OP actually has some sound reasoning in reply to parent comment. I'm not sure how convinced I am without evidence. Also stopping gerrymandering is way more politically feasible than mandatory voting.
Their argument isn't sound. Gerrymandering already provides extremely complex districts that are close to as ludicrous as considering particular city blocks. It's not an all-or-nothing thing. It's not like the 42% of non-voters are a random mix of people in such a randomly placed geography that it would hamper the efforts to gerrymander. Instead, we have every reason to believe that the non-voters are still segregated and partisan enough to be identifiable for gerrymandering. And the gerrymandering needs only to be partially effective to have a significant impact.
