MT Congressional Redistricting

[Torie]

I drew the map below which nobody else on the planet seemed to replicate. I guess that means I am uniquely perspicacious or uniquely obtuse.

The Dem court appointed 5th commission person seems intent on not being hackish and hopes not to be the tie breaking vote. If so (this person is not Mathis 2), making the western CD as competitive as possible should not be given much weight, because that is well, partisan. So I start with something that looks pretty to the eyes, and minimizes county chops, and the size of the one chop, and where it seems logical to put it. Some of the maps look butt ugly (some of the Dem ones). I would suggest the idea for the Dems is to make a case for something that looks appealing and has some good justification other than competitiveness, that makes it more desirable on neutral redistricting principles than say this map or other more Pub friendly versions.

[Torie]

I drew the map below which nobody else on the planet seemed to replicate. I guess that means I am uniquely perspicacious or uniquely obtuse.

If there's one obvious aspect of the commission maps, it's that Republicans absolutely do not want the entirety of Gallatin County (namely Bozeman) in the western district. The main intention of most of the Democratic maps seems to be to keep all of the reservations together in the eastern district. That alone makes it easier to make the western district more competitive.

This is a map I mentioned above that puts the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in the western district (along with the Flathead Reservation):

I think while I am in "love" with my map, and want to bond with it, as a narcissist, yours is a worthy suitor, and may be the way out of the box for the 5th Commissioner vote, without being boxed into the hack category, so I think that is a good platform for the Dems to hang their hat on. If the 5th vote were an ethical Pub type, rather than an ethical Dem type, I would hawk my map, which moves the ball to another PVI Pub point.

One thing that kind of amuses me, is that the political coalitions are so unstable, and so based on the  moment on cult of personalities rather than something more substantive, that "fleeing" to what hews to neutral redistricting principles, might be the best option in a host of states for both parties. But long term thinking is not what politicians, most of them, want, in either party. They live for the moment to extend their half life in the public square, or what they perceive as the lucrative off ramp. Family first.

And the saddest thing of all, is that as a business plan for those for whom acting out of conscience, and sense of duty, it is in a neighborhood adjacent to  what I characterize as "pond scum," in the food chain. It's  a fail for those few who go there, at least at the margins.

[Torie]

I drew the map below which nobody else on the planet seemed to replicate. I guess that means I am uniquely perspicacious or uniquely obtuse.

If there's one obvious aspect of the commission maps, it's that Republicans absolutely do not want the entirety of Gallatin County (namely Bozeman) in the western district. The main intention of most of the Democratic maps seems to be to keep all of the reservations together in the eastern district. That alone makes it easier to make the western district more competitive.

This is a map I mentioned above that puts the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in the western district (along with the Flathead Reservation):

I think while I am in "love" with my map, and want to bond with it, as a narcissist, yours is a worthy suitor, and may be the way out of the box for the 5th Commissioner vote, without being boxed into the hack category, so I think that is a good platform for the Dems to hang their hat on. If the 5th vote were an ethical Pub type, rather than an ethical Dem type, I would hawk my map, which moves the ball to another PVI Pub point.

One thing that kind of amuses me, is that the political coalitions are so unstable, and so based on the  moment on cult of personalities rather than something more substantive, that "fleeing" to what hews to neutral redistricting principles, might be the best option in a host of states for both parties. But long term thinking is not what politicians, most of them, want, in either party. They live for the moment to extend their half life in the public square, or what they perceive as the lucrative off ramp. Family first.

And the saddest thing of all, is that as a business plan for those for whom acting out of conscience, and sense of duty, it is in a neighborhood adjacent to  what I characterize as "pond scum," in the food chain. It's  a fail for those few who go there, at least at the margins.

Do you have any statements that the independent isn't Mattis 2.0? I am pretty sure Mattis made similar statements in the name of bipartisanship as well.

What I said the independent said is what the independent said. I will dig up the quote if you want. I believe the person somehow that she really wants to work hard to effect a compromise. The thing with Mattis is that she kept saying competitive districts were job one, when the law said it was at the bottom of the food chain. At that point I "knew" she was a disingenuous Dem bot. And a quite pathetic one. And thus the rage.

