In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board
It's not just Donald Trump's mantra anymore. As the Republican president pushes states to redraw their congressional districts to the GOP's advantage, Democrats have shown they are willing to go beyond words of outrage and use whatever power they do have to win.
Democrats in the Texas Legislature started it off by delaying, for now, Republican efforts to expand the GOP majority in the state's delegation and help preserve party control of the U.S. House through new districts in time for the 2026 midterm elections.
Then multiple Democratic governors promised new districts in their own states to neutralize potential Republican gains in Washington. Their counter has been buoyed by national fundraising, media blitzes and public demonstrations, including rallies scheduled around the country Saturday.
'For everyone that's been asking, 'Where are the Democrats?' — well, here they are,' said U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of several Democrats who could be ousted under her state's new maps. 'For everyone who's been asking, 'Where is the fight?' – well, here it is.'
There is no guarantee Democrats can prevent the Republican-powered redistricting, just as Democrats on Capitol Hill has not been able to stop Trump's moves. But it's a notable turn for a party that, by its own leaders' admissions, has honored conventional rules and bypassed bare-knuckled tactics.
So far, progressive and establishment Democrats are aligned, uniting what has often been a fragmented opposition since Republicans led by Trump took control of the federal government with their election sweep in November. Leaders on the left say the approach gives them a more effective way to confront him. They can challenge his redistricting ploy with tangible moves as they also push back against the Republicans' tax and spending law and press the case that he is shredding American democracy.
'We've been imploring Democrats where they have power on the state and local level to flex that power,' said Maurice Mitchell, who leads the Working Families Party at the left flank of mainstream U.S. politics. 'There's been this overwrought talk about fighters and largely performative actions to suggest that they're in the fight.'
This time, he said, Democrats are 'taking real risks in protecting all of our rights' against 'an authoritarian president who only understands the fight.'
Pairing fiery talk with action
Texas made sense for Republicans as the place to start a redistricting scuffle. They dominate the Statehouse, and Gov. Greg Abbott is a Trump loyalist.
But when the president's allies announced a new political map intended to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House, state Democratic representatives fled Texas, denying the GOP the numbers to conduct business in the Legislature and approve the reworked districts.
Those legislators surfaced in Illinois, New York, California and elsewhere, joined by governors, senators, state party chairs, other states' legislators and activists. All promised action. The response was Trumpian.
Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed Texas Democrats and pledged retaliatory redistricting. Pritzker mocked Abbott as a lackey who says 'yes, sir' to Trump orders. Hochul dismissed Texas Republicans as 'lawbreaking cowboys.' Newsom's press office directed all-caps social media posts at Trump, mimicking his signature sign off: 'THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.'
U.S. Rep. Al Green, another Texas Democrat who could lose his seat, called Trump 'egomaniacal.' Yet many Democrats also claimed moral high ground, comparing their cause to the Civil Rights Movement.
State Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., invoked another Texas Democrat, President Lyndon Johnson, who was 'willing to stand up and fight' for civil rights laws in the 1960s. Then, with Texas bravado, Romero reached further into history: 'We're asking for help, maybe just as they did back in the days of the Alamo.'
'Whatever it takes'
A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about 15% of Democrats' own voters described the party using words like 'weak' or 'apathetic.' An additional 10% called it 'ineffective' or 'disorganized.'
Beto O'Rourke, a former Texas congressman who is raising money to support Texas Democrats, has encouraged Democratic-run statehouses to redraw districts now rather than wait for GOP states to act. On Friday, California Democrats released a plan that would give the party an additional five U.S. House seats. It would require voter approval in a November election.
'Maximize Democratic Party advantage,' O'Rourke said at a recent rally. 'You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules.' There are no refs in this game. F— the rules. … Whatever it takes.'
Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin acknowledged the shift.
'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to a knife fight,' he said.
Andrew O'Neill, an executive at the progressive group Indivisible, contrasted that response with the record-long speeches by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J. and the Democratic leader of the U.S. House, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, in eviscerating Trump and his package of tax breaks and spending cuts. The left 'had its hair on fire' cheering those moments, O'Neill recalled, but were 'left even more frustrated in the aftermath.'
Trump still secured tax cuts for the wealthy, accelerated deportations and cut safety net programs, just as some of his controversial nominees were confirmed over vocal Democratic opposition.
