How Democrats Fooled California’s Redistricting Commission

[BigSkyBob]

From what I can tell the GOP was particularly weak at recognizing underlying bias in some neutral mathematical models. In AZ the GOP assumed that the blame was solely on the partisan chair, but even a neutral chair would have had a hard time overcoming the state competitiveness directive given the bias in the chosen elections.

In CA my sense was that the lack of understanding by the GOP of the impact of socioeconomic grouping as a preferred community of interest. The underlying math here works against the GOP as much as a maximally square grid with minimum area districts works against the Dems.

In Arizona, the game was over the minute the Democratic mapping firm was picked. Inevitably, there were in a position to equate "strongly leans Democratic" with "competitive." That is why Mathis went to great lengths to intimidate/bribe the Republican commissioners into going along with a unanimous vote to select the Democratic firm. She wanted the inevitable Democratic gerrymander to have a veneer of "bipartisanship."

[BigSkyBob]

It doesn't really matter too much. Dems are still vulnerable to losing seats in a wave election under the new lines.

There's no evidence that there will ever be such an election.

Real unemployment above 15%, a fifteen trillion dollar deficit, a war going on longer than any in American history, Solyndra, and the list continues.

[BigSkyBob]

Well, surprise, surprise, the article that I linked is being used by the Pubs to call for the CD map to be tanked. Is there really any chance of that happening? Er, no. The Pubs are calling for investigations and the like. Hey Pubs, your dropping the ball, and the commissioners being duped by clever Dems, is not a grounds to have the map tanked. It would be like having a verdict in a civil case reversed because you lost on the grounds that you had a suck lawyer represent you. That dog won't hunt. Get over it! You deserve what you got. Geez!

The legal analogy would be if one of the parties had been shown to have contacted the judge through an undisclosed intermediary. Democratic front groups may be one thing. Individual Congressmen having undisclosed groups is another.

[BigSkyBob]

The districts honestly look much better now than during the bi-partisan-mander monstrosity. Personally I see this just as liberal grass-roots organizations doing a better job of working the system, which is entirely fine and is one of the purposes of the public hearings (to give a voice to the various interests groups).

Members of Congress can't properly be labeled "grassroots."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If she claims to be a resident of "San Gabriel Valley" it matters that she in fact lives in government central.