Cube root congressional districts

[jimrtex]

This map would probably be illegal. There would probably need to be at least 2, maybe 3 African America opportunity districts.

As the challenger, you must demonstrate that you can draw compact districts with 50% BVAP.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

[Oryxslayer]

Sorry to butt in, but I am this close to dropping 20+ state maps (some of which have already been done) including CA, TX, and FL as soon as I finish the write ups.



My South Carolina map proves that you can easily have two BVAP districts, and 3 (like mine) is possible if you use the same justification that was used in VA last year. if you are drawing you districts naturally based on counties, then there needs to be two Black belt based districts, it is easy to make the two BVAP districts. It is then the map creators decision whether or not to stick Richland into one of the districts or to make it its own district.

The Richland based district in my map is only about 44% BVAP, however it is highly Dem and whites are still a VAP minority thanks to other minorities. 3 easy districts.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

So your black districts are what, 3 and 4?

Also, what are the 2008 results for those districts?

[Oryxslayer]

So your black districts are what, 3 and 4?

Also, what are the 2008 results for those districts?

Districts 1 and 5 are 50% + 1 BVAP. District 1 went 63 - 35, and 5 went 59 -40. If one wanted to make the two necessary BVAP district more packed, then the 4th would be disassembled from its current situation as a BVAP district justified under the Virginia redistricting last year. the 4th is 61 - 38 D.

[KingSweden]

I really like this MO map!

[Adam Griffin]

How much variance are we allowing for here, and are we following state requirements? If I recall correctly, Iowa requires counties to be kept together, so I tried to follow that where possible...which led to around 1% deviation in CD-1. 

I'm not entirely sure what this map would have produced in 2016: CDs 1 & 3 would likely be safe for Democratic congressional candidates; 5, 6 & 7 would all likely elect Republicans. CDs 2 & 4 are where I'm unsure - depends on how much the downballot was damaged by Clinton. I'm fairly confident Trump would have carried CDs 2, 4, 5, 6 & 7. 

[VPH]

How do yall still use DRA??

[Starpaul20]

How do yall still use DRA??

It's still possible to use DRA on Firefox, but you need to add a config option. Still works as of Firefox 54.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

How do yall still use DRA??

Internet Explorer still supports silverlight. Literally the only thing I use that browser for.

[jimrtex]

Sorry to butt in, but I am this close to dropping 20+ state maps (some of which have already been done) including CA, TX, and FL as soon as I finish the write ups.



My South Carolina map proves that you can easily have two BVAP districts, and 3 (like mine) is possible if you use the same justification that was used in VA last year. if you are drawing you districts naturally based on counties, then there needs to be two Black belt based districts, it is easy to make the two BVAP districts. It is then the map creators decision whether or not to stick Richland into one of the districts or to make it its own district.

The Richland based district in my map is only about 44% BVAP, however it is highly Dem and whites are still a VAP minority thanks to other minorities. 3 easy districts.

Can you get SC-3 and SC-5 to 50% without going into Richfield? Then you can put all of Richland in a district and not worry about whether it is a required VRA district since it will be an effective cross-over district based on neutral non-racial considerations.

You shouldn't have to split both Orangeburg and Williamsburg.

The Florence finger is suspect.

The split of Charleston is OK, given that you have to have space for two non-VRA districts along the coast. But is that true? What happens if SC-1 takes all of Beaufort and Dorchester?

Greenville should not be split. Bring the Spartanburg district south and then SC-10 over to the west.

I don't like those nibble of Lexington.

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

[Oryxslayer]

Can you get SC-3 and SC-5 to 50% without going into Richfield? Then you can put all of Richland in a district and not worry about whether it is a required VRA district since it will be an effective cross-over district based on neutral non-racial considerations.

You shouldn't have to split both Orangeburg and Williamsburg.

The Florence finger is suspect.

