Redistricting victims next cycle.

[Oryxslayer]

I haven’t played around with IL in awhile, but I am convinced 14-3 can work. I think anything further risks dummymander. It’s also necessary to ensure our incumbents are highly protected, especially Bustos. I’m not sure where she lives, but I’m sure she can win any D-leaning district drawn for her. She’s running for leadership, so her protection is a priority. Also, did you account for the fact that downstate districts are bleeding population? Those districts will have to expand to account for uneven population shifts.

There is a thread in this board that has rough 2020 projections where the pop change at the county level is distributed do to the precinct level. So pop change is accounted for.

[Sol]

What do these 14-3 maps look like if one draws two Hispanic districts?

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Nice maps. Yeah, it shouldn't be hard for dems to extract a 14-3 from IL. Like here is my map from previously. I have much higher standards then most other mappers, only seeing seats above +7 PVI as wave-proof, respect the VRA, Keep incumbents residences in their seats, and I like to have tentacles more then one precinct wide/have a highway or major road through then. Even then might not last the full ten years partisan-wise. With that in mind, I completed my map  using PVI and created a 13-4...but one of those four was only R+2.5 (IL14) and Clinton obviously won it. So even then under my harsh rules, I probably got 14-3 clinton seats.

So it looks like you had the same general issue with the downstate issues wrapping around the 2 Dem seats. If you want the downstate R vote sinks to look at least somewhat compact, then some general tweaking is needed.

Insofar as aesthetics are an issue, I do think that the 2nd configuration I had of IL-17 (where it goes along the Iowa border and then along the Wisconsin border to get to Rockford, rather than just going straight to Rockford) is better because it allows the northern R vote sink to be more compact and not to have to wrap around IL-17.

And in the south, maybe it is better for IL-13 (your IL-12) to have a less obvious tendril than the one we both drew connecting East St. Louis and Springfield. Rather than going directly from East St. Louis to Springfield, maybe it is better to do something more like this, with the tendril from East St. Louis first extending generally west and then northwards towards Decatur/Springfield/Champaign:



That is not a finished or polished version at all (I only spent a very short time modifying that and the exact configuration of the tendrils on IL-13 can no doubt be improved), so that screenshot is just intended to show the general concept which would allow the R vote sinks to be more compact - one in the south below IL-13, one to the north of IL-13, and one in the north-west that skirts around IL-17 and IL-14. At least from a macro viewpoint where you are zoomed out and looking at the entire state, it then "looks" less gerrymandered because the R vote sinks are not entirely wrapping around the downstate Dem districts.


I do like the fact that you were more aggressive in Chicagoland than me, in particular un-packing IL-05 and drawing it into DuPage and IL-09 into Lake/McHenry more than I did to make the suburban Chicagoland seats safer. They are probably safe enough anyway, but that doesn't hurt. But given that you are doing that, there is no reason not to make IL-14 safe as well. If you try and draw IL-14 as an R vote sink, it just ends up being a half-assed ineffectual vote sink that may have voted for Clinton but still be tough for Dems to win, which is pretty much the worst of both worlds - you are then wasting Dem votes but also making a district that is tough for Dems to win.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

What do these 14-3 maps look like if one draws two Hispanic districts?

Pretty much the same from an overall big picture view. IL-03 (Lipinski's seat) was already 33% Hispanic in 2010. Even with its current boundaries, it should be more so now. So basically the current Hispanic seat IL-04 just takes the area around the northern earmuff of the current IL-04, and IL-03 is modified slightly to take in more Hispanics that were formerly in the southern earmuff of IL-04.

So there are a lot of advantages of making a 2nd Hispanic district from a progressive perspective... You expand Hispanic representation in line with their population growth, you probably make it easier to primary Lipinski, because you a progressive Hispanic can primary him and get both the Hispanic vote and the Progressive vote, and another benefit is IL-07 is not surrounded by IL-04. That means that if you want to, you can then draw out IL-07 at least a bit into more Republican areas outside of Cook County, which helps a lot with making everything else more safely Democratic. If you wanted to do a 15-2 map in a somewhat cleanish looking way, that would probably be the easiest way to do it, because suddenly you could unpack IL-07 and incorporate that into the gerrymander, in addition to having a bunch of extra packed Dem votes in IL-05 and IL-09 to work with.

[lfromnj]

What do these 14-3 maps look like if one draws two Hispanic districts?