'Now,' O'Neill said, 'there is some marriage of the rhetoric we've been seeing since Trump's inauguration with some actual action.'
O'Neill looked back wistfully to the decision by Senate Democrats not to eliminate the filibuster 'when our side had the trifecta,' so a simple majority could pass major legislation. Democratic President Joe Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, he said, was too timid in prosecuting Trump and top associates over the Capitol riot.
In 2016, Democratic President Barack Obama opted against hardball as the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, refused to consider Obama's nomination of Garland to the Supreme Court.
'These unspoken rules of propriety, especially on the Democratic side, have created the conditions' that enabled Trump, Mitchell said.
Fighting on all fronts
Even on redistricting, Democrats would have to ignore their previous good-government efforts and bypass independent commissions that draw boundaries in several states, including California.
Party leaders and activists rationalize that the broader fights tie together piecemeal skirmishes that may not, by themselves, sway voters.
Arguing that Trump diminishes democracy stirs people who already support Democrats, O'Neill said. By contrast, he said, the GOP 'power grab,' can be connected to unpopular policies that affect voters' lives.
Green noted that Trump's big package bill cleared the Senate 'by one vote' and the House by a few, demonstrating why redistricting matters.
U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said Democrats must make unseemly, short-term power plays so they can later pass legislation that 'bans gerrymandering nationwide … bans super PACs (political action committees) and gets rid of that kind of big money and special interest that helped get us to this place.' U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas, added that a Democratic majority would wield subpoena power over Trump's administration.
In the meantime, said U.S. Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas, voters are grasping a stark reality.
'They say, 'Well, I don't know. Politics doesn't affect me,'' she said of constituents she meets. 'I say, 'Honey, it does' If you don't do politics, politics will do you.''
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
3 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Guatemalan prison guards freed after being held hostage by gang members
GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — Guatemalan authorities on Saturday freed nine prison guards who had been held hostage since Thursday by rioting inmates in Guatemala City, an official said. Members of Guatemala's two largest gangs — Barrio 18 and Mara Salvatrucha — began rioting Tuesday in two prisons, demanding the return of 10 leaders who had been transferred to another facility and placed in solitary confinement. José Portillo, Deputy Minister of Security, told The Associated Press that the guards released Saturday had been held by members of Mara Salvatrucha. One prison official died Friday after being shot, authorities said, without providing further details. Local media reported the shooting occurred at one of the prisons involved in the riots. Earlier this year, U.S. President Donald Trump designated Mara Salvatrucha as a terrorist organization, placing it on a list of criminal groups that he said operate in the region and threaten public safety across the hemisphere. In another similar incident, anti-kidnapping teams freed 11 guards on Wednesday who were also held hostage by gang members in two Guatemalan prisons. ___ Follow AP's coverage of Latin America and the Caribbean at
Globe and Mail
3 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Trump tells Zelensky that Putin demands more control of Ukraine, urges Kyiv make a deal
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because 'Russia is a very big power, and they're not', after a summit where Vladimir Putin was reported to have demanded more Ukrainian land. After the two leaders met in Alaska on Friday, Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that Putin had offered to freeze most front lines if Kyiv ceded all of Donetsk, the industrial region that is one of Moscow's main targets, a source familiar with the matter said. Zelensky rejected the demand, the source said. Russia already controls a fifth of Ukraine, including about three-quarters of Donetsk province, which it first entered in 2014. Trump also said he agreed with Putin that a peace deal should be sought without the prior ceasefire that Ukraine and its European allies, until now with U.S. support, have demanded. Zelensky said he would meet Trump in Washington on Monday, while Kyiv's European allies welcomed Trump's efforts but vowed to back Ukraine and tighten sanctions on Russia. Analysis: Despite Trump's impatience to broker a settlement in Russia-Ukraine War, Putin presents some obstacles to peace Trump's meeting with Putin, the first U.S.-Russia summit since Moscow launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, lasted just three hours. 