I hear the criticism, and will continue to watch carefully for balance in our language, but I do think we’ve been pretty clear that BOTH sides are gerrymandering, with TX doing it first and CA looking to offset it.
For example, our story from yesterday on TX map:
www.politico.com/news/2025/08...
New Jersey politics and power are wild. Of course.
And *still* I was repeatedly taken by surprise by this story about the president of the NJ NAACP — a former jail warden whose legal residence is his house in Florida — and his relationship to Norcross.
www.inquirer.com/politics/new...
Also, because it’s hard to know what would happen in redistricting, it’s hard to know what the exact impact would be in the House. As states lose seats to Canada in reapportionment, blue districts could disappear in red states and vice versa. Canada itself would also have red seats.
I’m assuming 435 House seats still, reapportioned across states. +2 senators, for a total of 102. Total 540 electoral votes, 271 to win.
I treat ME and NE as winner-take-all; it’s hard to know what would happen in redistricting, and ME-02 and NE-02 cancel out right now.
Some methodological notes:
I’m using Canada’s 2020 Q2 population estimate to match the timing of the 2020 Census.
My colleagues in Canada say it would be a solidly Democratic state in the American two-party system, so I treat it as such.
Canada would have 45 House seats, taken from the following states:
CA (6)
TX (4)
FL (3)
IL (2)
NY (2)
NC (2)
PA (2)
AL (1)
AZ (1)
CO (1)
CT (1)
GA (1)
IN (1)
KS (1)
KY (1)
MD (1)
MA (1)
MI (1)
MN (1)
MO (1)
MT (1)
NE (1)
NJ (1)
OH (1)
OR (1)
RI (1)
SC (1)
TN (1)
VA (1)
WA (1)
WI (1)
Donald Trump keeps trolling Canada with a bit about being the 51st state, so we decided to run the numbers: What would happen electorally?
Dozens of House seats would be reapportioned to Canada, giving Democrats a significant advantage in the electoral college.
www.politico.com/news/2025/01...
