If partisan gerrymandering is now effectively legal unless explicit racial intent can be proven, are we finally ready to admit America may need structural election reform instead of endless “just vote harder” messaging?
Because at some point, a system can become mathematically resistant to public opinion itself.
And that conversation makes everybody uncomfortable.
Virginia Dems now have a plan to remove the state Supreme Court judges. They can lower the retirement age to clean them out, which is within the purview of the legislature to do assuming the Extreme Court doesn't make another contra-legal ruling. This has to be a no-holds barred fight.
No-holds barred fight indeed… as if our political structure didn't resemble WWE enough already…
This is the kind of escalation cycle that scares a lot of independents right now.
Republicans normalize hardball institutional tactics, Democrats respond by considering their own version of institutional hardball, and both sides justify it as “necessary” because the other side started it first.
Maybe some of these actions are technically legal. That’s not the same thing as healthy for long-term institutional legitimacy.
Once both parties fully embrace the idea that courts, rules, and governing structures are just temporary weapons to be manipulated whenever power changes hands, the country enters a very dangerous place politically. And honestly, we’re already halfway there.
The deeper issue is that public trust in institutions has collapsed so badly that millions of people now support almost any tactic as long as their side wins. That’s not stability. That’s a cold civil war mindset wearing procedural language.
Sorry, but simply rolling over to the GOP's project to Orbanize the US into some form of permanent minority rule, is not acceptable.
The Roberts court initiated this entire Gerrymander war by ruling that cracking and packing rotten boroughs was a state's rights issue. Roberts presumably did so for the same reason as the recent Callais decision: to politically benefit the GOP.
There is no means to appeal to the better angels of conservative voters, because FOX News--where 85% of GOP voters get some/most/all of their news--has already painted Callais as "...a return to sanity."
I understand the frustration, especially because a lot of people genuinely believe the current trajectory of gerrymandering and judicial rulings creates structural advantages that can outlast public opinion.
That concern shouldn’t just be dismissed.
But I think there’s also a danger in reducing every institutional ruling we dislike to pure partisan conspiracy, because once both sides fully stop believing institutions can act independently at all, democratic legitimacy erodes even faster.
I’d also push back on the idea that conservative voters are unreachable or uniformly consuming one narrative. That framing mirrors the same oversimplifications many conservatives make about liberals living inside MSNBC or social media bubbles. The media ecosystem absolutely contributes to polarization across the board, but millions of voters are more persuadable and less ideological than online discourse makes them appear.
The deeper problem, in my view, is that both parties increasingly see institutions as tools to secure long-term power rather than neutral systems deserving public trust. Republicans didn’t invent that instinct, but they’ve accelerated it in ways Democrats now feel pressured to mirror. That escalation cycle is where the real danger lives.
Virginia voters VOTED for the map change. This isn’t partisan bickering. This is a a handful of people on a Court overthrowing the will of its people. THAT’S way more dangerous to normalize.
You should check out the post I made today on redistricting. But this one is what I did on my 2nd narrative vs. reality Monday series that was the day after Virginia had there vote. I really explained it well to give some unique Insight.... it's a quick read https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/they-changed-the-rules-mid-game?r=5xf1q5
And don't we live there now? What's the alternative? If there is one to stop the Orbanization or Putinization of the USA, we should be talking about it. They use the courts to their advantage and ignore laws, punish dissenters, and enrich themselves mightily. So what should we do to support the democracy and rule of law that's being trampled. If it's not to push back, or what might be called escalation, what should be done?
Nancy. You make such an amazing Point here. I would love if you read the post that I made about a month ago after Orban lost. I would love to get your take on it because a lot of people miss the point that you are making, especially with all of the frustration and outrage. The last thing we want is to have elections not matter because the systems in place, are so corrupt, that they don't require people to an elections in order to stay in power.....
But start with this post and give me your feedback.
That's absolutely undoubtedly true, Patricia. My entire publication rights about uncomfortable facts and I would say incoming equality , by far, is the common thread that weaves every issue together.
And it appears that's where we are, i.e., "a cold civil war mindset wearing procedural language." Either we fight for our democracy, or we can continue watching it be demolished like the East Wing. The process has clearly started, but the "building" is still standing!
It only makes those who are uncomfortable with needed change upset. Those of us who see the need are only 'uncomfortable' in that it is taking so long.
