Has the Republican party ever seen the same sort of disparity that is quoted in the above Reuters article on Wisconsin?
Despite receiving 51 percent of the votes statewide in 2012, Democrats won only 39 of 99 Assembly seats. In 2014, Republicans won roughly the same percentage of votes statewide, but won 63 seats, a 24-seat disparity, judges wrote.
Sure. In Massachusetts, 25% of voters are Republicans (and 33% of the two party vote). 0% of the congressional delegation is.
That's not really gerrymandering, as Republicans are spread across Massachusetts. If you want to look into actual gerrymandering, look at Maryland. Donald Trump won 33.9% of the vote in Maryland in 2016, but there is only one out of eight Representatives that is Republican. There were two prior to the last redistricting.
Trump won 40% of the vote in Connecticut, but Republicans won 0% of the five congressional seats.
Perhaps you don't remember, but in 1980 and 1990, Republicans complained about gerrymandering a lot. At that time, Republicans would use their domination of the governorships to counteract the Democratic domination in legislatures. There are probably even better examples from that time.
Note that this kind of disparity doesn't actually demonstrate gerrymandering. For example, Iowa had three of five seats held by Democrats in 2009. After 2014, they had only one of four. But that wasn't a Republican gerrymander. That was a good Republican year in the swing district and one of the Democrat-leaning districts. By most measures, Iowa has one Republican district, two Democratic districts, and one swing district. If anything, it's biased in favor of the Democrats.
Democrats built their coalition around urban populations. This gives them lots of safe legislative seats in overwhelmingly Democratic areas. But it gives Republicans more seats, albeit with lower support in each.