But then the GOP gerrymanders come into play, and you get stuff in 2012 like Romney winning 13/20 EC votes in Pennsylvania while losing its popular vote by 5.5% (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania#By_congressional_district)

He also wins 14 out of 18 EC votes in Ohio, and a majority of electors in Florida, despite losing those states too. Obama gains a dozen votes out of Texas and a few in Arizona and some other states, but overall has a smaller Electoral College lead, or even falls behind. Ranked choice is definitely the way to go.

Hence I said Baby steps. Gerrymandering also should be forbidden and the counties redrawn one last time based on geographical borders (like cliffs, rivers, mountains) and/or latitude/longitude and then outlawed forever, but that's another point. Also with so many EC, there's also a distinct chance to lose some votes to third parties no matter how they redraw the lines as then the vote for third parties would not be "lost" anymore (at least not nearly to the same degree anymore).

I do agree that Ranked choice or some proportional voting system would be much preferable to this, but like I said, anything is better than winner takes all.

I'm personally not buying the Georgia and Texas going blue this election nonsense. I do think Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconson are good options to flip back blue this election though. Assuming Dems can hold the states they won under Hillary, and nab the aforementioned states, they would win. Trump barely won in those states too so it definitely isn't an impossible scenario to envision happening.

That isn’t possible.  The number of districts need to be updated quite often based on population changes.  Otherwise it wouldn’t make much sense.  There should be a consistent process of how those districts are redrawn though, as politicians obviously shouldn’t be trusted with it.  Here in Utah, they have the districts set up to all take a small piece of salt lake so that they don’t have a concentrated liberal district.  It’s the most obvious use of gerrymandering I have seen.  Nobody seems to care though... it should be kept as close to city or country boundaries as possible though in my opinion...

If Biden flips Florid which is likely judging by how much Trump has fallen behind there, then its pretty much over as he certainly won't win Michigan again.

Those are the only two states needed to flip for Biden.

I agree that Georgia and Texas in particular won't turn blue this election regardless of what happens, they will, however, continue to get bluer compared to where they were previously and i can see Trump winning them by relatively small margins of 3% aa both states were the bluest they had been in years in 2016, and i don't see that trend stopping. 2024 is the year they could truly become battleground zones. 

The red state I seeing being flipped this year is Arizona and I'm surprised more people aren't talking about that.

Yeah, I was tempted to mention Arizona in my original post, but shied away from posting it as I'm not too confident in it flipping blue but I can say that I wouldn't be surprised to see it do so. 

The Southwest seems to be slowly flipping blue.  New Mexico, Colorado, and Nevada used to be battlegrounds, now they seem mostly blue.  Arizona has been pink for a while and now seems fully battleground.  I think Texas is in the pink phase still, but within the next 10 years it will be a battleground as well, unless there is a big shift in the parties.

Even Utah was a battleground last election and the last poll from this election only had trump ahead by one point.  However, I think that is more about trumps problems with Mormons than the state actually shifting.

Yikes at that empty Trump rally in Tulsa. If he wasn't worried before he has to be worried now, even I didn't expect that.

So much for a million people trying to attend his rally. Maybe they were nostalgic for his inauguration.