Redistricting 2020, doomed incumbents

[Sol]

-MD: I'm surprised no one's mentioned Maryland as a possibility as I think Democrats could go for an 8-0 map. Hogan may be the governor, but Democrats far exceed the 3/5 supermajority necessary to override if necessary. The map is unnecessarily hideous in part because Dutch Ruppersberger wants two distant military installations in his district. I'm not sure why MD-03 is such a monstrosity. The balance between partisan allegiance and parochial interests will probably determine the fate of MD-01 (i.e. Andy Harris).

MD is one of the few states that I already have an individual thread going on, so you can check that out. The short answer though is that it feels like 7-1 is going to stay, but now feature 3 AA seats instead of 2.

Couldn’t they just shift territory between MD-04 and MD-05 to make the latter black majority?

Rumor has it Steny Hoyer doesn't want a Black-majority district.

[Sol]

In 2010 Hoyer IIRC also insisted on having College Park in his district--which if he continues to fuss in 2020 would make the 3rd black district v. ugly.

[Sol]

Minnesota seems like the kind of state where Democrats might go for a light-to-medium gerrymander, like Indiana or Wisconsin last time. In practice that probably means the 7th gets cut up between the 6th and 8th and everybody else gets shored up.

That probably means a great northern district--if Peterson holds on he'd have better odds with Duluth and the Iron Range. It'd probably still be likely R but probably more favorable than either district is currently.

Of course, this is all assuming that Minnesota loses a seat...

[Sol]

Minnesota seems like the kind of state where Democrats might go for a light-to-medium gerrymander, like Indiana or Wisconsin last time. In practice that probably means the 7th gets cut up between the 6th and 8th and everybody else gets shored up.

That probably means a great northern district--if Peterson holds on he'd have better odds with Duluth and the Iron Range. It'd probably still be likely R but probably more favorable than either district is currently.

Of course, this is all assuming that Minnesota loses a seat...

realistically, they'll draw something like this.  It's not the best dems could do, but without cracking the twin cities or drawing weird districts, this is a pretty solid 4-3 map.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/bf2b2217-b59d-49e3-9cb7-a0ff2c1a28ed

Yeah, a map like that would make a lot of sense. You could probably help democrats by dropping Carver and Scott counties and picking up Rochester instead if Democrats are willing to concede the 1st.

Playing around with a version of your map on 2016 population; not done yet but so far some of these districts look like they have some population imbalances which will need correcting--which makes sense since Minneapolis is growing even as the state is losing a district.