As if it's not bad enough that the Rs are holding the country hostage,

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

let's not forget that the reason they control the House and have as large a piece of the Senate as they do is thanks almost entirely to gerrymandering and lies.

About that gerrymandering, in case anyone missed it, Sam Wang did a great piece on this at the beginning of this year:

HAVING the first modern democracy comes with bugs. Normally we would expect more seats in Congress to go to the political party that receives more votes, but the last election confounded expectations. Democrats received 1.4 million more votes for the House of Representatives, yet Republicans won control of the House by a 234 to 201 margin. This is only the second such reversal since World War II.

Using statistical tools that are common in fields like my own, neuroscience, I have found strong evidence that this historic aberration arises from partisan disenfranchisement. Although gerrymandering is usually thought of as a bipartisan offense, the rather asymmetrical results may surprise you.

Through artful drawing of district boundaries, it is possible to put large groups of voters on the losing side of every election. The Republican State Leadership Committee, a Washington-based political group dedicated to electing state officeholders, recently issued a progress report on Redmap, its multiyear plan to influence redistricting. The $30 million strategy consists of two steps for tilting the playing field: take over state legislatures before the decennial Census, then redraw state and Congressional districts to lock in partisan advantages. The plan was highly successful.

Read the entire piece and view the excellent graphics here.

[Tx4obama]

1. Every time I think about all the good things that Obama could have gotten done by now...

... if we still held the majority in The House it turns my stomach.

Our only hope is to somehow get it back in 2014.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

2. Unfortunately, I don't see the gerrymander situation improving. So, Dems have to

convince nearly twice as many voters to support them than Rs do to win. And, there's this:

Still reeling from their second straight presidential loss to Barack Obama, Republicans are working to make drastic changes to how electoral college votes are allocated in key swing states.

The successful pro-Republican gerrymandering that took place that year didn’t just protect the Republican control of the House of Representatives, but also laid the groundwork for taking back the presidency. If these plans, which are by most accounts legal (although they could be challenged in court), were to become law, it would be difficult for Democrats to win the presidency in 2016, even if they win by millions of votes.

[FUMCSDLCBDPOS]

3. Perhaps the next Democratic President will have learned the lesson that

the party leader needs to FIGHT for what they campaign on or the voters will turn their back on you.

People need something to vote for and support rather then against something.

If we Democrats want votes we have to give people a reason to get out and vote not our team is not as bad as the other team.

Rightly or wrongly the perception was that President Obama did not fight for single payer hence why bother to vote when he did not fight for you the first time. New Boss same as the old boss.

Democratic Politicians need to make a choice do they work and represent the 1% or the 99% they can no longer have it both ways, the middle ground is gone.

[Laelth]

5. Turning out the base is far more important than fighting for the squishy middle.

In part, as you note, because the middle is shrinking. I argued something similar in 2010, here, if you are interested: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Laelth/41

-Laelth

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

9. Good points. I would add that a lot of people who call themselves Independents

these days are really Republicans who like to smoke pot. In other words, Libertarians. Ds on social issues, but Rs on financial ones. And they care more about money. They're fine with the idea that if you have enough money you can do what you want. So, they're probably going to vote R, anyway.

[Laelth]

4. k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t

-Laelth

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

6. Depressing, yes. But, ss is so often true, Stephen Colbert can still make me laugh at it.

Win, Lose, or Redraw!

I love that man.

[Laelth]

7. Brilliant. Thanks for posting. I had not seen that segment. n/t

-Laelth

[Jester Messiah]

8. I don't see a solution shy of people picking up and moving across district lines.

Well, not a peaceful solution, anyway.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

10. Sam Wang proposes two ideas that seem unlikelly to have enough R support to be feasible.

First, let’s establish nonpartisan redistricting commissions in all 50 states. In Ohio, one such ballot measure failed in November, in part because of a poorly financed campaign. Maybe those who prodded voters to turn out could support future initiatives.

Second, we need to adopt a statistically robust judicial standard for partisan gerrymandering. In the Supreme Court’s Vieth v. Jubelirer case, in 2004, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy voted against intervention in chicanery in Pennsylvania, but left the door open for future remedies elsewhere if a clear standard could be established.