Pretty much the same from an overall big picture view. IL-03 (Lipinski's seat) was already 33% Hispanic in 2010. Even with its current boundaries, it should be more so now. So basically the current Hispanic seat IL-04 just takes the area around the northern earmuff of the current IL-04, and IL-03 is modified slightly to take in more Hispanics that were formerly in the southern earmuff of IL-04.

So there are a lot of advantages of making a 2nd Hispanic district from a progressive perspective... You expand Hispanic representation in line with their population growth, you probably make it easier to primary Lipinski, because you a progressive Hispanic can primary him and get both the Hispanic vote and the Progressive vote, and another benefit is IL-07 is not surrounded by IL-04. That means that if you want to, you can then draw out IL-07 at least a bit into more Republican areas outside of Cook County, which helps a lot with making everything else more safely Democratic. If you wanted to do a 15-2 map in a somewhat cleanish looking way, that would probably be the easiest way to do it, because suddenly you could unpack IL-07 and incorporate that into the gerrymander, in addition to having a bunch of extra packed Dem votes in IL-05 and IL-09 to work with.

lol @daddy madigan hurting Dan Lipinski.

[SATW]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

[Wisconsin SC Race 2019]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

You better believe it. Until Texas/Georgia/Ohio/North Carolina breaks, Illinois is a counterstrike.

[Strudelcutie4427]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

Don’t forget their idea to spaghetti strip NY into 23-3

[Oryxslayer]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

You better believe it. Until Texas/Georgia/Ohio/North Carolina breaks, Illinois is a counterstrike.

Until it's outlawed, you gotta play by the rules. The main reason we have been talking about IL I feel though is because there still is considerable uncertainty around a bunch of states redistricting-wise. The is also a lack of motivation, because a bunch of  these states already have pubmanders, and not much will change. IL however is a locked in Dem Trifecta. I could whip up a 8-1 TN map, like we did earlier if you wish.

[Virginiá]

How does a 14D - 3R map perform under a 2014 scenario?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Illinois,_2014

House popular vote: 51.42% (D) - 48.58% (R)

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

"War is bad" - USA, circa 1940

Bombs pearl Harbor - Japan, circa 1941

Invades a bunch of Japanese islands and starts bombing Japan - USA, circa 1942-45

"Hey, why are you doing that? I thought you said war was bad? Why don't you just let us shoot at you but not shoot back?" - Japan, circa 1942-45



There is a solution to gerrymandering, much like there is a solution to war. The solution is a peace treaty. That means that not only does the USA stop shooting, but Japan also stops shooting as well, and that both sides agree to not start shooting again.

So far, Democrats have expressed a much greater willingness to end gerrymandering than Republicans have, including introducing redistricting commissions and things like that in a lot of states.

If Republicans are ready to end the gerrymandering war, then Dems and Reps should come to an agreement in which both sides agree to stop gerrymandering Congressional seats and to do something to fix the permanent gerrymander of the Senate. But until Republicans are ready for that, Democrats should fight as brutally as they possibly can. The most extreme and brutal options, including things like 26-0 New York maps and 53-0 California maps (or else whatever is closest to those as is possible), should absolutely be on the table unless and until Republicans are willing to come to the negotiating table.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

"gerrymandering is bad" - atlas dems

"make a 14-3 dem gerrymander in Illinois" - atlas dems

Don’t forget their idea to spaghetti strip NY into 23-3

24-2, although 26-0 would be better ideally.

[MAINEiac4434]

What tools do you guys use to draw maps? I could play around with this.

[Oryxslayer]

What tools do you guys use to draw maps? I could play around with this.

GIS, DRA. The usual.

[Bidenworth2020]

What tools do you guys use to draw maps? I could play around with this.

pm me if you wanna do it yourself!

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

How does a 14D - 3R map perform under a 2014 scenario?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Illinois,_2014

House popular vote: 51.42% (D) - 48.58% (R)

That was back when Republicans were competitive, and sometimes even winning in the collar counties. That time is over. Trump has pushed those areas away from the Republican party, and these areas are not the type that will go back to the Republicans even after Trump is gone. Republican are not going to ever perform this well again in Illinois anytime in the near future. There is nothing to be worried about here.