Isn't it so sad that the things that need to be changed are so obvious that if you presented them to a middle school Civics class, they would all vote to one way , in the way of fairness. The income inequality, campaign finance, citizens united as all led to this domino effect of undemocratic practices while we quote on quote spread democracy across the world
"No structural map advantage has ever fully contained a midterm when presidential approval is in freefall."
Has any president's approval rating ever been in free fall as much as Trump's is now? Not a rhetorical question; I don't actually know.
At any rate, it seems unlikely to tick up before the midterms - if ever. He's painted himself and his ego into a corner with the Iran war, and it's hard to see how he'll get out and just might make things a whole lot worse instead.
Never has a president or his cabinet been so unfit to enter us into a war. A "war of whim" besides! No clear objective, and absolutely nothing has been achieved for our national interests so far. Instead, we are weaker and poorer, and according to some experts, heading over an economic cliff soon.
Historically, presidential approval collapses absolutely can reshape midterms. Trumps isn't the lowest. Carter, Bush Sr., Bush after Iraq, Obama in 2010, and Biden before 2024 all faced major backlash environments. So your broader point about political gravity still stands.
Where I’d push back is on the “war of whim” framing.
A lot of Americans across the spectrum are exhausted by decades of unclear foreign interventions, so skepticism is fair. But the harder question is whether this is truly an irrational ego-driven escalation, or part of a larger deterrence strategy tied to Iran’s regional influence, proxies, and nuclear concerns. Those are legitimate national security debates even if people disagree on the execution.
I also think both parties underestimate how much economic anxiety amplifies reactions to foreign policy. When people already feel financially cornered, any military conflict immediately gets interpreted through the lens of: “Why are we spending money and attention abroad while life here gets worse?”
That’s not uniquely a Trump problem. It’s become a long-term credibility problem for the entire political establishment.
We disagree on "legitimate national security" interests regarding Iran. What we've done now is further destabilize the whole area. Saudi Arabia thought our bases on their territory represented our protection and instead found out they just made them a target. The fallout of the UAE leaving OPEC is yet to be seen but it represents a clear split with Saudi Arabia, which is now turning to nuclear-able Pakistan for protection and forming economic ties with Russia and China. As are other countries.
Israel is running roughshod over a sovereign country, ordering whole villages to simply vacate or be killed and even actively targeting ambulances and medics - a war crime! - and all anyone can talk about is what Trump said on Truth Social.
And look at who has directly, massively benefited from this war! Putin. He's making billions now from unsanctioned oil, and even if the Strait of Hormuz were completely open today, Trump is not going to sanction his oil again because the shortage will ripple through the global economy for many months.
And as far as Iran's nuclear capabilities, what have we done except convince them the US cannot be trusted in any negotiation? Frankly, I don't know why they aren't just trying to buy nuclear weapons from N. Korea, China, Russia, Pakistan, or India.
You make some fair points here honestly, especially about credibility. If countries start believing U.S. agreements only last until the next administration, NO DOUBT more nations will start thinking in terms of self-protection, deterrence, alternative alliances.
A lot of Americans underestimate how much these conflicts reshape global relationships beyond just the immediate war itself. Countries are watching how the U.S., Israel, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and others all operate and adjusting accordingly. That’s why the world feels way less stable and predictable now than it did 20 years ago.
Where I’d push back a little is on reducing everything to one side simply causing all the instability. The region was already full of overlapping power struggles, proxy conflicts, sectarian tensions, and competing ambitions long before this escalation. None of the major players involved are exactly innocent actors. That doesn't mean I agree with what we did.
And on Israel... I think one of the pieces I am most proud of is what I put out regarding Israel the minute we attacked Iran. They influence our foreign policy to the point that the two countries far in the policies are very difficult to differentiate... This is my prologue post. You should check it out and if you're interested I think I did four follow-ups in the series called The Ally test, and which I point out tons of fax and numbers that show that this is a one-sided allyship.
Your bigger point about a shifting global order though is probably the most important part. It really does feel like we’re moving into a more fractured multipolar world where countries are increasingly hedging between major powers instead of automatically trusting U.S. leadership. That’s a much bigger conversation than the usual partisan food fight people keep reducing this to.
