Reader · no content
No body text on file.
Open the original to read the full piece.
On 2026-05-01 @sabrdance asserted any U.S. House district where the winner…
Brief
@sabrdance (May 1, 2026) claims any House district with a winner under 60% is a flawed, effectively disenfranchising district that merges two communities. The post cites Phil Haskett (@filbertwrites), who says redistricting should consider only U.S. citizen population and a compactness metric (boundary length summed divided by area) to avoid partisan bias.
Why it matters
On 2026-05-01 @sabrdance asserted any U.S. House district where the winner receives less than 60% of the vote is de facto a poor district that effectively disenfranchises voters by jamming two different communities into a single district.
Key details
- Phil Haskett (@filbertwrites) argued there are only two truly reasonable, non‑partisan factors for delimiting congressional districts: (1) the population of U.S. citizens encompassed by the state's districts, and (2) statewide geographic compactness measured by minimizing the sum of district boundary lengths relative to total district area; he conceded compactness can be gamed only to a limited extent.