SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
virginia
California, Virginia Democrats Notch Wins in Fight Against Trump GOP's Map Rigging
"The continuing effort led by Washington Republicans to unfairly rig the midterm elections with an unprecedented series of mid-decade gerrymanders must be met head-on," said a former US attorney general.
Jan 14, 2026
Democratic officials and voters battling President Donald Trump's attempt to bully Republican state lawmakers to rig congressional maps for the GOP ahead of the November midterm elections recorded two key wins on Wednesday.
In California, two members of a three-judge panel upheld Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's new map, which was approved by the state's voters late last year and then challenged by the California Republican Party and the US Department of Justice.
Meanwhile, in Virginia, the Democratic majority in the state's House of Delegates advanced a proposed constitutional amendment that would let lawmakers to redraw the congressional map in the middle of the decade—an authority that would expire in 2030.
As the Virginia Mercury detailed:
Democrats argue the amendment is necessary to counter aggressive Republican gerrymanders elsewhere that could tilt control of Congress, while Republicans call it a blatant power grab that undermines Virginia voters' 2020 decision to create an independent redistricting commission.
"This amendment creates essentially a narrow, temporary exception," said Del. Rodney Willett (D-58), the measure's sponsor. He emphasized repeatedly that the proposal does not automatically redraw any lines and does not eliminate the Virginia Redistricting Commission.
"We are not expanding the authority to change the state district lines," Willett said. "We're just talking about congressional lines. And more importantly, it does not change any of the lines as they exist today—this just creates the process to consider doing that."
The proposal now heads to the Virginia Senate, where Democrats also have a majority. If it advances, as expected, then the measure would be voted on by state residents in April.
According to the Hill, "Democratic leaders in Old Dominion are eying either a 10-1 or 9-2 map in a state where Democrats currently have a 6-5 edge in the congressional delegation."
Former US Attorney General Eric Holder, now chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said in a Wednesday statement that "the continuing effort led by Washington Republicans to unfairly rig the midterm elections with an unprecedented series of mid-decade gerrymanders must be met head-on."
"The threat created by the Trump administration to our democracy is grave. Protecting our system requires taking extraordinary and responsive action, like the proposed referendum in Virginia," he continued. "The decision by Virginia lawmakers to pursue a process that allows voters to weigh in stands in stark contrast to the illegitimate power grab engineered by Republicans in Texas and anti-democracy efforts now underway by politicians in Florida."
In addition to Texas and Florida, Missouri and North Carolina's GOP legislators have pursued new maps for their states ahead of the midterms—under pressure from the president—while some Indiana Republicans joined with Democrats to block an effort there.
Newsom, one of several Democrats expected to run for president in 2028, led the fight for Proposition 50, which voters approved in November. So far, California is the only Democrat-led state to fight back by trying to draw Republican districts out of existence.
In the court battle over the California map, Judges Josephine Staton and Wesley Hsu—appointees of former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, respectively—allowed the new districts to stand, while a Trump appointee, Judge Kenneth Lee, dissented.
Welcoming Wednesday's court ruling, Newsom said that "Republicans' weak attempt to silence voters failed. California voters overwhelmingly supported Prop 50—to respond to Trump's rigging in Texas—and that is exactly what this court concluded."
Although the case could move to the US Supreme Court—which has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees—the justices in December gave Texas Republicans a green light to use their recently redrawn map.
As the New York Times reported: "The Supreme Court previously determined that courts could not rule on claims of partisan gerrymandering. So Republicans who oppose the California maps face the same challenge as Democrats who opposed the maps in Texas: to prove that race, not partisanship, was the predominant factor in crafting the new district lines."
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee intervened in the lawsuit, represented by Elias Law Group. Firm partner Abha Khanna called Wednesday's decision "a vindication of California voters and a decisive rebuke of the Republican Party's attempt to use the courts to overturn an election."
"The court correctly recognized that Proposition 50 was an unambiguously partisan response to Texas' unprecedented mid-decade redistricting," Khanna added. "The accusations of racial gerrymandering, especially coming from Republicans and Trump's Department of Justice, were nothing more than a cynical attempt to prevent California voters from having their voice heard in response to Texas."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats Can Win Back Trump Voters—If They Don't Blow It
The message from the 2025 election is clear: Some Trump voters will back Democrats if the candidates reach them where they are and talk to them about the issues that they care about most.
Nov 11, 2025
While the media has covered extensively Democratic successes in the 2025 off-year elections, there is one story that has been dramatically undercovered. This is the fact that the 2025 Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races show that Democrats can win over Trump voters. Granted, these are not dramatic slices of the Trump coalition, but they are enough in these hyper-polarized times to win elections.
According to CNN polling, in New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill in her race for governor was able to win 7% of those who had voted for Donald Trump in 2024. Interestingly, the Virginia exit polling data shows that Rep. Abigail Spanberger won the identical (7%) of Trump voters.