Yes, the region was "full of overlapping power struggles, proxy conflicts, etc", but those are up to them to work out, not least of which because we don't share their culture, their history, their heritage and now under the Trump administration, do we have even one person who has a rudimentary understanding of the politics of the region?
Look at who our negotiators are! Trump's real estate buddy and his son-in-law, a guy with a questionable connection to Saudi Arabia alone through an investment fund that has made investors no money and that was advised against from day one. Meaning it was a personal favor from MBS or a quid pro quo for something we don't even know about.
They're a joke, Trump is a joke, and whatever legitimate interests we had in starting this war (which I question but concede others hold) have been completely undermined - and in ways that probably cannot be undone.
Perhaps you have read this from Robert Kagan in the Atlantic: Checkmate In Iran
There will be no return to the status quo ante, no ultimate American triumph that will undo or overcome the harm done. The Strait of Hormuz will not be “open,” as it once was. With control of the strait, Iran emerges as the key player in the region and one of the key players in the world. The roles of China and Russia, as Iran’s allies, are strengthened; the role of the United States, substantially diminished.
It is not enough to simplify elect democrats; we need to elect leaders who will fight to bring SCOTUS in line and make this country live up to its aspirations!
Agentic, I don't think we will ever live up to our aspirations, but what truly makes America great is that, over time, we try to, despite the occasional slipping backwards.
The code of ethics that lower courts and those in government offices follow would do well to be implemented in the supreme court. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Clearly we need one or more Constitutional amendments. We need desperately to be rid of the Electoral College. We need codified non-partisan redistricting countrywide. We need to reverse Citizens United in a way the court cannot undo. We need to declare clearly that no one (specifically including the President of the United States) is above the law. We need to expand the House of Representatives. We need voting rights protection with some teeth (and maybe an open door for ranked choice voting in national offices). Maybe we even need to state explicitly in a way that cannot be misunderstood that the church and the state are separate entities.
All of these are currently impossible, so first we need to win elections even given the current rigged system. That means enormous turnout every time we have the opportunity to vote. All politics being local, that means we need to get involved in our local communities to ensure registration, a way to get to the polls, and fair counting of results. We have our jobs cut out for us. Let's get busy. November is a little more than 5 months away.
I cannot thank you enough, Ms. Rubin, for lifting my spirits! We all should take up Bette Midler's anthem, "All You Fascists Gonna Lose," and sing it loudly and proudly at every Democratic gathering and at every protest.
This isn't only about African American rights. It's also about the rights of any minority. If you aren't a White strait male with a gun and of European decent, or a Christian Dominion worshiper, or one of the ultra-wealthy corporate elite', your protected rights have ceased to exist in the MAGA Fascist states.
The focus for 2026 needs to be on channeling voter anger at Trump and Republicans to vote Republicans out and give the Democrats control of the House and Senate. There will be no reform of the Supreme Court before there is a new President and there is no point wasting energy on an effort that can't succeed. At the present time voters need to be reminded that Trump and Republicans lied to them about being for them and lowering the cost of living and that Democrats are the ones who will fight for them and do what they can to work to lower costs. Voters need to be constantly reminded that Trump's corruption is enriching he and his family along with all his Republican enablers and bootlickers at our expense. We are told that our suffering is going to a good cause that enriches them. The goal should be to turn the partisan gerrymandering of districts to favor Republicans into new Democrat districts. In most cases the district lines have only given Republicans a small advantage. With voters enraged at Trump and Republicans it is quite possible for Democrats to win in many of those new districts. Like Hungary, we need to swamp the Republicans with overwhelming turnout. Once the Democrats have control of Congress then the focus needs to be on investigation and accountability and laying the groundwork to ensure another overwhelming turnout n 2028 so that they have the political power and mandate to reform the government institutions and legislate ethics and the honor system to make what has been happening subject to criminal charges.
If we win in a trifecta in 2028 we need to fix the Supreme Court first. The present MAGA Supreme Court is willing to strike down laws that were voted on and signed by Congress. If Congress passes a new voting rights law, the Supreme Court can render unconstitutional and make strike them down. The 1st thing that needs to be done in when Democrats are is power is fix the Supreme Court and voting rights.
Great article Jennifer! Please provide us with specific ways that we as individuals can assist with encouraging huge voter turnout. Also, please invite some of the southern Democrats who are running and against this latest initiative to gerrymander & suppress voter turnout on your substack. Once people like me learn more about these candidates, we may be able to help promote their campaigns, even if we do not live in southern states. Thank you!
