There's a lot of good news coming out and I haven't seen it discussed. Sorry if I missed it...






I just hope republicans don't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Tony.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: benny6,

There hasn't been just one thread on the subject...Yet! Until now, the content/discussion has been sprinkled around in multiple threads; some in the Trump thread, some in the 'Not enough Republicans voted in Virginia' thread, some in the Ketanji Jackson thread, etc.

Here's my contribution...



https://x.com/PapiTrumpo/status/2049534546907930870

There is a lot of it in this post:

https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...35/m/8780053715/p/21

How is this a win if (from looking at the color map above) the end is essentially about parity w/ about a 10% (risky) benefit for red? This seems like winning on the edge, not a clear unequivocal win.

Not an expert - just curious what the reality is.

quote:

Originally posted by konata88:
How is this a win if (from looking at the color map above) the end is essentially about parity w/ about a 10% (risky) benefit for red? This seems like winning on the edge, not a clear unequivocal win.

Not an expert - just curious what the reality is.

Best-case scenario for Republicans: a net gain of roughly 8–13+ seats from mid-decade redistricting for the 2026 midterms (potentially pushing their majority into the 225–230+ range, assuming they hold most existing seats), with even larger structural advantages possible after the 2030 census.

In the strongest GOP outcome, Republicans could enter 2026 elections with maps supporting 225–235 seats (vs. Democrats in the 200–210 range), creating a buffer against midterm losses. Without redistricting gains, Democrats are generally favored to flip the chamber given the narrow starting point and anti-incumbent trends.

The 2030 census + full reapportionment/redistricting cycle offers Republicans even stronger structural tailwinds in a best-case world:

Continued population growth in Sun Belt states (Texas, Florida, etc.) → more seats overall, drawn by GOP-controlled legislatures.
Locked-in or further-optimized gerrymanders from the current cycle.
Potential for additional Southern gains if litigation trends continue favorably.
Republicans could expand their baseline advantage by another 5–10+ seats (or more) depending on demographic shifts and sustained legislative control, solidifying a stronger House edge through the 2030s.

That's an AI summary of the videos I posted.

Keep in mind, just a month ago, we were projected to lose the house in the mid-terms. Now, not only should we hold it, but we should gain a lot of seats regardless.

Tony.

quote:

Keep in mind, just a month ago, we were projected to lose the house in the mid-terms. Now, not only should we hold it, but we should gain a lot of seats regardless.

Thanks. Helps.

Here's my post on the SCOTUS decision and that it was voted on over 7 months ago, the release was held up waiting on the write up, Alito had his done quickly for the support of the decision.

Here's a little more on the SCOTUS process the Justices conferenced and voted, the decision was 7 months ago, Alito was to write the opinion and then one of the justices voting no writes the dissent. Ketanji wrote it, and took her time, the skuttlebutt is she went as long as she could so the decision wouldn't be allowed to take effect for the mid terms - 7 Months.

It's key to note, not one Justice joined her with her disent.. zero... Everybody knows...

Shipwreckedcrew:

For those who might not realize the significance of Ron's referenced to "conferenced" -- immediately after oral arguments the Justices go into "conference" in a room with no clerks, just the 9 Justices. The vote on the outcome of the case just argued.

That's the decision -- they know that day which side wins.

Writing the opinion is then assigned to a Justice in the majority. If the Chief is in the Majority, he decides who will write the opinion. If the Chief is in the Minority, the senior most Justice in the Majority decides.

Alito's point is the outcome of this case was known more than 7 months ago -- it was argued in October.

The fact that is is Alito, the author of the Court's Opinion, who calls this out is implied confirmation that it was the writing of the dissent by Kagan that delayed announcing the decision.

If the libs wanted to better cover their tracks, they would have written 3 different dissents and had a better excuse for it taking as long as it did.

Ron Coleman:

RT
@dvaughanCI
The first Alito footnote is notable: he says the original case was conferenced 7 months ago. That says there’s more than a little smoke to the rumors the liberal justices dragged their feet to impact the midterms, and now Jackson is throwing a fit the majority is fixing that delay

SCOTUSWIRE:

Justice Alito fires back at Justice Jackson, calling her solo dissent "baseless and insulting" and "utterly irresponsible" after she accused the majority of abandoning principle for power.