[lfromnj]

How does a 14D - 3R map perform under a 2014 scenario?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Illinois,_2014

House popular vote: 51.42% (D) - 48.58% (R)

That was back when Republicans were competitive, and sometimes even winning in the collar counties. That time is over. Trump has pushed those areas away from the Republican party, and these areas are not the type that will go back to the Republicans even after Trump is gone. Republican are not going to ever perform this well again in Illinois anytime in the near future. There is nothing to be worried about here.

I mean there can be a countertrend in downstate that kills Bustos and the other downstate district near East St louis+ the 2 colleges
Then a wave takes down one chicago land district.

[Oryxslayer]

Comparing congressional vote to a map just feels weird because congressional vote totals are the product of a different map. For example, someone tried this where examining NJ's available gerrymanders, at it was just as confusing. IF seats are drawn specifically to protect one party who suddenly becomes more disadvantaged or advantaged by a gerrymander, they gain votes. Some incumbents will be safe, and get more votes than if they were seen as competitive. Others will be less safe, and visa versa.

But I get your point - what if a Republican wave hits gerrymanders? Well, this is why I typically have a strict +7 barrier: a Two-Year measure of Party Change captures voter change, and +7 is typically high enough to escape a wave. It is why in most my maps I prefer to leave 1 competitive and 3 safe seats, to 4 wave-dangerous seats - the former ensures the worst can never happens and traps opposition to a few battlegrounds.

[Tartarus Sauce]

MA has pending legislation to get an independent commission. If that happens I think atleast 3 or 4 of the current delegation gets shafted by either double bunking (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Trajan?) or being drawn into more competitive districts (McGovern, Keating)

I think the commision might take into account incumbents like NJ does.

That might be difficult since 4 of them are in core Boston (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Clark). And the wording says that lines should respect municipal boundaries, and not be drawn to dilute voters of certain parties or race. So the 2 I most likely see are MA-2 becoming primarily a Central MA swing seat by taking Amherst/Northampton out and MA-9 becoming a south shore swing district taking New Bedford and Fall River out and adding The parts of Plymouth/E Norfolk that are in 8

Making a swing seat out of central Massachusetts is a stretch unless it was specifically designed to be a swing district, and the Democratic legislature has no incentive to do so. You have to draw the lines in a very deliberate manner to get a true swing district out of central Mass.

A swing district in the southeast is probably the best that Republicans could hope for.

[Strudelcutie4427]

MA has pending legislation to get an independent commission. If that happens I think atleast 3 or 4 of the current delegation gets shafted by either double bunking (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Trajan?) or being drawn into more competitive districts (McGovern, Keating)

I think the commision might take into account incumbents like NJ does.

That might be difficult since 4 of them are in core Boston (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Clark). And the wording says that lines should respect municipal boundaries, and not be drawn to dilute voters of certain parties or race. So the 2 I most likely see are MA-2 becoming primarily a Central MA swing seat by taking Amherst/Northampton out and MA-9 becoming a south shore swing district taking New Bedford and Fall River out and adding The parts of Plymouth/E Norfolk that are in 8

Making a swing seat out of central Massachusetts is a stretch unless it was specifically designed to be a swing district, and the Democratic legislature has no incentive to do so. You have to draw the lines in a very deliberate manner to get a true swing district out of central Mass.

A swing district in the southeast is probably the best that Republicans could hope for.

 "Proportional Representation"


1. D+18 (Springfield, Amherst) NEAL
2. R+1 (Fitchburg, Ludlow) OPEN SEAT
3. D+15 (Worcester, Waltham) MCGOVERN
4. D+19 (Quincy, Newton) KENNEDY
5. D+13 (Malden, Lynn) MOULTON vs CLARK
6. D+7 (Lowell, Lawrence) TRAHAN
7. D+34 (Boston, Cambridge) PRESLEY vs LYNCH (Lynch retires or runs for Senate)
8. EVEN (Weymouth, Taunton) OPEN SEAT
9. D+6 (New Bedford, Plymouth) KEATING

"PRIORITIZE COMPETITION"


1. Springfield, Amherst (D+18) NEAL
2. Worcester, Gardner (D+2) MCGOVERN (way too liberal for this MA-2)
3. Lowell, Fitchburg (D+3) TRAHAN
4. Quincy, Newton (D+19) KENNEDY
5. Framingham, Waltham (D+17) CLARK
6. Lawrence, Lynn (D+10) MOULTON
7. Boston, Cambridge (D+34) PRESLEY vs LYNCH (again, Lynch probably retires or runs for Senate)
8. Fall River, New Bedford (D+4) OPEN
9. Weymouth, Plymouth (D+2) KEATING

Districts 2, 3, 8, and 9 could be highly competitive seats

[Tartarus Sauce]

MA has pending legislation to get an independent commission. If that happens I think atleast 3 or 4 of the current delegation gets shafted by either double bunking (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Trajan?) or being drawn into more competitive districts (McGovern, Keating)

I think the commision might take into account incumbents like NJ does.