I am curious. Has anyone except those elected ever really liked gerrymandering? Will people respond by their vote? Isn't this something worthwhile protesting? The whole idea seems so undemocratic. The whole idea of representation has become absurd because it has become racist by definition. I have always voted my conscience and for whomever I think will be best for the country based on character abd intelligence, and never on color or gender or religion.
The Red Court must be repaired and expanded to 13 Justices to match the 13 Federal circuits. The Citizens United decision must be reversed for starters. The work of a democratically controlled government should be to fix and strengthen the constitution and…and…and…frankly, there is so much to do.
The National Day of Action kicks off in Montgomery Alabama on May 16th. There was already a protest on May 5th of last week in Montgomery when governor Kay Ivey decided to open with a special session after the Callais ruling. A number of speakers spoke at the event including students from our state HBCUs. Make no mistake, there will be people from all walks of life including black, Hispanic, Native American and mixed race people from across Alabama at the National Day of Action and women as well.
Serious question:
If partisan gerrymandering is now effectively legal unless explicit racial intent can be proven, are we finally ready to admit America may need structural election reform instead of endless “just vote harder” messaging?
Because at some point, a system can become mathematically resistant to public opinion itself.
And that conversation makes everybody uncomfortable.
Virginia Dems now have a plan to remove the state Supreme Court judges. They can lower the retirement age to clean them out, which is within the purview of the legislature to do assuming the Extreme Court doesn't make another contra-legal ruling. This has to be a no-holds barred fight.
No-holds barred fight indeed… as if our political structure didn't resemble WWE enough already…
This is the kind of escalation cycle that scares a lot of independents right now.
Republicans normalize hardball institutional tactics, Democrats respond by considering their own version of institutional hardball, and both sides justify it as “necessary” because the other side started it first.
Maybe some of these actions are technically legal. That’s not the same thing as healthy for long-term institutional legitimacy.
Once both parties fully embrace the idea that courts, rules, and governing structures are just temporary weapons to be manipulated whenever power changes hands, the country enters a very dangerous place politically. And honestly, we’re already halfway there.
The deeper issue is that public trust in institutions has collapsed so badly that millions of people now support almost any tactic as long as their side wins. That’s not stability. That’s a cold civil war mindset wearing procedural language.
Sorry, but simply rolling over to the GOP's project to Orbanize the US into some form of permanent minority rule, is not acceptable.
The Roberts court initiated this entire Gerrymander war by ruling that cracking and packing rotten boroughs was a state's rights issue. Roberts presumably did so for the same reason as the recent Callais decision: to politically benefit the GOP.
There is no means to appeal to the better angels of conservative voters, because FOX News--where 85% of GOP voters get some/most/all of their news--has already painted Callais as "...a return to sanity."
I understand the frustration, especially because a lot of people genuinely believe the current trajectory of gerrymandering and judicial rulings creates structural advantages that can outlast public opinion.
That concern shouldn’t just be dismissed.
But I think there’s also a danger in reducing every institutional ruling we dislike to pure partisan conspiracy, because once both sides fully stop believing institutions can act independently at all, democratic legitimacy erodes even faster.
I’d also push back on the idea that conservative voters are unreachable or uniformly consuming one narrative. That framing mirrors the same oversimplifications many conservatives make about liberals living inside MSNBC or social media bubbles. The media ecosystem absolutely contributes to polarization across the board, but millions of voters are more persuadable and less ideological than online discourse makes them appear.
The deeper problem, in my view, is that both parties increasingly see institutions as tools to secure long-term power rather than neutral systems deserving public trust. Republicans didn’t invent that instinct, but they’ve accelerated it in ways Democrats now feel pressured to mirror. That escalation cycle is where the real danger lives.
Virginia voters VOTED for the map change. This isn’t partisan bickering. This is a a handful of people on a Court overthrowing the will of its people. THAT’S way more dangerous to normalize.
You should check out the post I made today on redistricting. But this one is what I did on my 2nd narrative vs. reality Monday series that was the day after Virginia had there vote. I really explained it well to give some unique Insight.... it's a quick read https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/they-changed-the-rules-mid-game?r=5xf1q5
And don't we live there now? What's the alternative? If there is one to stop the Orbanization or Putinization of the USA, we should be talking about it. They use the courts to their advantage and ignore laws, punish dissenters, and enrich themselves mightily. So what should we do to support the democracy and rule of law that's being trampled. If it's not to push back, or what might be called escalation, what should be done?
