This is a poor piece on a number of issues, and I am happy to write a rejoinder. But, in the meantime, some facts:

-There is very little evidence of serious gerrymandering in Hungary. Part of this is the function of the principles established for drawing district lines (stay within counties, and maintain the integrity of Budapest districts) -There is evidence of malapportionment in the reforms of 2011 and 2014 but they actually were LESS malapportioned than others. Not a little either. - Orban reduced the size of the legislature *to the optimum size deemed the standard by political scientists* from a dreadfully oversized parliament before (which was WHY the districts were redrawn) - The electoral system reform in 2011 did make the electoral system more majoritarian like that of the UK, Malta, or the United States House, and these systems substantially over-reward plurality winners to deliver decisive majorities. It is barely a Mixed system at all, but it was left more mixed than it could have (They kept proportionality rules). - They lowered the threshold for ethnic minority parties to get in parliament (as nationalist authoritarians bent on domination do, I guess?). Ah, but that is a dastardly trick too, because then they won't as eagerly join the opposition pre-electoral coalition! The less democratic and more democratic elements all point to authoritarianism. How... tautological.

All told, via the electoral process there is startling little evidence of even remotely norm-breaking shenangans. The talk of predatory partisan gerrymanders is borderline disinformation.

As I have written elsewhere, there are worrying aspects to Hungary, and Orban's goals vis-a-vis changes in power (As with any leader) are not perfectly clear. However, the problems faced in Hungary are the same pressures faced across the West. The declines we see are the same as those across the West. There is virtually no serious threat to democracy in Hungary that isn't present in countries like the US, the UK, the NL, and countless other countries.

Even one of the main worries of the EU regarding electoral integrity (mail in ballot's sans ID) is considered a major democratic advance in the United States. In Hungary: Bad. IN America: Good! Why? Excellent question.

Hungary, as all of our Democracies, is in a fragile place right now, but its biggest problem is its opposition in the new constitutional system. The REAL shenangan was that moving from a more proportional to a more majoritarian system of representation the largest most unified part was advantaged in terms of winning seats. The divided opposition is a problem, as is its poor campaigning. They are losing because they are bad at winning. Yes, there is some bias in the larger media system. But, even before that, liberal and left publications were not able to draw large circulations, and political entrepreneurs outside the right seemed as interested in working with the voters they had, as they are now interested in competing withing the constitutional system they have.

The solution, is that the opposition leadership in various parties give up power and merge into a larger party capable of capturing real vote share in the constituency districts. But absolutely none of them, nor their constituents, or their interest groups have any interest in that or playing in a majoritarian system.

So, they turn to propaganda and 'political sciencey' looking analyses that are ultimately motivated political studies almost entirely unsubstantiated. These coalitions in Hungary do not want this majoritarian system because it harms their office interests, not the policy or governance interests of Hungary. Indeed, their refusal to get realistic about the new political world they live in is why they lost the election.

Orban is and was eminently beatable by a strong center right liberal with a national rather than internationalist orientation. But the small groups of educated, international, and left Hungarians don't want that. They want to win without winning elections in this system. They look to the EU to enforce policies on their fellow citizens that they can't win at the ballot box. They look to international pressure. All this, of course, just plays into Orban's narrative (how is it we lose).

So if this kind of liberal myopia, bad politics, and myopia sounds familiar, it should. Because it's the exact same kind of thing we are seeing from left-leaning parties across the West, and they keep losing. 'I don't like the system, and it doesn't advantage me, so it's undemocratic' Sounds familar. It's the Democratic complaint about the US Senate and Electoral College. Democrats SHOULDN'T HAVE TO patrongize the great unsophisticated unwashed in rural states, and Democrats shouldn't have to campaign in tiny places if it means compromising on their desires for deep blue urban areas so its all so very unfair. (check out the electoral bias in House elections in the 1960's sometime)

Unable to win via democratic means, the liberal left appeal to courts, dominance in non-state institutions, international pressure, international courts, media, or conspiracy to force policies they cannot win at the ballot box and stand aghast as *how it could be possible they are not liked by the masses!* It's the liberal conundrum. And, it's explained usually by boogeymen (always men).