.

https://westvirginiawatch.com/2026/05/12/repub/are-they-going-to-roll-over-gerrymandering-fights-reach-state-high-courts/

Johnny Neumonic1's avatar

I have argued multiple cases in the MO supreme court, and I know those judges well. If you want to DM me, I can give you my unfiltered opinions

Paleo's avatar

They issued their opinion 6 hours after oral argument. That tells me enough.

NewDem07's avatar

Seems like 5 Republicans voted with all Dems.

the lurking ecologist's avatar

They have real reason to be concerned about unpacking Clyburns district. The Senate Maj Leader (Massey?) said the quiet part out loud. They know that the 6 R districts with heavy R majorities are effective voter suppression tactics. If they mix it up, people might come out to vote. When they added the 7th district, Tom Rice almost lost to a D (Tinabu). It's been solid R since, now repped by sock puppet Russell Fry.

NewDem07's avatar

Agree with you 100%. SC is only 58-42 statewide, which is the exact number for an ideal gerrymander. As seen in some of the potential maps circulating the internet, getting every single seat to match that spread while satisfying the incumbents' demands is very difficult to achieve in practice, as some districts were estimated to be redder while others were bluer (down to R+10?).

John Carr's avatar

It is often more like 55-45 statewide.

the lurking ecologist's avatar

Yes, if we have a compelling D candidate. (i.e. Not Joe Cunningham)