WI redistricting (was Wisconsin GOP's obstruction of Tony Evers)

[UncleSam]

Is there any hint of Evers or the state GOP, you know, trying to govern the state together? Or do they just block each other from doing anything?

Also Wisconsin is a state where geography favors Rs quite heavily. Almost all of the D votes in the state are centered around Milwaukee and Madison. Any fair map would result in Rs getting more seats than they would based on proportional vote share. It is hard to see Dems regaining the majority in Wisconsin barring a huge wave or significant realignment.

[UncleSam]

1. The populations in that map are outside of allowable bounds in terms of differences, so the map itself is not legitimate in the first place as a point of argument.
2. To follow best practices in terms of map drawing you’re supposed to minimize county splits. That you split the same county many times doesn’t mean anything since each one is still a split - you have like five unnecessary county splits in there, and probably more that are hard to tell with the naked eye.
3. You had to baconmander both Milwaukee and Madison in order to get the map to the point where six of the districts were won by Clinton by between 2.5-7 points. I shouldn’t even need to say that that falls dangerously close to being a dummymander if the state shifts any further right - in a 2010 style year the GOP winning 8-0 is completely plausible with that map, so not really sure what you’re trying to prove with it
4. The reason county splits are used as a measure in fair map making is that they are set as the boundaries intended to allow voters to reasonably be close to the center of each area represented geographically in their district. The state lines are arbitrary as well but the point is to allow people to organize themselves into communities that can run themselves in as independent a manner as possible from the other states.
5. ‘Proportional representation’ just means that the map maker backs into the seat distribution based on how many votes they think each party will get. It’s not reliable or consistent over time and is also completely contrary to the principles laid out in the constitution establishing how districts are to be established. Districts are meant to represent the interests of the entire country and are meant to represent contiguous communities. We live in a republic not a democracy, and there is a reason for that. Whether you agree with that reason is irrelevant to the purposes of this discussion, though you’re certainly free to raise it as a point of discussion in a standalone thread.

In any case none of this overly matters. Despite what many red avatars want to believe Wisconsin is trending R pretty rapidly, and is going to become a reliable Republican state soon. Even in a wave year Dems only barely managed to take the governor race, and the reality is that the driftless area is going to keep swinging right until the state as a whole looks a lot like Iowa does currently - 6-2 most of the time for the GOP with a solid Lean R tilt, but can go D under the right circumstances.

[UncleSam]

We get it, you like your 5-3 gerrymander.
I imagine the Texas congressional map will suddenly also become morally unacceptable to you after it flips.

4. The reason county splits are used as a measure in fair map making is that they are set as the boundaries intended to allow voters to reasonably be close to the center of each area represented geographically in their district.

Orthodromic distance, how relevant today.

In what Universe is the current map a gerrymander hahaha. If you go to 538 the map it gives you for compact following county borders is virtually identical to the existing map.

If Dems win the right to draw the maps in Texas and draw one following 538s algorithm I will applaud them. The current Texas map is a gerrymander and shouldn’t be allowed.