The split of Charleston is OK, given that you have to have space for two non-VRA districts along the coast. But is that true? What happens if SC-1 takes all of Beaufort and Dorchester?

Greenville should not be split. Bring the Spartanburg district south and then SC-10 over to the west.

I don't like those nibble of Lexington.

I took some of your criticism to heart, and here is a new map which avoids splitting Richland.



First I assume you mean SC - 01 instead of SC - 03. And yes, you can it seems put both of the belt districts out of Richland. The BVAPs are lower, closer to 50%, however the Obama % is still fine.

I shouldn't have spit Orangeburg and Williamsburg,  and the Spartanburg northern area - that was simply me focusing on one district at a time.

The bits in Lexington were the most AA parts along the district. However, killing the southern cut removed some of these nibbles and only required a small cut to reach equity.

First off, Beaufort. The population of the cubed districts is too low to actually add and whites along to coast to one of the BVAP districts and actually hope to add more blacks elsewhere. Once I get to my writeups (halfway done!) I shall explain how SC was one of the hardest maps for me. This was because the coast has exactly the right population for two districts. However, the population distribution along the coast made it almost impossible to draw the two nicely. Let me be frank, if the coast is going to be cut off from the interior by the BVAP districts, then it needs to be drawn like I have here.

Second the Florence Finger. It is ugly, disgusting, obtuse, horrible, and cuts counties and cities freely. Yet, destroying the finger removes 2% BVAP. It needs to exist if there are going to be two black belt districts + Richland. It itself therefore is a necessary evil. I hate it, yet it must on some level exist for this map. If a two BVAP district map was being made, then Florence and Darlington entirely could be subtracted from the district and Richland bits could be added.



Also, I wish you could quit posting here Dwarvan Dragon, in a kind way. I am about to drop maps yet every post you seem to make makes the maps I will post outdated...

[Strudelcutie4427]

District 1(Nashua, Derry, Seacoast): Obama won by 2 points, Trump won by just under 10,000 votes

District 2 (Merrimack Valley, Strafford, Lakes): Obama won by 6 points, Trump by about 4,200

District 3 (Connecticut Valley, North, Concord): Obama won by 20 points, Clinton by just under 17,000

RATINGS:
District 1 (Open Seat) LEAN R
District 2 (Carol Shea-Porter Dem-Rochester) TILT R
District 3 (Ann Kuster Dem-Hopkinton) SAFE D

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Can you get SC-3 and SC-5 to 50% without going into Richfield? Then you can put all of Richland in a district and not worry about whether it is a required VRA district since it will be an effective cross-over district based on neutral non-racial considerations.

You shouldn't have to split both Orangeburg and Williamsburg.

The Florence finger is suspect.

The split of Charleston is OK, given that you have to have space for two non-VRA districts along the coast. But is that true? What happens if SC-1 takes all of Beaufort and Dorchester?

Greenville should not be split. Bring the Spartanburg district south and then SC-10 over to the west.

I don't like those nibble of Lexington.

I took some of your criticism to heart, and here is a new map which avoids splitting Richland.



First I assume you mean SC - 01 instead of SC - 03. And yes, you can it seems put both of the belt districts out of Richland. The BVAPs are lower, closer to 50%, however the Obama % is still fine.

I shouldn't have spit Orangeburg and Williamsburg,  and the Spartanburg northern area - that was simply me focusing on one district at a time.

The bits in Lexington were the most AA parts along the district. However, killing the southern cut removed some of these nibbles and only required a small cut to reach equity.

First off, Beaufort. The population of the cubed districts is too low to actually add and whites along to coast to one of the BVAP districts and actually hope to add more blacks elsewhere. Once I get to my writeups (halfway done!) I shall explain how SC was one of the hardest maps for me. This was because the coast has exactly the right population for two districts. However, the population distribution along the coast made it almost impossible to draw the two nicely. Let me be frank, if the coast is going to be cut off from the interior by the BVAP districts, then it needs to be drawn like I have here.

