Big enough to overcome gerrymandering? My guess is yes, but it will be close. And it won't be the end of the story. This is a long process.

Look at Virginia. In 2016, 49.17 percent of voters went for a Dem for their U.S. representative, slightly more than the 48.74 percent that went for a Republican. That led to 7 Republican seats and 4 Democratic seats, because of severe and intentional gerrymandering. That same map will be in place for 2018, more than likely.

But Virginia is also the earliest peek at the Democratic wave building. It was a major statewide set of elections in a fairly purple state. Dems won the governorship easily and either flipped or reduced a large Republican advantage to a razor-thin margin, depending on recounts.

The 2020 electoral map will be drawn by that balanced legislature with veto rights for Gov. Northam. That should knock off what is a +2 baked-in, gerrymandered Republican edge in the House. Depending on how you want to calculate it, just going by the relevant R/D votes in House races in 2016 versus the national total, Republicans baked in 21 extra seats. That's a quick and dirty methodology, so if you want to quibble over that number, that's fine. But it's not arguable that they got more seats than the voting totals would indicate.

If you repeat what just happened here in half a dozen other states, you can start to reverse the gerrymandering problem. You can also start fixing the voter suppression problem, which singlehandedly handed Wisconsin to Trump. If you put the work in and the results show up, we might start seeing something approaching fair elections in the U.S. by 2024. (Or as fair as we can get in a system where 39 million people in the 20 smallest states get 40 Senators and 39 million Californians get two.)