'It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,' Trump posted on Truth Social. His various comments on the meeting mostly aligned with the public positions of Moscow, which says it wants a full settlement - not a pause - but that this will be complex because positions are 'diametrically opposed'. Russia has been gradually advancing for months. The war - the deadliest in Europe for 80 years - has killed or wounded well over a million people from both sides, including thousands of mostly Ukrainian civilians, according to analysts. Before the summit, Trump had said he would not be happy unless a ceasefire was agreed on. Ukrainian women give birth in bomb shelters as country faces plummeting population But afterwards he said that, after Monday's talks with Zelensky, 'if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin'. Those talks will evoke memories of a meeting in the White House Oval Office in February, where Trump and Vice President JD Vance gave Zelensky a brutal public dressing-down. Putin signalled no movement in Russia's long-held demands, which also include a veto on Kyiv's desired membership in the NATO alliance. He made no mention in public of meeting Zelensky, which the Ukrainian leader said he was willing to do. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov said a three-way summit had not been discussed. In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, Trump signalled that he and Putin had discussed land transfers and security guarantees for Ukraine, and had 'largely agreed'. 'I think we're pretty close to a deal,' he said, adding: 'Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they'll say 'no'.' Asked what he would advise Zelensky to do, Trump said: 'Gotta make a deal.' 'Look, Russia is a very big power, and they're not,' he added. Zelensky has consistently said he cannot concede territory without changes to Ukraine's constitution, and Kyiv sees Donetsk's 'fortress cities' such as Sloviansk and Kramatorsk as a bulwark against Russian advances into even more regions. Zelensky has also insisted on security guarantees, to deter Russia from invading again. He said he and Trump had discussed 'positive signals' on the U.S. taking part, and that Ukraine needed a lasting peace, not 'just another pause' between Russian invasions. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney welcomed what he described as Trump's openness to providing security guarantees to Ukraine under a peace deal. He said security guarantees were 'essential to any just and lasting peace.' Putin, who has opposed involving foreign ground forces, said he agreed with Trump that Ukraine's security must be 'ensured'. 'I would like to hope that the understanding we have reached will allow us to get closer to that goal and open the way to peace in Ukraine,' Putin told a briefing on Friday with Trump. For Putin, just sitting down with Trump represented a victory. He had been ostracized by Western leaders since the start of the war, and just a week earlier had faced a threat of new sanctions from Trump. Trump spoke to European leaders after returning to Washington. Several stressed the need to keep pressure on Russia. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said an end to the war was closer than ever, thanks to Trump, but added: '... until (Putin) stops his barbaric assault, we will keep tightening the screws on his war machine with even more sanctions.' A statement from European leaders said, 'Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees' and no limits should be placed on its armed forces or right to seek NATO membership as Russia has sought. Some European politicians and commentators were scathing about the summit. 'Putin got his red carpet treatment with Trump, while Trump got nothing,' Wolfgang Ischinger, former German ambassador to Washington, posted on X. Both Russia and Ukraine carried out overnight air attacks, a daily occurrence, while fighting raged on the front. Trump told Fox he would postpone imposing tariffs on China for buying Russian oil, but he might have to 'think about it' in two or three weeks. He ended his remarks after the summit by telling Putin: 'We'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon.' 'Next time in Moscow,' a smiling Putin responded in English.
Canada News.Net
26 minutes ago
- Canada News.Net
US has responsibility to bring Ukraine war to end, after provoking it
Donald Trump came into office promising to end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. Now, six months later, his high stakes meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska may have put the United States and Russia on a new path toward peace, or, if this initiative fails, could trigger an even more dangerous escalation, with warhawks in Congress already pushing for another $54.6 billion in weapons for Ukraine. After emerging from the meeting, Putin correctly framed the historical moment: "This was a very hard time for bilateral relations and, let's be frank, they've fallen to the lowest point since the Cold War. I think that's not benefiting our countries and the world as a whole. Sooner or later, we have to amend the situation to move on from confrontation to dialogue." Trump said he will follow up by talking to NATO leaders and Zelenskyy, as if the U.S. is simply an innocent bystander trying to help. But in Ukraine, as in Palestine, Washington plays the "mediator" while pouring weapons, intelligence, and political cover into one side of the war. In Gaza, that has enabled genocide. In Ukraine, it could lead to nuclear war. Despite protests from Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump was right to meet with Putin, not because they are friends, but because the United States and Russia are enemies, and because the war they are fighting to the last Ukrainian is the front line of a global conflict between the United States, Russia