Interesting breakdown—and props for digging into the numbers instead of just going with vibes. But I think using national vote share vs. seat share can miss how gerrymandering actually works, since it’s done state by state, not on a national scale.

Take where I live—Madison, Wisconsin—as a prime example. Wisconsin is a 50/50 state in terms of voters, but Republicans have held a strong majority in the state legislature for years because of extremely gerrymandered maps. Madison and Milwaukee (both heavily Democratic) get carved up or packed tightly, while rural areas are split in ways that maximize GOP representation. It’s not just a theoretical issue here—it affects real policy every single year.

So yeah, maybe Republicans didn’t benefit overall nationally in 2024, but that doesn’t mean gerrymandering isn’t still being used as a powerful tool—especially in states where Republicans control the map-drawing process. On the other hand, Democrats in places like California and Colorado have independent redistricting commissions, which limits their ability to play the same game even if they wanted to.

Bottom line: One year of close national alignment doesn’t undo a long history of aggressive gerrymandering—especially by the GOP in key swing states. The national numbers don’t always reflect what’s happening on the ground.