this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2025
49 points (100.0% liked)

Seattle

1919 readers
64 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

With California leading the charge to counter gerrymandering, should we in Washington state join in as well?

Would our governor even entertain such an idea?

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There’s no point in avoiding it based on what the modern American Nazi party might do in retaliation sometime in the future.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Agreed. I imagine most Washingtonians may think the same.

Would Bob Ferguson even entertain this?

[–] Mediocre_Bard@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A few years, or even a few months, ago I would have said no. However, the old ways are done, and American values are dead. So, yeah. Fuck 'em. Two more seats in the house for the democrats.

[–] lessthanluigi 3 points 8 months ago

I would also argue those values have long been dead, either since 2016 Trump or George W. Bush with the USA PATRIOT ACT

[–] chaospatterns@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

The thought crossed my mind. Why is california the only one doing something to stand up against tyranny? We should be joining them. It sucks but we can't take the high road if we lose what makes us American

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes. Yes. 100 million times yes. This is maybe your one chance to preserve democracy in this nation. It still might not work, but if you don't do it you're screwed forever. If the Democratic party isn't willing to do this they need to resign because they're of no use to the American people.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I'm reading that the state of Washington has ten representatives in Congress, and two of them are Republican. So best case, you get two more Democrat representatives.

Does more than 20% of Washington vote Republican? This page says that 27% of the population is registered Republican, and 20% are unaffiliated. Even if you could, seems pretty undemocratic to strip all those people of representation.

To be clear, I think Trump and Maga are clear threats to democracy. I think we are at the point where extreme measures are called for. I also think you don't resolve threats to democracy by threatening democracy.

I'm more sympathetic to actions which are time bound, or tied to bad actions of other states. So for example "we're redrawing these maps for five years" or "this new map will become effective if such and such legislation is passed in such and such state."

But I would much rather see extreme actions taken which are consistent with democracy rather than disenfranchising people further.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That may have worked before, but the rules of the game have changed. We can't afford to take the high road in practice. In theory we would discuss the pros and cons thoroughly, doing what is best for everyone in terms of representation. When one political party threatens the entire system, the system is already broken.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

I'm curious to hear the plan on how the system gets unbroken. Because gerrymandering is further breaking it. Suppose Democrats win control of congress through gerrymandering. What is the plan to return to non crooked districts?

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I heard this metaphor use the other day. If you're playing soccer and the other team picks up the ball and starts running with it you can either also pick up the ball or just loose. That's it. The issue isn't that democracy will be damaged by this, it's a democracy will be dead if you don't.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you want to play soccer, and someone else picks up the ball, you're not playing soccer. If you too pick up the ball, you're still not playing soccer. If you somehow successfully forced the other team to return to kicking the ball (how does that work?) then you will be the one not playing soccer.

I want something to happen! I want to live in a democracy. It's not a question of "should we do something extreme to save our country?" It could very easily destroy it. Doing "our own gerrymandering" is antidemocratic. That's why I said something time bound or explicitly/legally tied to a bad action on the other side is at least a little better. Because otherwise how do we ever get back to "democracy"?

Even when a regime is overthrown by violence (another action that's inherently undemocratic but sometimes in service of good) for the next administration to be recognized it's expected they have elections. There has to be some consent from the governed, some legitimacy.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Yes, you're no longer playing soccer. That's the point. The game has changed. You can change with it or you can literally die. Those are your options.