2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[cvparty]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

[SevenEleven]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

[Greedo punched first]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

[Coastal Elitist]

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

[Coastal Elitist]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

[SevenEleven]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

[Greedo punched first]

Is seven GOP seats fine (CA-02, CA-03, CA-18, CA-22, CA-40, CA-42, and CA-47)?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Creating that SF Asian seat isn't worth it. The Bay Area is easy. You literally just ring the bay with seven adjacent districts from San Francisco down to San Jose and back up to Hercules. Make sure the Fremont/Milpitas one is Asian VRA and you're set.

[Coastal Elitist]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

What 3 in Northern CA? You should have the Tahoe seat and the Far North CA seat. That's it.

[SevenEleven]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

The Central Valley is majority Hispanic, whites are only 34.5%.

My map has two VRA seats in the south valley, a Hispanic majority seat based in Fresno, a Hispanic majority seat based in Modesto, a white seat based in Bakersfield, and a coalition seat that is plurality white based in Stockton. This is a better representation of the Central Valley than a configuration that creates three Trump districts at the expense of minority representation.

Just because you "can" draw Republican districts, does not mean you "should" and creating districts that reflect the composition of a community is not bias, it's literally the commission's job.

You would have to gerrymander very hard to get 3 Northern CA districts or 3 Central Valley districts.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

The Central Valley is majority Hispanic, whites are only 34.5%.

My map has two VRA seats in the south valley, a Hispanic majority seat based in Fresno, a Hispanic majority seat based in Modesto, a white seat based in Bakersfield, and a coalition seat that is plurality white based in Stockton. This is a better representation of the Central Valley than a configuration that creates three Trump districts at the expense of minority representation.

Just because you "can" draw Republican districts, does not mean you "should" and creating districts that reflect the composition of a community is not bias, it's literally the commission's job.

You would have to gerrymander very hard to get 3 Northern CA districts or 3 Central Valley districts.

Yep. A fair CA map has anywhere from 5-7 GOP districts. The GOP is guaranteed a seat in Far Northern CA, a seat in the Tahoe/Sierra foothills area, a San Joaquin Valley seat, a Eastern Sierra/Victor Valley seat, and a South Riverside/North San Diego seat. Reasonable configurations could add a second San Joaquin Valley seat, and another seat in South Orange/North San Diego/South Riverside. That's it.

[SevenEleven]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

The Central Valley is majority Hispanic, whites are only 34.5%.

My map has two VRA seats in the south valley, a Hispanic majority seat based in Fresno, a Hispanic majority seat based in Modesto, a white seat based in Bakersfield, and a coalition seat that is plurality white based in Stockton. This is a better representation of the Central Valley than a configuration that creates three Trump districts at the expense of minority representation.

Just because you "can" draw Republican districts, does not mean you "should" and creating districts that reflect the composition of a community is not bias, it's literally the commission's job.

You would have to gerrymander very hard to get 3 Northern CA districts or 3 Central Valley districts.

Yep. A fair CA map has anywhere from 5-7 GOP districts. The GOP is guaranteed a seat in Far Northern CA, a seat in the Tahoe/Sierra foothills area, a San Joaquin Valley seat, a Eastern Sierra/Victor Valley seat, and a South Riverside/North San Diego seat. Reasonable configurations could add a second San Joaquin Valley seat, and another seat in South Orange/North San Diego/South Riverside. That's it.

My Victor Valley seat is paired with Antelope Valley. CA-25 voted for Hillary Clinton by 2.5 points in 2016. Using 2018 numbers, there is a 40-39 White plurality by CVAP that is likely to shift to a Hispanic plurality by the time the ongoing Census is complete.

It's still R+1 by PVI, but PVI is useless if you ask me.

My CA-45 and CA-48 are also R+5 by PVI, though, again, both are Clinton districts. CA-48 by less than 400 votes, but again, it's not biased, it's a coastal district shaped by its neighboring minority districts and county lines.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

The Central Valley is majority Hispanic, whites are only 34.5%.

My map has two VRA seats in the south valley, a Hispanic majority seat based in Fresno, a Hispanic majority seat based in Modesto, a white seat based in Bakersfield, and a coalition seat that is plurality white based in Stockton. This is a better representation of the Central Valley than a configuration that creates three Trump districts at the expense of minority representation.

Just because you "can" draw Republican districts, does not mean you "should" and creating districts that reflect the composition of a community is not bias, it's literally the commission's job.

You would have to gerrymander very hard to get 3 Northern CA districts or 3 Central Valley districts.