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/.../2051650218245136686




And now some group called the Robinson Intervenors are asking SCOTUS to recall the Judgement. they are seeking a rehearing. They know they can't win, they just want to intervene and stop the process going forward before the election...


https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/.../2051729859320377406

That makes it twice, that we know of, where the leftist Justices have deliberately and significantly delayed finishing their dissent for political reasons. First was the abortion decision, appearing to be a delay in hopes of one of the majority being assassinated. The second being gerrymandering, apparently in hopes of affecting the midterm election.

Why aren't they being impeached?

JUST IN: THEY LOST KETANJI BROWN JACKSON IN REDISTRICTING

9-0, the Supreme Court has REJECTED a bid to reconsider their striking down of racial gerrymandering in Louisiana, the Callais ruling

After Alito and Thomas swatted Ketanji into her place — she gives up.

Case closed.

SCOTUS has DONE THE RIGHT THING and is ending decades of Democrat cheating

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052059842580283451

Here's an interesting take on SCOTUS decision on the VRA and the real impact, it's not just the South it impacts as everyone is focused on it.

EVERY gerrymandered district must be redrawn, in EVERY state, and they cannot be based on Race, period.

The Democrats May Not Survive Callais Ruling

The Court moves to curb race-based districts — and the political fallout could be enormous.




"If the title of this column seems to exaggerate the potential impact of last week’s Supreme Court ruling in Louisiana v. Callais, it’s probably because most political pundits have focused on its effect below the Mason-Dixon Line. But the majority-minority congressional districts that will need to be altered pursuant to the Court’s ruling are far more pervasive than most realize. Ballotpedia, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2024 American Community Survey, estimates that these racially gerrymandered districts account for 148 seats in the House of Representatives. This is about one third of the House’s 435 districts and 122 of them are held by Democrats — more than half of their 212 seats.

This is why House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries went on an unhinged rant when SCOTUS handed down its ruling. The Democrats had long ago weaponized the Voting Rights Act (VRA) by funding pettifoggers like the Elias Law Group to convince federal courts that Section 2 of the VRA required racially gerrymandered districts wherever they could be contorted enough to make the demographic math work. Last week, the Court corrected that misinterpretation. As the opinion’s author, Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, patiently explained it on page 6: “Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act … was designed to enforce the Constitution — not collide with it.” In other words, this section of the VRA explicitly prohibits “voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race.”

The effect of this ruling is that states which have gerrymandered district maps based on race will likely have to revisit and redraw those maps. The day after the Court rendered its decision the Justice Department confirmed that it will vigorously enforce the Court’s ruling on majority-minority districts in all 50 states. Just The News reported, “United States Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said Thursday that the Justice Department will enforce the Supreme Court’s decision on racially gerrymandering districts in every state that has such a district.”

Link

I have a map of the 23d District in Florida that is the absolute prime example of Gerrymandering!

I have failed in trying to post it herein!

Any assistance is welcome!!

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:
Continued population growth in Sun Belt states (Texas, Florida, etc.) → more seats overall, drawn by GOP-controlled legislatures.

Even without that, I expect this ruling to have a positive effect for conservatives in states like Massachusetts and California in 2030. The key to getting there is to win this year and in 2028.



.

quote:

Originally posted by tleddy:
I have a map of the 23d District in Florida that is the absolute prime example of Gerrymandering!

I have failed in trying to post it herein!

Well I guess Texas started it and I am proud to say WE booted ghetto thug Crockett out by redistricting. And what a great day it was.

She lost in her run off bid for the Senate so no more jazzie! Thankfully she and Beto are history for now. Saw something about her starting a PAC to help other candidates get elected. Word or warning. Stay away from anything she supports!

The dems had a filibuster going, and then the pussies ran away when the tornado sirens started going off, so, tough shit, kiddies.

They'll try to use this to bring suit, I suppose, but, they're done and they know it.

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052390875410383215

2026 and 2028 are going to be desperation level, potential existential events, for Democrats.

Between the Census accurately reflecting population shifts and the end of racial gerrymandering that guaranteed them seats in overwhelmingly red states, the Dems will lose maybe as many as 30 seats in the House.

They won't just be "competitive" -- these will be likely safe Dem seats becoming likely safe GOP seats.

They will become largely a party of the cities to a degree even greater than they are that now.

And they are titling farther left in the direction of Euro socialism and the DSA at the same time.

They are staring at a future where they are under 180 seats in good election years, and bouncing down around 160 seats in bad years.

https://x.com/shipwreckedcrew/.../2052408931616784408

Tough shit, kiddies. It's been a long time coming.

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2052455382149222691





Already bearing fruit. This loudmouth phony is done and he knows it. Dollar store Al Sharpton.

https://x.com/Cjpearson/status/2052448235235451133