[Torie]

I drew the map below which nobody else on the planet seemed to replicate. I guess that means I am uniquely perspicacious or uniquely obtuse.

The Dem court appointed 5th commission person seems intent on not being hackish and hopes not to be the tie breaking vote. If so (this person is not Mathis 2), making the western CD as competitive as possible should not be given much weight, because that is well, partisan. So I start with something that looks pretty to the eyes, and minimizes county chops, and the size of the one chop, and where it seems logical to put it. Some of the maps look butt ugly (some of the Dem ones). I would suggest the idea for the Dems is to make a case for something that looks appealing and has some good justification other than competitiveness, that makes it more desirable on neutral redistricting principles than say this map or other more Pub friendly versions.

Wouldn't this be accomplished by proposal two?   It keeps the native american reservations together, no county splits, is relatively compact, and looks pretty good.

The only real reason I've seen not to do it is it creates a competitive district, but if that's the only reason to "not" draw it, then what they're really doing is drawing a map to favor Republicans, and that, in turn, is partisan.

That is the best line of argument for the Dems to make, and for the Pubs in reverse, i.e., to hawk their respective maps on non partisan grounds, and trash the other side's map also on non partisan grounds. Maybe if both sides' maps are about equally as good, you then go for something also good, that has a compromise on the partisan numbers. Maybe that actually happens if the 5th vote says she is in equipoise between the two maps, and will flip a coin if the two sides cannot compromise on something else. That is actually an appropriate way for her to handle it, I think, if the underlying merits of the maps are about the same.

[Torie]

Bullock only lost MT-01 by a point. I think it is definitely winnable for Democrats downballot, though probably not in 2022. Likely R for 2022.

How was MT-01 in 2016 and 2012 at the presidential level?  It has a lot of ancestral D mining areas moving right but it also has Bozeman and Missoula which are the 2 largest counties by population and pretty clearly moving left.  Ancestral R Flathead is the 3rd largest and it has basically been stable since the Bush era.

Trump 2016 won MT-01 by 12 points.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/da5dab01-a99c-40bf-9fa0-17cd2d8a212e

[Torie]

I am just so hurt that nobody congratulated me for decoding visually the split of Pondera County down to the very last census block, most of which have no people. And the more I play with other options for the map, the more I have to admire the Pubs for what they went for. It is very sophisticated. Actually, I agree that in the end this is the best possible map given the metrics I prefer, and obviously tie breaker Smith preferred. Normally the Pubs in these fights are the rubes and the dumbs, the Dems the cognescenti and the smarts, but not in MT. They assumed Smith was a Dem hack. They must have been shocked that she was not. I suspect the Pubs got very expensive legal advice as to how to play the game. The Dems assumed the game was already probably fixed, an AZ redux.

[Torie]

I am just so hurt that nobody congratulated me for decoding visually the split of Pondera County down to the very last census block, most of which have no people. And the more I play with other options for the map, the more I have to admire the Pubs for what they went for. It is very sophisticated. Actually I agreed I in the end it is the best possible map given the metrics I prefer, and obviously tie breaker Smith preferred. Normally the Pubs in these fights are the rubes and the dumbs, the Dems the cognescenti and the smarts, but not in MT. They assumed Smith was a Dem hack. They must have been shocked that she was not. I suspect the Pubs got very expensive legal advice as to how to play the game. The Dems assumed the game was already probably fixed, an AZ redux.

Didn't I post something along the lines of congrulating you in advance in case you were right? IIRC.

No, this is decoding the 500 or so folks involved as to how the micro county was chopped via block by block chopping of a given mini precinct relatively speaking. This county was chopped btw, because 1) the Blackfoot reservation also chops it, and reservation lines trump county lines, 100% of the time, and 2) as a delightful bonus, it resulted in a county chop involving the fewest people of all the other options. Honest! It was a win-win.

The rest of my post was not about my stumbling into seeming inspired genius, albeit not about the actual map, but the mind of Smith. It was about the inspired genius of Smith.

Posters here tend to assume that those who take the oath to be non partisan, more often than not do not respect that, and go hack, and do so even  when one choice is very clearly superior to another but does not favor their team.  From that I strongly dissent. These folks are not all Mathis types. Most still have a conscience.

That is my opinion. Keep hope alive.