Thread by @mcpli

So here’s one way to think of the differences over what it would take for Democrats to win a majority in 2018.

Imagine that there is a 10.6 foot wall. Democrats somehow need to get over that wall to get a majority. #fairmaps 1/

Now, one way to do so would be to build a 10.6 foot ladder - or better yet an 11 foot one because a bit of extra is helpful in these things. #fairmaps 2/

But some think, we’ll, maybe you won’t need a 10.6 foot ladder because it’s been raining a lot and I think there are probably going to be some mudslides that push up against the wall. Ds may only need a 7-8 foot ladder. #fairmaps 3/

And in a given year, say, 2018, that may be a reasonable assumption. (Though needless to say, the builders of the wall weren’t projecting mudslides of that magnitude when they built it). #fairmaps 4/

Others might note that Ds recruited some really great jumpers this time around and say, well, that also will help. And it could. #fairmaps 5/

But the point is that it still is a 10.6 foot wall, i.e., a significant structural barrier. People can debate whether it might be less daunting in a given year b/c of mudslides, etc. But just because you can overcome it one year doesn’t make it less real. #fairmaps 6/

I realize political people want to debate mudslides, etc - and it’s plenty interesting (and fun). But as redistricting people, we are more concerned that the barrier is there in the first place. #fairmaps 7/

At the end of the day if a party, whether Democrats in North Carolina or Republicans in Maryland, have barriers placed that require the equivalent of mudslides to win more seats, well, that’s a problem - even if this is a year of mudslides. #fairmaps 8/

Which is another way of saying that we shouldn’t be in the position of depending on mudslides - or wave elections - to deliver change. #fairmaps 9/