Nancy. You make such an amazing Point here. I would love if you read the post that I made about a month ago after Orban lost. I would love to get your take on it because a lot of people miss the point that you are making, especially with all of the frustration and outrage. The last thing we want is to have elections not matter because the systems in place, are so corrupt, that they don't require people to an elections in order to stay in power.....
But start with this post and give me your feedback.
https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/orban-lost-the-system-he-built-didnt?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=5xf1q5
we must work to get rid of wealth inequality, which has caused this
We are at a place much like we were with the robber barons…history echos itself. Let’s try not to repeat The Great Depression before we fix it.
when historians search for the causes of the american demise first among them will be wealth inequality.
That's absolutely undoubtedly true, Patricia. My entire publication rights about uncomfortable facts and I would say incoming equality , by far, is the common thread that weaves every issue together.
https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/income-inequality-america-2026-floor-problem-not-ceiling-part-4
And it appears that's where we are, i.e., "a cold civil war mindset wearing procedural language." Either we fight for our democracy, or we can continue watching it be demolished like the East Wing. The process has clearly started, but the "building" is still standing!
It’s too slow. The courts/legislature can’t do it in time to save us.
It only makes those who are uncomfortable with needed change upset. Those of us who see the need are only 'uncomfortable' in that it is taking so long.
Amen.
if/when sane people regain, we will need a constitutional convention. keep most of it but tweek/remove the obvious problem elements.
Isn't it so sad that the things that need to be changed are so obvious that if you presented them to a middle school Civics class, they would all vote to one way , in the way of fairness. The income inequality, campaign finance, citizens united as all led to this domino effect of undemocratic practices while we quote on quote spread democracy across the world
Some hope regarding the redistricting war:
https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/the-redistricting-war-everyones-misreading
From your link:
"No structural map advantage has ever fully contained a midterm when presidential approval is in freefall."
Has any president's approval rating ever been in free fall as much as Trump's is now? Not a rhetorical question; I don't actually know.
At any rate, it seems unlikely to tick up before the midterms - if ever. He's painted himself and his ego into a corner with the Iran war, and it's hard to see how he'll get out and just might make things a whole lot worse instead.
Never has a president or his cabinet been so unfit to enter us into a war. A "war of whim" besides! No clear objective, and absolutely nothing has been achieved for our national interests so far. Instead, we are weaker and poorer, and according to some experts, heading over an economic cliff soon.
Historically, presidential approval collapses absolutely can reshape midterms. Trumps isn't the lowest. Carter, Bush Sr., Bush after Iraq, Obama in 2010, and Biden before 2024 all faced major backlash environments. So your broader point about political gravity still stands.
Where I’d push back is on the “war of whim” framing.
A lot of Americans across the spectrum are exhausted by decades of unclear foreign interventions, so skepticism is fair. But the harder question is whether this is truly an irrational ego-driven escalation, or part of a larger deterrence strategy tied to Iran’s regional influence, proxies, and nuclear concerns. Those are legitimate national security debates even if people disagree on the execution.
I also think both parties underestimate how much economic anxiety amplifies reactions to foreign policy. When people already feel financially cornered, any military conflict immediately gets interpreted through the lens of: “Why are we spending money and attention abroad while life here gets worse?”
That’s not uniquely a Trump problem. It’s become a long-term credibility problem for the entire political establishment.
We disagree on "legitimate national security" interests regarding Iran. What we've done now is further destabilize the whole area. Saudi Arabia thought our bases on their territory represented our protection and instead found out they just made them a target. The fallout of the UAE leaving OPEC is yet to be seen but it represents a clear split with Saudi Arabia, which is now turning to nuclear-able Pakistan for protection and forming economic ties with Russia and China. As are other countries.
Israel is running roughshod over a sovereign country, ordering whole villages to simply vacate or be killed and even actively targeting ambulances and medics - a war crime! - and all anyone can talk about is what Trump said on Truth Social.