That might be difficult since 4 of them are in core Boston (Kennedy, Lynch, Presley, Clark). And the wording says that lines should respect municipal boundaries, and not be drawn to dilute voters of certain parties or race. So the 2 I most likely see are MA-2 becoming primarily a Central MA swing seat by taking Amherst/Northampton out and MA-9 becoming a south shore swing district taking New Bedford and Fall River out and adding The parts of Plymouth/E Norfolk that are in 8

Making a swing seat out of central Massachusetts is a stretch unless it was specifically designed to be a swing district, and the Democratic legislature has no incentive to do so. You have to draw the lines in a very deliberate manner to get a true swing district out of central Mass.

A swing district in the southeast is probably the best that Republicans could hope for.

 "Proportional Representation"


1. D+18 (Springfield, Amherst) NEAL
2. R+1 (Fitchburg, Ludlow) OPEN SEAT
3. D+15 (Worcester, Waltham) MCGOVERN
4. D+19 (Quincy, Newton) KENNEDY
5. D+13 (Malden, Lynn) MOULTON vs CLARK
6. D+7 (Lowell, Lawrence) TRAHAN
7. D+34 (Boston, Cambridge) PRESLEY vs LYNCH (Lynch retires or runs for Senate)
8. EVEN (Weymouth, Taunton) OPEN SEAT
9. D+6 (New Bedford, Plymouth) KEATING

"PRIORITIZE COMPETITION"


1. Springfield, Amherst (D+18) NEAL
2. Worcester, Gardner (D+2) MCGOVERN (way too liberal for this MA-2)
3. Lowell, Fitchburg (D+3) TRAHAN
4. Quincy, Newton (D+19) KENNEDY
5. Framingham, Waltham (D+17) CLARK
6. Lawrence, Lynn (D+10) MOULTON
7. Boston, Cambridge (D+34) PRESLEY vs LYNCH (again, Lynch probably retires or runs for Senate)
8. Fall River, New Bedford (D+4) OPEN
9. Weymouth, Plymouth (D+2) KEATING

Districts 2, 3, 8, and 9 could be highly competitive seats

Like I said, you have to deliberately draw the maps with maximizing competition in mind. Getting 4 competitive seats for Republicans is a pipe dream in reality.

[Zaybay]

I dont get why you guys think that will even be passed into law for MA. Its rather bare-bones to begin with, and it hasnt even been debated on.

And, as other posters have mentioned, you would have to purposely draw a map based on only PVI and forgo every other criteria, like geography, and would have to draw a bunch of D voter sinks to make it possible.

If the commission is passed, a large if and probably not going to happen, then you would likely see one competitive seat, Keating's.

[Oryxslayer]

Anyway here's a few maps I messed around with:



5-1 R AL that cuts AL03



A Fair MN map that keeps all PVIs from 2010 intact: MN02 R+1, MN03 D+2, MN07 R+3



A slightly more D Biased MN map, but still fair: MN02 D+1, MN03 D+3.5, MN07 R+3



A Dem Gerry which is only one state senate seat away...  MN02 D+3.5, MN03 D+4, MN07 D+3

All MN maps try to avoid cutting localities - the only one cut by the Gerry is Bloomington for example.

[lfromnj]

Anyway here's a few maps I messed around with:



5-1 R AL that cuts AL03



A Fair MN map that keeps all PVIs from 2010 intact: MN02 R+1, MN03 D+2, MN07 R+3



A slightly more D Biased MN map, but still fair: MN02 D+1, MN03 D+3.5, MN07 R+3



A Dem Gerry which is only one state senate seat away...  MN02 D+3.5, MN03 D+4, MN07 D+3

All MN maps try to avoid cutting localities - the only one cut by the Gerry is Bloomington for example.

Is purple or yellow ilhan omar. If its purple I'm disappointed that u aren't giving the Racist hicks ilhan omar

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

Yarmuth is pretty liberal, and if the KY GOP draws the maps well, they can probably get him in a D+2 seat (depending on population growth). He might be able to lose that.