Also, if domination by a jurisdiction (or an “inner city”) is a thing we have a compelling interest in avoiding, why is it ok for Minneapolis to dominate St. Paul but not for St. Paul to dominate smaller suburbs?
Because Minneapolis and St Paul have more in common than St. Paul and Cottage Grove? Idk just a thought
Clearly, the people who live there and their elected officials don’t agree. This view seems to be coming from people outside who see these large cities as an undifferentiated mass of “inner city” to quote higher up in the thread.
Funny, I never see red avatars (including you) making hay in the GA or TX redistricting threads over maps that combine hitherto unconnected parts of Metro ATL or DFW to make Democratic-leaning districts, lol
I'm aware that (historically) there hasn't been an appetite for a unified MSP district. However, that doesn't negate that there are "good map" criteria that could be used to justify such a district (maximizing minority influence would be one such criterion) or that a Minny/SP split benefits D's from a partisan perspective.
I’m not sure I understand what I’m expected to object to on the Georgia and Texas threads...The best argument against a unified MSP district I've seen in this thread is literally "it's never been done before." Maintaining existing district alignment (i.e., "minimal change") can be a good, neutral map criterion in the absence of other concerns. However, I never (for some unfathomable reason?) see red avatars in the GA thread complaining about an ATL district that combines Decatur, Druid Hills, Buckhead, Dunwoody and Johns Creek to create a majority "White liberal" district when these cities have literally never been together in a CD before. Keeping MSP and St. Paul separate has the effect of allowing the cities to dominate 2/7 (~30%) of Minnesota's congressional delegation despite being only 13% of the statewide population. 13% is almost exactly what you need for a single district in MN (1/7 = ~14.3%.) Keeping them separate produces bad results
There’s a strain in Republican thinking that says cities are bad, people who live in cities are bad and not real Americans, their votes shouldn’t count as much, it’s better if they don’t vote or can’t vote, and if they have to vote, let’s pack them in as few districts as possible to limit their power. Referring to “inner city” isn’t a dog whistle, it’s a bullhorn for this attitude, and coming off an election where once again Republicans argued that votes cast in Detroit, Philadelphia, Milwaukee, and Atlanta shouldn’t count and are probably fake and definitely not American, I’m salty towards comments which show this dismissive attitude toward cities.
Uhmmm...how can you be this dense? This is unequivocally
not a racial thing. A unified MSP district is not even 1/3 non-white (30.8%). Such a district logically results from a thought exercise that groups the
most similar places in MN together based on several non-political criteria (i.e., density, demographics, history, development, transportation, etc.) More concretely, Longfellow and Highland Park simply have a lot more in common than Longfellow and Hopkins or Highland Park and Cottage Grove do. Moreso, this approach is even more justifiable from a racial standpoint because it would combine all of the predominantly Black/Asian neighborhoods in MSP into a single district where these communities would have a better chance of representation aligned with their actual population
rather than being sidelined as politically irrelevant constituencies in White, suburb-heavy split districts. Separating the two cities is a
de facto racial crack of MSP.
FWIW, if current trends continue I expect a unified MSP district to be realized 1-2 more redistricting cycles from now. As Suburban Ds become a larger part of the DFL coalition they'll want more representation for themselves, which means uniting MSP to get three, Democratic-leaning suburban seats.