And look at who has directly, massively benefited from this war! Putin. He's making billions now from unsanctioned oil, and even if the Strait of Hormuz were completely open today, Trump is not going to sanction his oil again because the shortage will ripple through the global economy for many months.
And as far as Iran's nuclear capabilities, what have we done except convince them the US cannot be trusted in any negotiation? Frankly, I don't know why they aren't just trying to buy nuclear weapons from N. Korea, China, Russia, Pakistan, or India.
You make some fair points here honestly, especially about credibility. If countries start believing U.S. agreements only last until the next administration, NO DOUBT more nations will start thinking in terms of self-protection, deterrence, alternative alliances.
A lot of Americans underestimate how much these conflicts reshape global relationships beyond just the immediate war itself. Countries are watching how the U.S., Israel, Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and others all operate and adjusting accordingly. That’s why the world feels way less stable and predictable now than it did 20 years ago.
Where I’d push back a little is on reducing everything to one side simply causing all the instability. The region was already full of overlapping power struggles, proxy conflicts, sectarian tensions, and competing ambitions long before this escalation. None of the major players involved are exactly innocent actors. That doesn't mean I agree with what we did.
And on Israel... I think one of the pieces I am most proud of is what I put out regarding Israel the minute we attacked Iran. They influence our foreign policy to the point that the two countries far in the policies are very difficult to differentiate... This is my prologue post. You should check it out and if you're interested I think I did four follow-ups in the series called The Ally test, and which I point out tons of fax and numbers that show that this is a one-sided allyship.
https://uncomfortable.rxansmithmedia.com/p/why-america-war-iran-2026-trump-played-netanyahu?r=5xf1q5
Your bigger point about a shifting global order though is probably the most important part. It really does feel like we’re moving into a more fractured multipolar world where countries are increasingly hedging between major powers instead of automatically trusting U.S. leadership. That’s a much bigger conversation than the usual partisan food fight people keep reducing this to.
Yes, the region was "full of overlapping power struggles, proxy conflicts, etc", but those are up to them to work out, not least of which because we don't share their culture, their history, their heritage and now under the Trump administration, do we have even one person who has a rudimentary understanding of the politics of the region?
Look at who our negotiators are! Trump's real estate buddy and his son-in-law, a guy with a questionable connection to Saudi Arabia alone through an investment fund that has made investors no money and that was advised against from day one. Meaning it was a personal favor from MBS or a quid pro quo for something we don't even know about.
They're a joke, Trump is a joke, and whatever legitimate interests we had in starting this war (which I question but concede others hold) have been completely undermined - and in ways that probably cannot be undone.
Perhaps you have read this from Robert Kagan in the Atlantic: Checkmate In Iran
https://archive.ph/fv4vt
There will be no return to the status quo ante, no ultimate American triumph that will undo or overcome the harm done. The Strait of Hormuz will not be “open,” as it once was. With control of the strait, Iran emerges as the key player in the region and one of the key players in the world. The roles of China and Russia, as Iran’s allies, are strengthened; the role of the United States, substantially diminished.
I don't see how he's wrong.
Sfsdsvdsvaasassaaaadsdasassssssaasaaaaadaddress we degggge
are you ok ??
It is not enough to simplify elect democrats; we need to elect leaders who will fight to bring SCOTUS in line and make this country live up to its aspirations!
Agentic, I don't think we will ever live up to our aspirations, but what truly makes America great is that, over time, we try to, despite the occasional slipping backwards.
The most uncomfortable part of Callais is realizing how many Americans still think democracy is “safe” because elections technically still exist.
You can preserve the shell of democracy while hollowing out representation underneath it.
That’s the real warning here.
"They will also have to consider reform of the Supreme Court itself."
For example: impeachment and term limits.
And expanding the Court and forcing the Court to implement and execute ethics rules.
The code of ethics that lower courts and those in government offices follow would do well to be implemented in the supreme court. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Absolutely. They should put them on a ballot
Clearly we need one or more Constitutional amendments. We need desperately to be rid of the Electoral College. We need codified non-partisan redistricting countrywide. We need to reverse Citizens United in a way the court cannot undo. We need to declare clearly that no one (specifically including the President of the United States) is above the law. We need to expand the House of Representatives. We need voting rights protection with some teeth (and maybe an open door for ranked choice voting in national offices). Maybe we even need to state explicitly in a way that cannot be misunderstood that the church and the state are separate entities.
