Likely next US districts after 2020 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 14, 2024, 08:58:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Likely next US districts after 2020 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Likely next US districts after 2020  (Read 9266 times)
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,579
United States


« on: December 06, 2016, 11:55:41 AM »


Yes.  At some point, Dems just need to accept reality and take their strategy where the people are.

This year was a good start.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,579
United States


« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2016, 12:50:44 PM »


Yes.  At some point, Dems just need to accept reality and take their strategy where the people are.

To be clear, I don't necessarily have anything against Texas in particular--I've never been there; I have no strong opinion on it--I just think it's ridiculous and unsustainable that any one state should keep growing and growing and growing and growing like this.

Not as crazy as the growth California had in the 20th Century:

1900 Census: 8
1910 Census: 11 (+3)
1920 Census: 11
1930 Census: 22 (+11)
1940 Census: 25 (+3)
1950 Census: 32 (+7)
1960 Census: 40 (+8)
1970 Census: 45 (+5)
1980 Census: 47 (+2)
1990 Census: 54 (+7)
2000 Census: 55 (+1)
2010 Census: 55
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,579
United States


« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2016, 01:42:35 PM »

How is Illinois in danger of losing a Dem seat?

The populations of the non-Chicagoland districts are just barely 700k (three of them are sub-700k) while the districts in the Chicago area all fall into the range of 720k or even 730k.  

Even more if Rauner loses re-election the Dems are pretty much assured full control of redistricting, and the proportional representation mandate going through the courts wouldn't really have any affect since the Chicago districts are all still such massive vote sinks for Dems.

Also I really have a hard time seeing the NC GOP drawing an 11-3 map after the lawsuit that went through earlier this year.  

As I mentioned above, it would be very easy to eliminate a downstate GOP district and then put all of the most Dem areas of downstate into one district designed to elect a Dem.  Additionally, Dems could shore up the 10th by swapping out some more Cook precincts with the 9th and 5th.

Exactly, eliminate IL-12 and combine it's best Democratic parts with the best Democratic parts of IL-13. You can construct a District that goes from Carbondale, up to via the Mississippi River to Belleville/East St. Louis, then up on I-55 to Edwardsville, follow I-55 to Springfield, then take I-72 though Decatur to Champlain, and then finally go up I-74 to Bloomington.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,579
United States


« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2016, 09:38:34 AM »

Also I really have a hard time seeing the NC GOP drawing an 11-3 map after the lawsuit that went through earlier this year.  
They drew the 10-3 map in response to the lawsuit.

BTW, the SCOTUS heard the appeal of the NC case.

It was great fun to read the argument about whether NC-12 was a racial gerrymander or a political gerrymander, since the snake version doesn't exist any more, and the Democrats were arguing that the bad Republicans were packing blacks from Greensboro.

I have a hard time seeing how they could draw a completely safe 11-3 map that wouldn't run foul with the courts. To me it wit would make sense to draw 4 Dem packs in order to make the other 10 seats safe.
Logged
Gass3268
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,579
United States


« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2016, 12:17:48 PM »

How about NC and VA?  Is 11R/3D viable in NC, or will the legislature have to concede the new seat?  I would presume 8R/3D is no longer viable in VA with what is happening in Richmond and outer NOVA.  If it meets court standards, Republicans would probably want to draw the second black opportunity seat from Richmond to Woodbridge along I-95 to shore up VA-10 and VA-07.

The Virginia map is 7-4 currently,  I really don't think even that is very sustainable going into 2020 with the way VA-10 is going (and Loudon County's growth and trend).   The most likely map will be 6R-5D IMO.   The three NOVA districts will get sucked more into the NOVA area and lose their Republican exurbs.   VA-1 might possibly move Dem a little, but not enough to really matter.

Once district results in NC are available we'll know more about that state.

Also, it looks like VA results by state senate district were just released.  Counting only Election Day ballots, Clinton has won 22 of the 40 districts, and by at least 6% in 21 of them.  Trump is barely up by <500 votes in SD-07 in the Norfolk area.  Given that absentee ballots are uniformly more D than countywide results in VA, it's quite likely Clinton won 23 districts.  She won the seat Dems would need to tie the chamber by 13%.  If VA Dems flip 2 seats and get to 21 in 2019, they are assured of a say in the next congressional redistricting.  If they flip one seat to tie the chamber and hold the LG office, they would also be assured of a say in the next redistricting.

Nice, a fair state senate map probably locks in a Democratic majority. Fingers crossed...
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 12 queries.