Second the Florence Finger. It is ugly, disgusting, obtuse, horrible, and cuts counties and cities freely. Yet, destroying the finger removes 2% BVAP. It needs to exist if there are going to be two black belt districts + Richland. It itself therefore is a necessary evil. I hate it, yet it must on some level exist for this map. If a two BVAP district map was being made, then Florence and Darlington entirely could be subtracted from the district and Richland bits could be added.



Also, I wish you could quit posting here Dwarvan Dragon, in a kind way. I am about to drop maps yet every post you seem to make makes the maps I will post outdated...

I don't care if your drop includes some states that I or others did.

[Strudelcutie4427]

District 1: Eastern Shore (McCain won by 13 points) SAFE R
District 2: Harford County/SE Baltimore Co (McCain by 13) SAFE R
District 3: SW Baltimore Co/NW Baltimore City (Obama by 60) SAFE D
District 4: North half of Anne Arundel Co (McCain by 3) TOSS UP
District 5: Southern Corner/Potomac Delta (Obama by 5) TOSS UP
District 6: Eastern PG (Obama by 86!!!) SAFE D
District 7: Western Panhandle (McCain by 10) SAFE R
District 8: North Baltimore/Carroll/SE Frederick (McCain by 18) SAFE R
District 9: Eastern 3/4ths of Baltimore (Obama by 71) SAFE D
District 10: SE Montgomery (Obama by 55) SAFE D
District 11: Howard/E Montgomery (Obama by 21) SAFE D
District 12: Northern/Western Montgomery (Obama by 36) SAFE D
District 13: Western PG (Obama by 67) SAFE D

7 Democrat
4 Repubican
2 Toss ups

[KingSweden]

District 1(Nashua, Derry, Seacoast): Obama won by 2 points, Trump won by just under 10,000 votes

District 2 (Merrimack Valley, Strafford, Lakes): Obama won by 6 points, Trump by about 4,200

District 3 (Connecticut Valley, North, Concord): Obama won by 20 points, Clinton by just under 17,000

RATINGS:
District 1 (Open Seat) LEAN R
District 2 (Carol Shea-Porter Dem-Rochester) TILT R
District 3 (Ann Kuster Dem-Hopkinton) SAFE D

Is there any reason coastal NH is more conservative than the rest of the state?

Like your MD map BTW. Very clean.

[Miles]

^ Fis con transplants from Massachusetts.

[Strudelcutie4427]

District 1: Albuquerque (Obama by 36) SAFE D
District 2: Las Cruces/Roswell (McCain by 4) LIKELY R
District 3: Rural Part of the state (Obama by <1) LEAN R
District 4: NE Albuquerque/Rio Ranchos (Obama by 8 ) TOSS UP
District 5: Farmington/Santa Fe (Obama by 34) SAFE D

3 Competitive districts

[Strudelcutie4427]

District 1(Nashua, Derry, Seacoast): Obama won by 2 points, Trump won by just under 10,000 votes

District 2 (Merrimack Valley, Strafford, Lakes): Obama won by 6 points, Trump by about 4,200

District 3 (Connecticut Valley, North, Concord): Obama won by 20 points, Clinton by just under 17,000

RATINGS:
District 1 (Open Seat) LEAN R
District 2 (Carol Shea-Porter Dem-Rochester) TILT R
District 3 (Ann Kuster Dem-Hopkinton) SAFE D

Is there any reason coastal NH is more conservative than the rest of the state?

Like your MD map BTW. Very clean.

