The Daily Signal - Victor Davis Hanson: Democrats Lose Next Phase in the Gerrymandering Wars

Episode Date: May 7, 2026

The Democratic Party is facing a significant electoral crisis as population shifts from blue to red states fundamentally alter the balance of power in the House of Representatives. Recent legal rulings against racial gerrymandering and declining fertility rates in progressive hubs further threaten the long-term viability of the current liberal coalition. As their traditional platform fails to secure a majority, leadership has turned toward radical structural changes to the American governing system to maintain influence.“ There were some recent studies by various pollsters about what would happen if all of the states decided to engage in redistricting, gerrymandering, based on the relative control of the state legislatures. “And it came up with a very surprising result: If the Republican red states, or purple states that have Republican majorities, decided to redistrict and Democrats did the same, an all-out war, there would be about 262 Republicans and only 173 Democratic seats,” points out Victor Davis Hanson on today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In a Few Words.”  👉 The Daily Signal cannot continue to tell stories, like this one, without the support of our viewers: http://dailysignal.com/donate 👉Don’t miss out on Victor’s latest short videos by subscribing to The Daily Signal today. You’ll be notified every time a new piece of content drops: ⁠https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1⁠  Also on Spotify: https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL9753340027  👉Want more VDH? Watch Victor’s weekly, hour-long podcast, “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” now! Subscribe to his YouTube channel, and enable notifications:  https://www.youtube.com/@victordavishanson7273?sub_confirmation=1👉More exclusive content is available on Victor’s website: https://victorhanson.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Behind every F-35 jet is a Canadian company, horizontal tails built in Winnipeg, engine sensors from Ottawa, and stealth composite panels crafted in Loonenburg to name just a few. Thanks to thousands of skilled Canadian workers, the F-35 aircraft is delivering unmatched capabilities for 20 allied nations around the world, and will generate more than $15.5 billion in industrial value for Canada. This ad is sponsored by the F-35 partner team, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems, Northrop Grumman, and RTX. Learn more at www.f35.com slash Canada.

Hello, this is Victor Davis Hansen for the Daily Signal. Gerrymandering are the protocol where states allot congressional seats by population is in the news recently. And some states do it transparently politically, depending on the makeup of their state legislatures. Others go through the operation, sometimes genuine, sometimes not. so much of having a nonpartisan body redistrict. It's very important because it's based on the census as well as within the state. The number of seats that the state is granted by the U.S. census is then further determined how you draw the lines for congressional districts.

And as you know, birds of a feather flock together, so you can do it regionally in a way that would favor one or the other party. Now we're in a gerrymandering war. where some of the states are trying to redistrict and improve either the Democratic or Republican turnout. Here in California, 40% of the state voted a little bit over, maybe 41, for Donald Trump. And if this new redistricting protocol goes into effect, which it will by November, it's likely that even though we have 53 congressional seats, we may only have seven. or eight Republicans in the House. We could go down, in other words, not getting 40%. We never get that.

We get about 20, 17 to 20%. We could go down to 8 or 9% of the state's House of Representatives members would be Republicans, even though 40% of the state shows that it's Republican by their voting in national elections. But this is what's interesting. Now that we're in this war, the Democrats, I don't quite think, have known what is going to go on. There was some recent studies by various pollsters what would happen if all of the states decided to engage in redistricting, gerrymandering, based on the relative control of the state legislators. And it came up with a very surprising result, and that is if the Republican red states

or purple states that have Republican majority has decided to redistrict. and Democrats did the same, an all-out war, there would be about 262 Republicans and only 173 Democratic seats. And that's not the end of it. We have had a massive population transfer of somewhere between 1 and 3 million people a year recently go from blue states and blue cities

to red states and red states and red city. And that alone, according to many people, within just four years, is going to radically change the census allotment of congressional representatives. Forget about redistricting. It's the whole number that each state is granted. And that will have an effect on the Electoral College, which has a formula that your senators and representatives determine your electors that will select the next president. And in that calculus, people are suggesting they may lose. They, being blue states, anywhere from 10 to 15, some quite outlier polls say they could lose 20 seats. And that's not the end of it.

A third factor people are not taking into consideration is the Supreme Court just outlawed racial gerrymandering. It's a question of whether that will be enacted in time for the November elections. It seems like it can. Maybe not for the June primaries. But that will affect. Democratic seats as well as the census and as well as just normal gerrymandering. But if you don't have these special seats that are carved out to ensure black people are the only two candidates, the Democrats could lose another 10 to 15 seats.

If you add it all up, you're talking about a permanent switch of 40 to 50 seats in the House of representatives. And it doesn't end there. If you look at the longer term demographics, whether you use number of bursts per 100,000 population, or you look at by family, what is the fertility rate of the average state? Is it 2.1, which is necessary for the replacement population? It turns out that with very few exceptions, the red states are usually reproducing. about 1.6 to 1.9 in a few cases, and the Democrats are about 1.5 down to 1 point almost below 3. So long term, people in blue states, for a variety of reasons, we don't have time to get in them, I think you know what they are. There's less emphasis on traditional religion, on traditional nuclear families, etc., etc.

They tend to be more urban than some of the rural states in the west, Midwest, and South. But in any case, the long-term prognosis for the Democratic Party is not good. It could lose 50, 60 permanent seats, and then you would have a sort of California-type one-party rule nationwide, except and it might have indications for the Senate as well. What am I getting at? It seems to me that the Democrats have lost confidence in their agenda. In other words, they don't believe that you, the voter, really does want an open border or you want 53 million foreign born without audits that ensure acculturation, integration, assimilation.

And the same is true of critical race. theory or critical legal theory or the emphasis and fixations on transgenderism or the new green the green new deal it seems to would have been disastrous had we enacted the full agenda of the left given what the status of oil is and were the largest producer of oil and gas in the history of civilization right now you put it all together and that message of the democrats is not appealing. And so, of course, in the short term, their strategy has been, we're not Donald Trump. Donald Trump is a fascist, and we're going to go demonstrate against Tesla and ICE and no kings, and we're going to try to put him in jail and impeach him on third time, all of that. But long term,

it suggests that they have two choices. They either have to change their culture and go back to more traditional lifestyles to improve their demographics and to go back to the assimilationist model, as I think the Republicans have. I don't see that happening. Or they would have to lower taxes and cut back entitlements in these blue states to retain their high earners and their upper middle class people who are for the most part leaving. They're not going to do that. as the historian Livy said about Rome's problems in the late Republic, the medicine for them is worse than the disease.

They don't want a society where a man and woman are married fairly early with two to three children. They really don't want a society that is racially blind, and they don't like the idea that a lot of red people stay in their states. They welcome them to leave. And the result of all that is, when they look at the... long-term prognosis I just went over, they get very angry. And so what is the reaction? Is it to change the agenda to win you over the vote? No, it's to change the system. And so if you want to know why they want to get rid of the electoral college or why they want the census to count residents that could be here, in many cases are here illegally, maybe 30 million, if you want

to know why they want to pack the Supreme Court, if you want to know why they want the National Voters Compact to de facto get rid of the Electoral College. If you want to know why they want to pack the Supreme Court, it is that their message right now does not appeal to 51 percent, and the demography of which a democracy and a constitutional republic are based on is not in their favor. So their only alternative is to find radical changes in the system of governance to allow their unpopular agenda to be what de facto popular. Thank you very much. It's Victor Davis Hansen for the Daily Signal. Thank you for tuning in to the Daily Signal. Please like, share,

and subscribe to be notified for more content like this. You can also check out my own website at victorhansson.com and subscribe for exclusive features in addition.