Yep. A fair CA map has anywhere from 5-7 GOP districts. The GOP is guaranteed a seat in Far Northern CA, a seat in the Tahoe/Sierra foothills area, a San Joaquin Valley seat, a Eastern Sierra/Victor Valley seat, and a South Riverside/North San Diego seat. Reasonable configurations could add a second San Joaquin Valley seat, and another seat in South Orange/North San Diego/South Riverside. That's it.

My Victor Valley seat is paired with Antelope Valley. CA-25 voted for Hillary Clinton by 2.5 points in 2016.

That seems weird. Desert San Bernardino+Inyo+Mono is like 80% of a district to start with, so it's natural to use it as a base.

[Greedo punched first]

Updated.

At-large:



San Francisco:



Central Valley:



Emerald Coast and Jefferson:



High Desert:



Los Angeles:



Orange:



San Diego:



Bay Area:

[Oryxslayer]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

[Greedo punched first]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

Is my CA-47 a white pack? It allows me to get more Asian access in CA-43, CA-44, and CA-46.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

Is my CA-47 a white pack? It allows me to get more Asian access in CA-43, CA-44, and CA-46.

No but it is kind of an awkward way of drawing the split, instead of just doing Lagunia Niguel+San Clemente+San Juan Capistrano+Dana Point. There's no need to carve up the Mission Viejo/Rancho Santa Margarita area like that.

[SevenEleven]

SD-OC pairing is always bad and if done, should never go further than San Clemente.

[Coastal Elitist]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

What 3 in Northern CA? You should have the Tahoe seat and the Far North CA seat. That's it.

CA-1: Del Norte, Siskiyou, Modoc, Trinity, Shasta, Lassen, Tehama, Butte, Plumas, Glenn, Colusa, Lake, Sierra, parts of Nevada
CA-3: Sutter, Yuba, Placer, rest of Nevada, Sacramento suburbs
CA-4: Sacramento suburbs, El Dorado, Amador, Calaveras, Tuolumne and Mariposa

[lfromnj]

Why wouldn't you just keep Sacramento county in exactly 2 districts?
It fits it exactly.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

SD-OC pairing is always bad and if done, should never go further than San Clemente.

Nah. It's better than OC-San Gabriel Valley or OC-Riverside which is usually the alternative. The ideal would be to do just two county splits in the area: San Diego-Riverside and Orange-Gateway Cities but I haven't worked out a good way to do that yet.

[SevenEleven]

In addition, the point of reworking the bay area is to avoid the ugly cut of Fremont...not make it worse. Also the essential West Sacramento and Truckee cuts.

The point was to eliminate the Marin-SF district, since everyone hated it, myself included. I re-did it again to not cut Fremont and I think it's better now. What about West Sacramento and Truckee?

he probably wants you to keep west sac with sac, and the lake tahoe area together

Adds additional county splits, but should be easy enough. Actually might be better so that Placer can remain whole.

I still like Marin-San Francisco. I also like the plurality-Asian seat in San Francisco.

There's no reason the 11th should be crossing the bay when you can make a district that makes up the majority of San Francisco

It's to create an Asian seat with CA-12.

Seven Eleven your map is clearly skewed towards democrats like mine is towards Republicans. For everyone I don't think that UC Irvine should be connected to Newport Beach and coastal OC.

Where is my map biased?

And where would you take population from to replace UC Irvine?

You can't take any population from the Hispanic or Asian district, and it has to come from somewhere. Splitting Irvine is the only logical approach here.

You only have four districts that lean Republican it's obviously biased.

How does that indicate bias? Republicans choose to live in Republican enclaves.

It's not that hard to get 3 in Northern CA, 3 in the Central Valley and 3 in Southern California

What 3 in Northern CA? You should have the Tahoe seat and the Far North CA seat. That's it.

CA-1: Del Norte, Siskiyou, Modoc, Trinity, Shasta, Lassen, Tehama, Butte, Plumas, Glenn, Colusa, Lake, Sierra, parts of Nevada
CA-3: Sutter, Yuba, Placer, rest of Nevada, Sacramento suburbs
CA-4: Sacramento suburbs, El Dorado, Amador, Calaveras, Tuolumne and Mariposa

Lol, this is not a natural pairing and it also means you're not getting your three Central valley districts.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Why wouldn't you just keep Sacramento county in exactly 2 districts?
It fits it exactly.

Because West Sac being part of the City of Sacramento district is more important than keeping Arden Arcade and Elk Grove together.

[SevenEleven]

SD-OC pairing is always bad and if done, should never go further than San Clemente.

Nah. It's better than OC-San Gabriel Valley or OC-Riverside which is usually the alternative. The ideal would be to do just two county splits in the area: San Diego-Riverside and Orange-Gateway Cities but I haven't worked out a good way to do that yet.

My map doesn't have OC-SGV or OC-Riverside.