The New York Times’ Nate Cohn is one of the few journalists who has pointed to the New Jersey and Virginia Democrats’ ability to win over Trump voters. He concludes that:
Instead, the two Democrats won so decisively because they also flipped a crucial sliver of voters who said they supported Mr. Trump in 2024. Ms. Sherrill and Ms. Spanberger both won 7 percent of Mr. Trump’s supporters, according to the exit polls. It may not seem like much to flip 7 percent of Mr. Trump’s backers, but consider: When a voter flips, it adds one voter to one party and also deducts one from the other, making it twice as significant as turning out a new voter.
Looking at the exit polling data makes it clear that while the Democrats margins in New Jersey and Virginia were helped by increased Democratic turnout, winning over 2024 Trump voters was critically important.
One of the key parts of the Trump coalition has always been strong and even almost overwhelming support from rural voters. An analysis by Politico of the Virginia gubernatorial race shows that:
Spanberger’s victory was largely driven by massive turnout in northern and eastern Virginia’s urban areas. But she picked up support across the state’s deep-red central and western counties, where Trump’s tariffs have hit the manufacturing and agricultural industries especially hard. Even as her GOP opponent won most of those places, Spanberger posed the best performance by a statewide Democratic candidate in several cycles, according to a POLITICO analysis of voting data in the localities classified as “rural” by the federal government.
To her great credit, Spanberger targeted rural voters and consistently hammered away on how the Trump administration’s tariff policies were hurting them. In comparison with former Vice President Kamala Harris’s performance in 2024, Spanberger outperformed Harris’ margin in 48 of Virginia’s 52 rural localities. The exit polling shows that Spanberger won 46% of rural voters—an eight-point deficit to Republican candidate Lieutenant Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, and a 19-point swing from 2021 gubernatorial Democratic nominee Terry McAuliffe’s 27-point disadvantage.
There is also data in the exit polling data indicating that Democrats won back in 2025 Hispanic voters who backed Trump in 2024. The Washington Post reports:
This year, most Democratic statewide candidates won Latino voters by at least 30 points in exit polls, re-creating the margins their party held before 2024. In New Jersey, 18 percent of Latino voters who backed Trump last year cast their ballot for the Democratic gubernatorial candidate, exit poll data showed.
The fact that Democrats won over Trump voters in 2025 has profound implications for Democrats in both the 2026 midterms and the 2028. The message is clear: Some Trump voters will back Democrats if the candidates reach them where they are and talk to them about the issues that they care about most. To assume that all Trump voters are absolutely committed to Trump no matter what the circumstances is a mistaken assumption that only hurts Democrats. Successful politics is always about addition.
Hopefully, Democrats learn from their success in 2025 and realize that they can make some Trump voters part of their winning coalition.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘People… Have No Idea What It Means’: Hegseth Raises Alarm With ‘Weird’ Military Meeting in Virginia
"This is either a meeting that could have been an email," said one observer, "or something ominous."
Sep 25, 2025
"Nothing good is likely coming out of this," said one Democratic political scientist on Thursday regarding reports that US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has called a meeting of hundreds of top military general and admirals in Quantico, Virginia next Tuesday.
The highly unusual summit was announced on short notice and no reason was given to military commanders and other leaders stationed in conflict zones, across Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region who are being required to leave their posts for the meeting.
The order applies to "all senior officers with the rank of brigadier general or above," The Washington Post reported. There are roughly 800 generals and admirals in the US military.
"You don’t call [general officers and flag officers] leading their people and the global force into an auditorium outside DC and not tell them why/what the topic or agenda is,” one person familiar with the matter told the Post.
Some sources told the newspaper that the order raises security concerns.
“Are we taking every general and flag officer out of the Pacific right now?” one person said. “All of it is weird.”
The directive comes months after Hegseth fired about 100 generals and admirals and a month after he dismissed top leaders of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Navy Reserve, and the Naval Special Warfare Command, without giving the officials reasons for their firing.
The DIA had found a few months earlier that Iran's nuclear program had not been significantly damaged by US strikes, contradicting President Donald Trump's claims.
The Pentagon has said there will likely be another 10% reduction of generals and admirals, and political consultant Joel Montfort noted that the right-wing policy blueprint Project 2025 "details a plan to remove senior leaders and consolidate power to loyalists" at the Department of Defense, which Hegseth has claimed is now called the Department of War.
“Are we taking every general and flag officer out of the Pacific right now? All of it is weird.”
“People are very concerned," one official told the Post regarding the meeting. "They have no idea what it means."
The Intercept reported that military sources it spoke to "speculated about the purpose, wondering if it might foretell a culling of general officers; a significant reorganization of the military command structure; a threat to eschew contact with the press; or a loyalty oath about putting Trump administration priorities above all else."
"One source, somewhat in jest, evoked the phrase 'coup d’état,' later clarifying they meant a gutting of leaders who might question Trump’s policies," reported the outlet.
Some other officials familiar with the matter told the Post that they believed the Trump administration's desire to make "homeland defense the nation's top concern," rather than China, was likely to be discussed at the meeting.
The order also came a day after the Office of Management and Budget threatened a new round of mass firings at federal agencies unless Democrats in Congress agree to a funding bill to keep the government running before the October 1 deadline.
"This is either a meeting that could have been an email," said Matt Gertz of Media Matters for America, "or something ominous."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular