Weakling former 'president' says Dems shouldn't gerrymander

[Zaybay]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, there are two reasons isnt unpacked. One being logistical, its a bit difficult to expand the seat since the area it borders are so sparsely populated that unpacking to a significant degree would require another fajita-style district, going from El Paso to Winkler and Ward county, and possibly beyond depending on how much of El Paso you want to give TX-23. It makes it overall pretty pointless. You can get the same job done better by using hispanics from San Antonio.

The second reason is that it would imperil R interests. This is because the current tossup district of TX-23, which is 70% hispanic, would have to take in very Democratic and higher turnout latinos from El Paso, which would endanger the balance the Rs have set up of San Antonio whites being able to outvote the hispanics.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

[Battista Minola 1616]

My take is that VRA districts are also supposed to represent a Community of interest. The Fajita strips cannot be characterized as representing any community of interest in the slightest.

But the VRA districts are not supposed to be an 80% minority district surrounded by a 40% minority district. With that said, I agree that the current iteration of the strips is awful.

But when theres literally a county with 800k people in a corner why not just shove a district there. It's a perfectly natural COI. And that's what an independent commision should do.

Yes I understand. My main concern is for good-looking districts and for not having politicians draw district lines. But I also understand why Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act exists and think it is beneficial overall.
I haven't researched enough South Texas enough to have a precise idea of how I would do the districts.

[Battista Minola 1616]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, El Paso should be a bit more unpacked, but again, that would imperil R interests, as TX-23 would be the recipient of any land swap between the two. It's also reasonable to argue that the current TX-23 is already a minority seat, so Hispanics are being represented, but its rather underhanded since, again, the low turnout by the racial group means that whites have a large say in the process.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

1. Yeah but the Tom DeLay plan which had 4 fajitas was ruled invalid in 2006 because its version of TX-23 was a racial gerrymandering, and the new version had only 3 fajitas.* So I don't know. Maybe there has been enough population growth to manage 4 fajitas.


2. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Shoring up the 23rd by unpacking a bit El Paso.


*By the way, the 2004 redistricting plan had one of the fajitas starting in McAllen and ending in Austin, which is really horrible.
And the funny thing is that the DeLay plan as for awfulness was absolutely NOTHING compared to the Goddamn mess that Democrats created in Dallas and Houston in 1992.

[Zaybay]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, El Paso should be a bit more unpacked, but again, that would imperil R interests, as TX-23 would be the recipient of any land swap between the two. It's also reasonable to argue that the current TX-23 is already a minority seat, so Hispanics are being represented, but its rather underhanded since, again, the low turnout by the racial group means that whites have a large say in the process.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

1. Yeah but the Tom DeLay plan which had 4 fajitas was ruled invalid in 2006 because its version of TX-23 was a racial gerrymandering, and the new version had only 3 fajitas.* So I don't know. Maybe there has been enough population growth to manage 4 fajitas.


2. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Shoring up the 23rd by unpacking a bit El Paso.


*By the way, the 2004 redistricting plan had one of the fajitas starting in McAllen and ending in Austin, which is really horrible.
And the funny thing is that the DeLay plan as for awfulness was absolutely NOTHING compared to the Goddamn mess that Democrats created in Dallas and Houston in 1992.

Yep, at the time the DeLay plan was a pretty good example of Democrats moving Hispanics around to their advantage, but nowadays, the area has gotten so much more hispanic that a map similar to the DeLay plan would be justifiable. Just to give an idea, when the DeLay plan was created, Nueces county was 55% hispanic. In 2010, it became 62%. Today, its 65%. Its just one county, but it does go to show how southern Texas has changed.

I also added a lot more context to the TX-23 question.

[Battista Minola 1616]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, El Paso should be a bit more unpacked, but again, that would imperil R interests, as TX-23 would be the recipient of any land swap between the two. It's also reasonable to argue that the current TX-23 is already a minority seat, so Hispanics are being represented, but its rather underhanded since, again, the low turnout by the racial group means that whites have a large say in the process.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

1. Yeah but the Tom DeLay plan which had 4 fajitas was ruled invalid in 2006 because its version of TX-23 was a racial gerrymandering, and the new version had only 3 fajitas.* So I don't know. Maybe there has been enough population growth to manage 4 fajitas.


2. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Shoring up the 23rd by unpacking a bit El Paso.


*By the way, the 2004 redistricting plan had one of the fajitas starting in McAllen and ending in Austin, which is really horrible.
And the funny thing is that the DeLay plan as for awfulness was absolutely NOTHING compared to the Goddamn mess that Democrats created in Dallas and Houston in 1992.

Yep, at the time the DeLay plan was a pretty good example of Democrats moving Hispanics around to their advantage, but nowadays, the area has gotten so much more hispanic that a map similar to the DeLay plan would be justifiable. Just to give an idea, when the DeLay plan was created, Nueces county was 55% hispanic. In 2010, it became 62%. Today, its 65%. Its just one county, but it does go to show how southern Texas has changed.

I also added a lot more context to the TX-23 question.

Thank you!

2 more questions:

- Do you know why McMullen County is so Republican? (see my post above)

- Where are the most probable locations for the (likely) 3 districts that Texas will gain this year?

[lfromnj]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, El Paso should be a bit more unpacked, but again, that would imperil R interests, as TX-23 would be the recipient of any land swap between the two. It's also reasonable to argue that the current TX-23 is already a minority seat, so Hispanics are being represented, but its rather underhanded since, again, the low turnout by the racial group means that whites have a large say in the process.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

1. Yeah but the Tom DeLay plan which had 4 fajitas was ruled invalid in 2006 because its version of TX-23 was a racial gerrymandering, and the new version had only 3 fajitas.* So I don't know. Maybe there has been enough population growth to manage 4 fajitas.


2. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Shoring up the 23rd by unpacking a bit El Paso.


*By the way, the 2004 redistricting plan had one of the fajitas starting in McAllen and ending in Austin, which is really horrible.
And the funny thing is that the DeLay plan as for awfulness was absolutely NOTHING compared to the Goddamn mess that Democrats created in Dallas and Houston in 1992.

Yep, at the time the DeLay plan was a pretty good example of Democrats moving Hispanics around to their advantage, but nowadays, the area has gotten so much more hispanic that a map similar to the DeLay plan would be justifiable. Just to give an idea, when the DeLay plan was created, Nueces county was 55% hispanic. In 2010, it became 62%. Today, its 65%. Its just one county, but it does go to show how southern Texas has changed.

I also added a lot more context to the TX-23 question.

Thank you!

2 more questions:

- Do you know why McMullen County is so Republican? (see my post above)

- Where are the most probable locations for the (likely) 3 districts that Texas will gain this year?

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

[Zaybay]

But couldn't they simply draw fajita districts that are better looking? I mean, the current ones are particularly awful. Look at the 2006-2010 map!

By the way, could the fajita concept be applied to El Paso? I imagine the 16th districts is more Hispanic than needed.

To the first question, yes. You could have much cleaner fajita strips, but doing so would imperil R interests. Hispanics in the Rio Grande really should have around 4 districts, but the Rs were able to gerrymander out TX-27 and use the fact that Rio Grande hispanics dont turn out as justification. While being majority Hispanic, the electorate is extremely white and republican.

 If one were to clean up the Rio Grande, you'd likely see a design similar to the 2005-2007 map when it comes to the fajita strips, with maybe a 5th hispanic seat in the cards.

To the second question, El Paso should be a bit more unpacked, but again, that would imperil R interests, as TX-23 would be the recipient of any land swap between the two. It's also reasonable to argue that the current TX-23 is already a minority seat, so Hispanics are being represented, but its rather underhanded since, again, the low turnout by the racial group means that whites have a large say in the process.

To put it simply, the current three fajita strips are the bare minimum for the VRA, and the bare minimum benefits the Republicans.

1. Yeah but the Tom DeLay plan which had 4 fajitas was ruled invalid in 2006 because its version of TX-23 was a racial gerrymandering, and the new version had only 3 fajitas.* So I don't know. Maybe there has been enough population growth to manage 4 fajitas.


2. Yes, that's what I was thinking. Shoring up the 23rd by unpacking a bit El Paso.


*By the way, the 2004 redistricting plan had one of the fajitas starting in McAllen and ending in Austin, which is really horrible.
And the funny thing is that the DeLay plan as for awfulness was absolutely NOTHING compared to the Goddamn mess that Democrats created in Dallas and Houston in 1992.

Yep, at the time the DeLay plan was a pretty good example of Democrats moving Hispanics around to their advantage, but nowadays, the area has gotten so much more hispanic that a map similar to the DeLay plan would be justifiable. Just to give an idea, when the DeLay plan was created, Nueces county was 55% hispanic. In 2010, it became 62%. Today, its 65%. Its just one county, but it does go to show how southern Texas has changed.

I also added a lot more context to the TX-23 question.

Thank you!

2 more questions:

- Do you know why McMullen County is so Republican? (see my post above)

- Where are the most probable locations for the (likely) 3 districts that Texas will gain this year?

Ifromnj did a good job with where the districts should go from an R perspective (basically the three big metro areas, but carefully manipulated), so Ill take the 1st question.

McMullen county is a majority white county, 60%/37% white/hispanic in the last census. Combine that with the fact that the 37% hispanic population have a garbage turnout rate, and you have a very white rural Texas electorate deciding how the county will go.

It doesnt really matter in the grand scheme though, since the county has only 700 people.

[Battista Minola 1616]

Ifromnj did a good job with where the districts should go from an R perspective (basically the three big metro areas), so Ill take the 1st question.

McMullen county is a majority white county, 60%/37% white/hispanic in the last census. Combine that with the fact that the 37% hispanic population has a garbage turnout rate, and you have a very white rural Texas electorate deciding how the county will go.

It doesnt really matter in the grand scheme though, since the county has only 700 people.

Well it's that it feels as if Anglos have a 90% turnout rate or something and Latinos a 10% turnout rate, also the first group there seems to be more Republican than in Mississippi.
Then of course I know there are more voters in a single Brownsville precinct than in the entire McMullen County, but how can I say, it's very notable on a map.

[Battista Minola 1616]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

[lfromnj]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

Montgomery has a lot of votes(100k Trump margin) If need be it can shore up both and Texas Rs have never been super parochial and the GOP really wants to rescue the donors in Bellaire and West university place and the Villages. The key part to Houston 3 D seats would be either Kevin Brady being fine with it, getting state party resources to go statewide or being persuaded to retire. Its more arguable that Dallas needs 4 sinks and not Houston because the Dallas geography is so much worse for the GOP because of the fact the titanium R counties to the south are blocked by the titanium D black VRA seat in South Dallas county and Collin/Denton county can barely hold their own as of right now and can no longer shore anything up.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

Montgomery has a lot of votes(100k Trump margin) If need be it can shore up both and Texas Rs have never been super parochial and the GOP really wants to rescue the donors in Bellaire and West university place and the Villages. The key part to Houston 3 D seats would be either Kevin Brady being fine with it, getting state party resources to go statewide or being persuaded to retire. Its more arguable that Dallas needs 4 sinks and not Houston because the Dallas geography is so much worse for the GOP because of the fact the titanium R counties to the south are blocked by the titanium D black VRA seat in South Dallas county and Collin/Denton county can barely hold their own as of right now and can no longer shore anything up.

Republicans would be playing with Fire if they tried to get rid of Fletcher and not just make her a sink. There’s a solid chance Biden pushes 60% in Harris and Fort Bend counties this year, and there’s the very real potential of Trump losing Crenshaw’s, Olson’s, and McCaul’s seat’s this year. Metro Houston is getting way too big and way too blue for that to not turn into a dummymander sooner or later

Also, how do you post pictures on this website so I can share my South Texas map? Thanks.

[lfromnj]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

Montgomery has a lot of votes(100k Trump margin) If need be it can shore up both and Texas Rs have never been super parochial and the GOP really wants to rescue the donors in Bellaire and West university place and the Villages. The key part to Houston 3 D seats would be either Kevin Brady being fine with it, getting state party resources to go statewide or being persuaded to retire. Its more arguable that Dallas needs 4 sinks and not Houston because the Dallas geography is so much worse for the GOP because of the fact the titanium R counties to the south are blocked by the titanium D black VRA seat in South Dallas county and Collin/Denton county can barely hold their own as of right now and can no longer shore anything up.

Republicans would be playing with Fire if they tried to get rid of Fletcher and not just make her a sink. There’s a solid chance Biden pushes 60% in Harris and Fort Bend counties this year, and there’s the very real potential of Trump losing Crenshaw’s, Olson’s, and McCaul’s seat’s this year. Metro Houston is getting way too big and way too blue for that to not turn into a dummymander sooner or later

Also, how do you post pictures on this website so I can share my South Texas map? Thanks.

I think it could backfire with only 3.
Anyway post your map by using imgur I guess?

[Zaybay]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

Montgomery has a lot of votes(100k Trump margin) If need be it can shore up both and Texas Rs have never been super parochial and the GOP really wants to rescue the donors in Bellaire and West university place and the Villages. The key part to Houston 3 D seats would be either Kevin Brady being fine with it, getting state party resources to go statewide or being persuaded to retire. Its more arguable that Dallas needs 4 sinks and not Houston because the Dallas geography is so much worse for the GOP because of the fact the titanium R counties to the south are blocked by the titanium D black VRA seat in South Dallas county and Collin/Denton county can barely hold their own as of right now and can no longer shore anything up.

Also, how do you post pictures on this website so I can share my South Texas map? Thanks.

A trick you can use if you cant get imgur working is to post the picture in Discord, and then copy the link for the photo.

If you dont have a discord, and you cant get a picture working, then you can just post the link to DRA.

[Sol]

If its 38 it should be Dallas and Houston. There should be another new district  in either Austin/SA which the GOP will gerrymander. Allred seems relatively safe as DFW needs 3 sinks by now but Fletcher could be in a bit of trouble if Brady decides to retire as he holds the largest suburban GOP sink district in the nation.

Why? Wouldn't the Montgomery Sink be given to Dan Crenshaw to shore him up, given that he seems to be considered a GOP rising star and that O'Rourke almost won his current district in 2018?

Montgomery has a lot of votes(100k Trump margin) If need be it can shore up both and Texas Rs have never been super parochial and the GOP really wants to rescue the donors in Bellaire and West university place and the Villages. The key part to Houston 3 D seats would be either Kevin Brady being fine with it, getting state party resources to go statewide or being persuaded to retire. Its more arguable that Dallas needs 4 sinks and not Houston because the Dallas geography is so much worse for the GOP because of the fact the titanium R counties to the south are blocked by the titanium D black VRA seat in South Dallas county and Collin/Denton county can barely hold their own as of right now and can no longer shore anything up.

Also, how do you post pictures on this website so I can share my South Texas map? Thanks.

A trick you can use if you cant get imgur working is to post the picture in Discord, and then copy the link for the photo.

If you dont have a discord, and you cant get a picture working, then you can just post the link to DRA.

You can also add images to the gallery.