|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 23, 2020, 05:22:42 PM
News:

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
  US House Redistricting: General (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: General  (Read 112788 times)
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« on: June 30, 2017, 07:58:22 PM »

I was under the impression that if Democrats have total control of redistricting in 2020, they were going to cut one of IL- 12 and IL -13 and take the most Democratic parts of the two districts and make one slight D favored district in the South, No?
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2017, 07:43:35 AM »

Some very important news I saw on Twitter from Realistic Idealist:
Apparently 2012 AND 2016 presidential election data will be making their way on to DRA shortly!



Guess I posted in the wrong area... can confirm this is happening.

Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2019, 08:06:18 AM »

Also, considering how Redistricting is done in Oregon, the state Dems would be fools to not draw 5-1. The only reason they may not is if there are not enough Dem votes left for DeFazio and Schrader and a second Republican pack gets drawn using the Red precincts from the Williamette valley. Look to Bend to get involved in the seats to the west of the Cascades as a starter.

Also, this goes for everything in DRA - treat 2008 numbers with a grain of salt. They are hopelessly outdated and fail to reflect the current coalitions. The simplest way to get better data, without learning GIS, is to open two windows simultaneously and draw your districts from the 2016 map in a 2010 map which has PVI numbers.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2019, 03:26:00 PM »

Any chance of something like this passing in Oregon in 2021?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b3a39d40-0280-41b6-bbd4-a3f1c423d267



Obviously the numbers aren't going to be precise, but the general idea is putting Salem and Eugene in one district.   The numbers actually work pretty well for the most part,  Washington and Yamhill are almost exactly one district with 2018 numbers.

Multnomah County
811880
Clackamas County
416075
Clatsop County
39764
Columbia County
52377
Tillamook County
26787
Total
1346883
Districts
1.928382593
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Washington County
597695
Yamhill County
107002
Total
704697
Districts
1.008940961
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Eugene (City)
171,245
Salem (City)
173,442
Benton County
92101
Lincoln County
49388
Polk County
85234
Total
571,410
Districts
0.818108995

I think the northwest rural counties are a bit ugly, but not terrible.  
This map underestimates Portland's population growth and needlessly chops up communities of interest (Multnomah and Clackamas Counties, as well as the Northwest Coast should be attached to Washington County; Marion should be left intact, and looping East Salem, Corvallis, and the City of Eugene into one district is disengenuous. Also, this is clearly a 4D-2R map, when a 5D-1R map can easily and fairly be drawn while taking into account simpler county combos (Clackamas and Marion being an obvious one) just like this:


Isn't the purple district a little questionable for Democrats?
It's D+6 or so.

When I drew the purple district in DRA, I got R+2 12/16 CPVI. Like I said DON"T USE OBAMA 08 NUMBERS! HORRIBLY OUTDATED! Obama+6 in '08 isn't even that strong of a result.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2019, 05:01:36 PM »

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,915


« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2019, 07:33:22 PM »

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.

That's a good point, and they might very well make a deal on an NJ 2011/CA 2001 style incumbent protection map in the House (and this group also might block CVAP redistricting for fear of driving Dem turnout through the roof in the 2022 midterm. 

The interesting part is the state legislature.  Any deadlock, whether because of a Dem lower house or because the GOP can't agree on a map in either chamber, sends redistricting to a backup commission of the Speaker of the TX House, the Land Commissioner, the Comptroller, the AG, and the LG with majority rule to adopt a map.  So this commission is guaranteed to be at least 4R/1D, but 4 of them are  facing statewide reelection in just 2 years in what could be a worse than 2018 environment in TX if Trump has been reelected.  They will have a strong incentive to be less explicitly partisan in drawing districts than the state legislature was in 2011.

I don't think a serious R gerrymander is getting through lower house even if Republicans retain a narrow majority there.  There will be a group that wants to go for broke and thinks they can get back to 2/3rds, and there will be a group that wants to make a deal with enough Dems to override an Abbott veto and look bipartisan for the statewide voters and for the state courts that may flip by mid-decade.  IDK who wins.  Worth noting the Republican speaker was elected with some Dem support and some Tea Party R opposition.

In the state senate, a hard R gerrymander is much easier as 1. the districts are yuge, bigger than US House seats, and 2. the state constitutional restrictions don't apply there.     

Agree with you on the state senate. Hell, if dems take the lower state house, then things may get even weirder, with situations like Dems trading away their voice on congressional and senate maps for unilateral action to gerry up the state house, similar to what VA dems did in 2010 in regards to the state senate. TX has a lot of potential map outcomes, depending on how the state votes in 2020 and who is elected to each of the three chambers.

But I seriously think people undervalue the 'one off' or ignorant contingency of the TX GOP right now. Like how the party drove a minority local Tarrant legislator out of the party, and how some  people are pushing for a primary of pro-Choice Sarah Davis, despite the fact that she's the only reason why her state house seat is still red.
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 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.