One variant of this argument posits that because gerrymandering is so severe, Republicans can lose the popular vote badly and still win the House. This weakens their incentive to reach out to the median voter (and to some observers, it erodes the Republicans’ democratic legitimacy). There’s no doubt that the GOP won more seats than you would expect given its share of the popular vote: Common sense would dictate that 49 percent of the two-party vote would not entitle you to 54 percent of the seats.
But as is usually the case, common sense has its limits. First, as Theodore Arrington has observed, these vote counts are complicated by the fact that some states don’t count votes for unopposed candidates, while others, like California, employ a runoff system that frequently pitted Democrats against Democrats and Republicans against Republicans. When you account for this, the Democrats’ lead in the popular vote total shrinks.
Read more: Gerrymandering Isn't to Blame for D.C. Impasse | RealClearPolitics