You're arguing the merits, which wasn't what I was addressing. You said it was the same as the TX gerrymander, just a naked power grab. I articulated the principle that, for me, differentiates it from TX. I stand by that.
You're arguing the merits, which wasn't what I was addressing. You said it was the same as the TX gerrymander, just a naked power grab. I articulated the principle that, for me, differentiates it from TX. I stand by that.
There is no difference. There is no principle. There's the principle of we want 2 Senators for doing nothing. If that wasn't the aim, they would be pursuing other options. They won't, because not only is there no advantage + reabsorbing most of DC denudes the argument they should have 3 EC votes.