and China. In our book, War In Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, which we have now updated and revised to cover three years of war in Ukraine, we have detailed the U.S. role in expanding NATO up to Russia's borders, its support for the violent overthrow of Ukraine's elected government in 2014, its undermining of the Minsk II peace accord, and its rejection of a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine after only two months of war in 2022. We doubt that Donald Trump fully grasps this history. Are his simplistic statements alternately blaming Russia and Ukraine, but never the United States, just a public façade for domestic consumption, or does he really believe America's hands are clean? At their first meeting in Saudi Arabia on February 18th, senior U.S. and Russian negotiators agreed on a three-step plan: first to restore U.S.-Russian diplomatic relations; then to negotiate peace in Ukraine; and finally to work on resolving the broader, underlying breakdown in relations between the United States and Russia. Trump and Putin's decision to meet now was a recognition that they must address the deeper rift before they can achieve a stable and lasting peace in Ukraine. The stakes are high. Russia has been waging a war of attrition, concentrating on destroying Ukrainian forces and military equipment rather than on advancing quickly and seizing a lot more territory. It has still not occupied all of Donetsk province, which unilaterally declared independence from Ukraine in May 2014, and which Russia officially annexed before its invasion in February 2022. The failure of peace negotiations could lead to a more aggressive Russian war plan to seize territory much faster. Ukrainian forces are thinly spread out along much of its 700 mile front line, with as few as 100 soldiers often manning several miles of defenses. A major Russian offensive could lead to the collapse of the Ukrainian military or the fall of the Zelenskyy government. How would the U.S. and its Western allies respond to such major changes in the strategic picture? Zelenskyy's European allies talk tough, but have always rejected sending their own troops to Ukraine, apart from small numbers of special operations forces and mercenaries. Putin addressed the Europeans in his remarks after the Summit: "We expect that Kyiv and the European capitals will perceive [the negotiations] constructively, and that they won't throw a wrench in the works, will not make any attempts to use some backroom dealings to conduct provocations to torpedo the nascent progress." Meanwhile, more U.S. and NATO troops are fighting from the relative safety of the joint Ukraine-NATO war headquarters at the U.S. military base in Wiesbaden in Germany, where they work with Ukrainian forces to plan operations, coordinate intelligence and target missile and drone strikes. If the war escalates further, Wiesbaden could become a target for Russian missile strikes, just as NATO missiles already target bases in Russia. How would the United States and Germany respond to Russian missile strikes on Wiesbaden? The U.S. and NATO's official policy has always been to keep Ukraine fighting until it is in a stronger position to negotiate with Russia, as Joe Biden wrote in the New York Times in June 2022. But every time the U.S. and NATO prolong or escalate the war, they leave Ukraine in a weaker position, not a stronger one. The neutrality agreement that the U.S. and U.K. rejected in April 2022 included a Russian withdrawal from all the territory it had just occupied. But that was not good enough for Boris Johnson and Joe Biden, who instead promised a long war to weaken Russia. NATO military leaders believed that Ukraine's counter-offensive in the fall of 2022 achieved the stronger position they were looking for, and General Milley went out on a limb to say publicly that Ukraine should "seize the moment" to negotiate. But Biden and Zelenskyy rejected his advice, and Ukraine's failed offensive in 2023 squandered the moment they had failed to seize. No amount of deceptive propaganda can hide the reality that it has been downhill since then, and 69% of Ukrainians now want a negotiated peace, before their position gets even worse. So Trump went to Alaska with a weak hand, but one that will get weaker still if the war goes on. The European politicians urging Zelenskyy to cling to his maximalist demands want to look tough to their own people, but the keys to a stable and lasting peace are still Ukrainian neutrality, self determination for the people of all regions of Ukraine, and a genuine peace process that finally lays to rest the zombification of the Cold War. The whole world celebrated the end of the Cold War in 1991, but the people of the world are still waiting for the long-promised peace dividend that a generation of corrupt, war-mongering leaders have stolen from us. As negotiations progress, U.S. officials must be honest about the U.S. role in provoking this crisis. They must demonstrate that they are ready to listen to Russia's concerns, take them seriously, and negotiate in good faith to achieve a stable and lasting agreement that delivers peace and security to all parties in the Ukraine war, and in the wider Cold War it is part of. Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of a new edition of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, just published by OR Books. Medea Benjamin is the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including .
