Competitiveness

[krazen1211]

Competitive seats = Arizona where 1 party wins all the competitive seats.

The Michigan Republican party also drew many competitive seats. Only 2 of them were won by McCain. Yet there is plenty of complaining. Curious.

[krazen1211]

Competitive seats = Arizona where 1 party wins all the competitive seats.

The Michigan Republican party also drew many competitive seats. Only 2 of them were won by McCain. Yet there is plenty of complaining. Curious.

McCain utterly collapsed in Michigan in 2008, presidential numbers from that year are unrepresentative of congressional voting.

Of course, that is the entire point. It would be folly to draw districts based on some arbitrary 'competitive' metric. As we have seen, when that 'competitive' metric does not provide the outcomes desired by a political party, that political party simply discards that metric (but only when it suits them).

Another example is, of course, New Jersey, where competitive seats were drawn and 1 party won all the competitive seats.

Another example is, of course, PA-06 (R+1), PA-07 (EVEN), PA-08 (D+1) PVIs based on the 2004 and 2008 elections.  I suspect these competitive seats are not what the original poster had in mind when he talked about creating competitive seats!

[krazen1211]

The VRA is certainly needed, IMO, particularly for Latinos, who can be easily diluted by non-hispanic whites due to their low voting rates.

I agree with you that Clyburn's district kind of screws SC up.

In the case of Thornburg v Gingles, it was North Carolina white Democrats who shattered various black communities.

[krazen1211]

The VRA is certainly needed, IMO, particularly for Latinos, who can be easily diluted by non-hispanic whites due to their low voting rates.

I agree with you that Clyburn's district kind of screws SC up.

In the case of Thornburg v Gingles, it was North Carolina white Democrats who shattered various black communities.

Which is why black voters are such fans of the Republican maps, where they'll be in minority for the foreseeable future...

I am grossly confused as to what you mean by 'fans'. But, in any case, the Court in Gingles noted that White Democrats had limited blacks to 2-4% of the seats in the 1970s redistricting.  Quite a small minority.

[krazen1211]

The VRA is certainly needed, IMO, particularly for Latinos, who can be easily diluted by non-hispanic whites due to their low voting rates.

I agree with you that Clyburn's district kind of screws SC up.

In the case of Thornburg v Gingles, it was North Carolina white Democrats who shattered various black communities.

Which is why black voters are such fans of the Republican maps, where they'll be in minority for the foreseeable future...

I am grossly confused as to what you mean by 'fans'. But, in any case, the Court in Gingles noted that White Democrats had limited blacks to 2-4% of the seats in the 1970s redistricting.  Quite a small minority.

So you're not smart enough to detect sarcasm?

I guess we have something new to add to the Miles personal insult barrage.

[krazen1211]

Gerrymandering has never been a problem and shouldn't be now.

Yes, of course. Sandra Day O'connor noted that gerrymandering was self-limiting.

[krazen1211]

There are 9 EVEN PVI districts and none were drawn by Republican legislatures. Just pointing that out.

Even PVI districts as of 2011-2012 include:

NJ-02 - drawn by Republicans
PA-07 - drawn by a Republican legislature
PA-08 - this is actually D+1. drawn by a Republican legislature
WI-07 - drawn by a Republican legislature
NH-01 - drawn by a Republican legislature
OR-05 - drawn by a Republican branch of the legislature

[krazen1211]

There are 9 EVEN PVI districts and none were drawn by Republican legislatures. Just pointing that out.

Even PVI districts as of 2011-2012 include:

NJ-02 - drawn by Republicans
PA-07 - drawn by a Republican legislature
PA-08 - this is actually D+1. drawn by a Republican legislature
WI-07 - drawn by a Republican legislature
NH-01 - drawn by a Republican legislature
OR-05 - drawn by a Republican branch of the legislature

It's curious why you're ignoring the current set of PVI's that I was referring to.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe I should have specified Republican trifecta to cover OR-05, but I thought it was a compromise.

Republican legislatures that passed the required One Man One Vote redistricting in 2011 or 2012 could only use the PVI present at the time. That is the cook PVI figures I posted. At the time, the districts listed held an even or worse than even PVI for the Republican party.


Your PVIs would only be valid for states that passed redistricting subsequent to the 2012 elections.