2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania

[Unelectable Bystander]

Doesn’t this seem almost slightly right leaning? I would think Biden should carry a bit more than 50% when winning the state with a majority? Like to the victors go the spoils. Almost like an inverse of what is going to happen in Ohio

[Unelectable Bystander]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

[Unelectable Bystander]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Yes they do lol nobody (except Texas and Tennessee partisans) actually increases rural influence. Do you ever hear about a commission splitting rurals to maximize their influence or give the COI’s more of a vote? Honestly if packing and cracking poor white rural voters was forbidden by the VRA, R’s would gain DOZENS more seats. But I shouldn’t point that out, because of course the electoral college, the senate, the house, state governments, redistricting, supreme courts, lower courts, and every other institution is perpetually rigged against dems

[Unelectable Bystander]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

My view on it is that proportionality should be used to an extend that is acceptable.   Make the map equal to the point that voters can translate votes to seats at a level that is proportionate to their statewide vote share, but if that requires distorting the seats to an extent that voters can't really know what district they're in (weird tentacles or awkward splits, etc) than that's a step too far.

Proportionality is one of the best ways we have to give a map true legitimacy because it's based on simple math rather than what looks good.  It's probably why the concept has taken hold in courts and commissions around the country so strongly.

There is no inherent right to have a map that reflects your state’s partisan lean. That is the job of the senate, where all voters in the state have the same influence. The job of the house is to give an equal and non-diluted vote to all voters in the COUNTRY. Gerrymandering towards a “fair” outcome is no better than gerrymandering towards a partisan outcome. Both actively disenfranchise voters in search of a pre-determined outcome, instead of letting the voters decide who to elect

[Unelectable Bystander]

Some of you are getting way too in the weeds. A fair map is one that reflects partisanship of the state. Doesn't matter how it got there. At the end of the day a Biden 9-8 map that includes a few very competitive districts IS a fair map. If anything, you could even argue that it favors Rs a bit since even though Biden won some of those districts, they are more R by PVI

Nope. It literally does not matter whether it reflects the partisanship of the state. A fair map is one that reflect the communities of interest of the state. We have a fundamental definitional disagreement of what a fair map is.

So if you have a state that has a huge city and smaller communities, but then only 1 district for that city and then say, 3-4 districts for those smaller communities, a map that is 3-1 or 4-1 for a state that could be equal in partisanship is fair? That makes no sense.

Nope, it totally makes sense. And yep, that seems perfectly fair.

To reiterate, everybody in that state likely has different needs. That city needs a local representative who understand things like public transportation or apartment zoning. The more rural areas need someone who understands the lumber industry or river commerce. It’s not all about R vs D