In items #1 and #3 of the previous post, EA notes the freakout of Democrats over their own failed gerrymandering in Virginia and Tennessee’s elimination of its “black district.” On CNN, a Democrat acted as if the recent spate of gerrymandering was brand new to 2026, somehow managing not to mention the long-gerrymandered states above. Listen to this head-exploding discussion yesterday, below. It is pointed out that this “racist” redistricting of Memphis will likely remove a long time white Rep. Steve Cohen and that his likely successor will be a black Republican woman. At around the 6:20 mark, there is a cut in the video. What is left out is when one member of the panel asks, “Is allowing a black woman to take the seat of a white man racist?” and a Democrat answers, “Actually yes!” (Why was that telling exchange excised?)
Earlier, a progressive hack on the panel explains that including blacks in majority white districts means that they will no longer “have a choice.” They will have the same choice every citizen has in elections, unless the presumption is that all blacks will only choose to vote for black candidates, meaning that blacks will naturally discriminate against whites. Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) is a spectacular hypocrite, saying that all members of both parties should be outraged now, while his party has benefited from the gerrymandering in the blue states above. Gerrymandering is terrible for Democracy, he says, but apparently that only concerns Suozzi when Democrats aren’t the only party doing it.
Yes, it is tit-for-tat, except that the Republicans finally woke up, first in Texas, and decided that the party was foolish to play a rigged game: nine blue states could legally gerrymander Republicans out of the House, but red states couldn’t respond in kind? Tit-for-tat is unethical, except when a short-term response in kind to unethical conduct can force a truce where the conduct is voluntarily eschewed by both sides. This is what the Republicans are doing now, and it is proof of that party’s irresponsible torpor that it didn’t do it years ago.
The problem is that I do not see what will bring this cycle to an end. The blonde hack on the panel demanding a constitutional amendment is grandstanding. That’s not going to happen.
The disinformation (or ignorance) the Democrats are flooding social media and the news with now is flagrant. Here’s Gavin Newsom:
Ethics Alarms 
I would nitpick that Hawaii is not gerrymandered. It only has two districts. There is NO map that even comes close to getting a 50/50 split of the districts. The only place that has a Republican tilt is Molokai, with a population around 6K.
I’d definitely include Illinois, Oregon and Washington on the list of states with significant gerrymandering tilt to the democrats even if they do not have 100% democrat districts. The wild shaped districts in all of those states net a significant tilt towards the democrats.
I think there is one possible amendment that could address the gerrymandering. Make a rule about the permissible perimeter of a district cannot exceed a certain multiplier over the square root of the area of the district. It estoppels long fingers that are used to reach groupings of strongholds to tie them together.
Of course this would greatly benefit the Republicans in some cases. Tennessee is a great example. The proposed redistricting turns the state into a bunch of rectangles. The current districts have to have fingers to meet the requirements of ethnic makeup. Tennessee is overall red enough that simple squares makes every district republican.
I have to credit Christopher Patrick Kohls for the idea. (He goes under the youtube handle “Mr. Reagan”)
To paraphrase: we need to turn the progressive statement “when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression” back on them. Blacks have long enjoyed a privilege of extra voting power. Not only are whites denied this power, so are hispanics and asians. The striking down of special rules for drawing black districts was a privilege only they got. They’re now experiencing equality, and seeing it as oppression.