Thank you Maryland was difficult but i tried to stay within county lines for the most part. And the Mass border tends to have a lot of republicans who moved in from massachusetts for lower taxes and a cheaper cost of living. As far as i know, NH is the only state in which the more urban part is more conservative than the rural part

[VPH]

1: 70.2% McCain, 28% Obama
Most of Western Kansas and some of North Central Kansas. Generally rural, with Garden City, Dodge City, Salina, and Hutchinson serving as anchors of sorts. The most Hispanic district, at 17.5%, much of it in the Southwest portion of the district. Historically Republican and not likely to change. Safe GOP

2: 61.0% McCain, 37.1% Obama
Central Kansas through Northeast Kansas. Takes in Emporia, Manhattan (one of the few Democratic areas in this KS-2), Junction City, Leavenworth, and Atchison. The northeast portion of the district would have swung GOP in 2016. Unlikely that a Democrat could win. Safe GOP

3: 59.2% Obama, 39.1% McCain
Wyandotte County, Lawrence, Topeka, and a little bit of Johnson County. Urban in nature, taking in various demographics. Lawrence is a college town and is quite left wing. Wyandotte County is a diverse working class blend, while Topeka has the elements of a midsize city. Safe Dem

4: 54.3% McCain, 44.4% Obama
Most of Johnson County. Generally high-educated, higher-income areas. Heavily suburban and politically moderate in many areas. Historically GOP but possibly voted for Hillary in 2016. Lean GOP

5: 62.2% McCain, 35.8% Obama
Southeast and South Central Kansas, extends up to KC exurbs. Quite rural, but with a number of towns such as Newton, Coffeyville, Winfield, Arkansas City, and Pittsburg. Definitely the district that swung most to Trump in 2016. While maybe a Democrat would have had a prayer here in the 1980s and before, those chances would be long gone. Parts of it vote like Appalachia. Safe GOP

6: 54.6% McCain, 43.6% Obama
Wichita and some suburbs. Urban and suburban, quite compact. Manufacturing is big in the area, but so are associated white collar jobs such as engineering. Has a decently sized conservative base, but also some moderates and a vocal left-leaning minority. James Thompson won it in 2017, so I'll call it likely GOP

[Kamala]

I did Mississippi.



1st - Northern Mississippi, largest city is Southaven. R+24, Safe R
2nd - Southwest Mississippi, largest city is Jackson, African American opportunity district. 36% white, 61% black. D+9, Safe D
3rd - Western Mississippi, largest city is Greenville, African American opportunity district. 41% white, 56% black. D+2, Safe D (due to racial polarization)
4th - Gerrymandered to fulfill VRA requirements - largest city is Columbus, I believe. 42% white, 53% black. D+4, Safe D
5th - South central Mississippi. R+23, Safe R
6th - Gulf counties, largest cities of Gulfport and Biloxi. R+21, Safe R
7th - Inverse gerrymander of 4th district. R+23, Safe R

4 Safe - 3 Safe

[Oryxslayer]

I did Mississippi.



1st - Northern Mississippi, largest city is Southaven. R+24, Safe R
2nd - Southwest Mississippi, largest city is Jackson, African American opportunity district. 36% white, 61% black. D+9, Safe D
3rd - Western Mississippi, largest city is Greenville, African American opportunity district. 41% white, 56% black. D+2, Safe D (due to racial polarization)
4th - Gerrymandered to fulfill VRA requirements - largest city is Columbus, I believe. 42% white, 53% black. D+4, Safe D
5th - South central Mississippi. R+23, Safe R
6th - Gulf counties, largest cities of Gulfport and Biloxi. R+21, Safe R
7th - Inverse gerrymander of 4th district. R+23, Safe R

4 Safe - 3 Safe

Racial polarization should not be a justification for a D + 2 district, since turnout could easily toss it to Whites. Plus with such a slim margin Dems would probably run a white candidate to try and get some white votes to boost their margins.

Also, I was worried the thread was filling up with Right leaning maps before my dump. (Tomorrow, only CA write-up left!) Looks like I now also have to worry about excessively left leaning ones as well...

[Kamala]

I doubt a white candidate makes it past the primary.

Anyway, this change makes the second D+4 and the third D+7

[7,052,770]

Both Mississippi maps shown here have put southern Madison County and northeast Jackson in a majority black district, which would never fly.