All of these are currently impossible, so first we need to win elections even given the current rigged system. That means enormous turnout every time we have the opportunity to vote. All politics being local, that means we need to get involved in our local communities to ensure registration, a way to get to the polls, and fair counting of results. We have our jobs cut out for us. Let's get busy. November is a little more than 5 months away.
I cannot thank you enough, Ms. Rubin, for lifting my spirits! We all should take up Bette Midler's anthem, "All You Fascists Gonna Lose," and sing it loudly and proudly at every Democratic gathering and at every protest.
@Anca, that one is on our protest playlist along with my other favorite, "Heavy Foot."
Excellent.
This isn't only about African American rights. It's also about the rights of any minority. If you aren't a White strait male with a gun and of European decent, or a Christian Dominion worshiper, or one of the ultra-wealthy corporate elite', your protected rights have ceased to exist in the MAGA Fascist states.
As a white Democrat in gerrymandered Indiana (and Republicans want to gerrymander it further), I do not feel represented.
'Strait' is Hormuz, 'straight' are non-gay males. Otherwise, excellent points.
I stand corrected.
No problem.
Democrats need to stop asking for permission. Texas didn't. Rick Wilson calls them the pillow fight democrats. Looks that way to me.
The focus for 2026 needs to be on channeling voter anger at Trump and Republicans to vote Republicans out and give the Democrats control of the House and Senate. There will be no reform of the Supreme Court before there is a new President and there is no point wasting energy on an effort that can't succeed. At the present time voters need to be reminded that Trump and Republicans lied to them about being for them and lowering the cost of living and that Democrats are the ones who will fight for them and do what they can to work to lower costs. Voters need to be constantly reminded that Trump's corruption is enriching he and his family along with all his Republican enablers and bootlickers at our expense. We are told that our suffering is going to a good cause that enriches them. The goal should be to turn the partisan gerrymandering of districts to favor Republicans into new Democrat districts. In most cases the district lines have only given Republicans a small advantage. With voters enraged at Trump and Republicans it is quite possible for Democrats to win in many of those new districts. Like Hungary, we need to swamp the Republicans with overwhelming turnout. Once the Democrats have control of Congress then the focus needs to be on investigation and accountability and laying the groundwork to ensure another overwhelming turnout n 2028 so that they have the political power and mandate to reform the government institutions and legislate ethics and the honor system to make what has been happening subject to criminal charges.
Has Pritzker said he's going to redistrict? I've heard him allude to the "maybe" but it didn't sound too certain.
If we win in a trifecta in 2028 we need to fix the Supreme Court first. The present MAGA Supreme Court is willing to strike down laws that were voted on and signed by Congress. If Congress passes a new voting rights law, the Supreme Court can render unconstitutional and make strike them down. The 1st thing that needs to be done in when Democrats are is power is fix the Supreme Court and voting rights.
Great article Jennifer! Please provide us with specific ways that we as individuals can assist with encouraging huge voter turnout. Also, please invite some of the southern Democrats who are running and against this latest initiative to gerrymander & suppress voter turnout on your substack. Once people like me learn more about these candidates, we may be able to help promote their campaigns, even if we do not live in southern states. Thank you!
I am curious. Has anyone except those elected ever really liked gerrymandering? Will people respond by their vote? Isn't this something worthwhile protesting? The whole idea seems so undemocratic. The whole idea of representation has become absurd because it has become racist by definition. I have always voted my conscience and for whomever I think will be best for the country based on character abd intelligence, and never on color or gender or religion.
The Red Court must be repaired and expanded to 13 Justices to match the 13 Federal circuits. The Citizens United decision must be reversed for starters. The work of a democratically controlled government should be to fix and strengthen the constitution and…and…and…frankly, there is so much to do.
Ms. Rubin, welcome back! Many, many of us missed you.
The United States will always be evolving. It will always be a fight.
I take inspiration from Hungary and Ukraine. Who would have guessed?
The National Day of Action kicks off in Montgomery Alabama on May 16th. There was already a protest on May 5th of last week in Montgomery when governor Kay Ivey decided to open with a special session after the Callais ruling. A number of speakers spoke at the event including students from our state HBCUs. Make no mistake, there will be people from all walks of life including black, Hispanic, Native American and mixed race people from across Alabama at the National Day of Action and women as well.