Virginia’s plan to redraw its congressional maps to create a four-seat Democratic majority is dead, annulled by the supreme court of the state. His impact on Virginia politics, though, is still felt — and nowhere more so than in Virginia’s First District.
The district, which covers much of Virginia Beach and includes parts of the Richmond suburbs, is one of the few in the country that is truly competitive, and has been thrown into disarray by a gerrymandering battle that has consumed the 2026 midterms.
To learn more, I traveled there last month for the latest episode of Vox’s video podcast, America, Really.
Earlier, Virginians voted to redraw their maps to favor Democrats in response to Republican efforts to do the same in Missouri, Texas and elsewhere. But a court effort threw out those results, restoring the state’s original maps and raising uncertainty for candidates and activists who have been advocating for the change.
Even more so, Virginia has been the place where the fundamental tension in the engagement war has begun to emerge. New Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger’s approval rating it has suffered a blow since endorsed the Democratic campaign to draw a new map, and recently warned House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries against continuing his “all-out war, everywhere, all the time” strategy when it comes to reimposing sanctions. (words, as Jeffries saidIt’s not natural for him: It’s also how the Trump camp is outlined its efforts to re-regulate.)
“It is too early for us to be talking about any kind of effort to reset the sanctions or change the map when we have to win the most important term of my life this November,” Spanberger told the New York Times the month of May.
On our trip to the First District of Virginia, America, Really he spoke to Democratic volunteers who had organized the referendum and were now trying to choose a primary candidate. We also attended a candidate convention at the Libbie Mill Library in Richmond, Virginia, where several candidates running for the Democratic nomination in the district made their pitches to voters.
In such cases, it is easy to see how the party’s message for the midterms is developing. Here are three takeaways:
1) Re-control fatigue is real
I understand that there is a Spanberger pickle. Democrats organized, lobbied, and persuaded voters to embrace a restrictive effort that many people were unhappy about — and then watched the courts strike it down. Katie Sitterson, an Indivisible Virginia volunteer we spoke to at Virginia First, described morale as taking “the air out of your sails.”
When I asked if it had dampened enthusiasm for volunteerism, he put it bluntly: “People are starting to feel like, ‘What’s the point?’ I tried, and we do all these things, and we even voted, and we used our voice, and it still didn’t work. He said the changes confirm the “lack of agency” that voters already feel – and make it harder to keep people engaged throughout the year.
I think that explains Spanberger’s opposition to Jeffries’ strategy. The “all war, all the time” argument is something that excites the core – important in a midterm or national primary school. Picking and choosing your precincts to use political capital is even more important in purple areas like Virginia’s Primary Election or statewide.
2) “Woke” is not dead
The brief period in which Democrats leaned on the language of social justice during the 2020 election seems to have passed. But at the divisive caucus in Richmond, there were plenty of medical masks being worn, identity politics embraced, and candidates leaning.
“I always say that happiness is the best opposition we have,” one candidate told attendees. “Hope is not a dirty word.” Another identified himself as “the child of immigrants,” and a third described himself as an “unapologetically progressive … who doesn’t take any corporate money.”
These days, “wokeness” has become a kind of pillar in Democratic elite circles, as more and more politicians run away from the progressive message of 2020. But those are values that people legitimately believe in and will re-emerge as a point of tension in the Democratic national primaries.
3) Democrats have a message
If the “ability” was the slogan of the 2025 election thanks to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, I think “corruption” is emerging as a synonym for 2026, fueled by the reaction to President Donald Trump’s actions and elevated by leading national politicians like Senator Jon Ossoff (D-GA). But what is most clear in this parliamentary race is that many candidates do not see power and corruption as separate issues, but as related ideas. Basically: Things are getting more expensive for you like Trump is worried in the White House.
This is what Tim Cywinski, one of the Democrats participating in the First State of Virginia, said: “From my experience with everyday people – Republican, Democrat, left, right, everyone in between – it’s all about affordability and corruption.” He said the connection does not need to explain insider trading or crypto: “You don’t have to know the nuances of the stock market. You just see that they are getting richer, while everyone else is getting … it’s hard to live. Life shouldn’t be impossible. And if you say, ‘Yes, it’s because of them, but also at the same time it drives people crazy,’ and at the same time it drives people crazy. It doesn’t matter who they voted for in the last election.”
That sweet spot was Cywinski’s focus — pointing out that prices are rising for many Americans when Trump puts a “for sale sign in front of the White House.” The candidates think the difference could not only motivate Democrats to turn out, but also draw enough independents and voters for Trump to win a district like Virginia’s First.
As always, there’s a lot more in the full show, too listen America, Really wherever you find your podcasts or watch them Vox’s YouTube channel.
