Ohio redistricting thread

[Former President tack50]

As per usual, decided to try to make a fair map and compact map with 2018 numbers. Here it is:



https://davesredistricting.org/join/327146eb-0778-408e-824f-4be3bc9dab31

And the statistics for the districts (using PVI and 2012-2016 composite numbers):

OH-01: 55D-45R; D+3;
OH-02: 78D-22R; D+27; 47% black, 44% white
OH-03: 55D-45R; D+3
OH-04: 65D-35R; D+14
OH-05: 51D-49R; EVEN
OH-06: 34D-66R; R+18
OH-07: 46D-54R; R+6
OH-08: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-09: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-10: 51D-49R; R+1
OH-11: 54D-46R; D+2
OH-12: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-13: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-14: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-15: 31D-69R; R+21

So in total, this map should have a lot of competitive or potentially competitive districts. In an R wave the GOP could get up to 2-13 in fact! (although 4-11 is way more likely). Similarly in a D wave Democrats can probably get up to 10-5.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

As per usual, decided to try to make a fair map and compact map with 2018 numbers. Here it is:



https://davesredistricting.org/join/327146eb-0778-408e-824f-4be3bc9dab31

And the statistics for the districts (using PVI and 2012-2016 composite numbers):

OH-01: 55D-45R; D+3;
OH-02: 78D-22R; D+27; 47% black, 44% white
OH-03: 55D-45R; D+3
OH-04: 65D-35R; D+14
OH-05: 51D-49R; EVEN
OH-06: 34D-66R; R+18
OH-07: 46D-54R; R+6
OH-08: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-09: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-10: 51D-49R; R+1
OH-11: 54D-46R; D+2
OH-12: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-13: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-14: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-15: 31D-69R; R+21

So in total, this map should have a lot of competitive or potentially competitive districts. In an R wave the GOP could get up to 2-13 in fact! (although 4-11 is way more likely). Similarly in a D wave Democrats can probably get up to 10-5.

In a perfectly neutral year how many seats would the Ds win?

[Former President tack50]

As per usual, decided to try to make a fair map and compact map with 2018 numbers. Here it is:



https://davesredistricting.org/join/327146eb-0778-408e-824f-4be3bc9dab31

And the statistics for the districts (using PVI and 2012-2016 composite numbers):

OH-01: 55D-45R; D+3;
OH-02: 78D-22R; D+27; 47% black, 44% white
OH-03: 55D-45R; D+3
OH-04: 65D-35R; D+14
OH-05: 51D-49R; EVEN
OH-06: 34D-66R; R+18
OH-07: 46D-54R; R+6
OH-08: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-09: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-10: 51D-49R; R+1
OH-11: 54D-46R; D+2
OH-12: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-13: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-14: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-15: 31D-69R; R+21

So in total, this map should have a lot of competitive or potentially competitive districts. In an R wave the GOP could get up to 2-13 in fact! (although 4-11 is way more likely). Similarly in a D wave Democrats can probably get up to 10-5.

In a perfectly neutral year how many seats would the Ds win?

It would depend on a lot of factors like trends, incumbency and what not.

Still, for a perfectly neutral year in 2022 I think Dems should win the 2 safe seats (2 and 4); the 2 borderline safe seats (1 and 3), the likely seat (11) and the tossup 5th district; for a total of 6 Dem districts on a purely neutral year. The 10th I think would go GOP by an incredibly narrow margin but still goes R by like 0.1 or something. It would be a true pure tossup.

So basically in a neutral year it should be 6D-9R on average; but 5D-10R and 7D-8R are both perfectly doable.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

As per usual, decided to try to make a fair map and compact map with 2018 numbers. Here it is:



https://davesredistricting.org/join/327146eb-0778-408e-824f-4be3bc9dab31

And the statistics for the districts (using PVI and 2012-2016 composite numbers):

OH-01: 55D-45R; D+3;
OH-02: 78D-22R; D+27; 47% black, 44% white
OH-03: 55D-45R; D+3
OH-04: 65D-35R; D+14
OH-05: 51D-49R; EVEN
OH-06: 34D-66R; R+18
OH-07: 46D-54R; R+6
OH-08: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-09: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-10: 51D-49R; R+1
OH-11: 54D-46R; D+2
OH-12: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-13: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-14: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-15: 31D-69R; R+21

So in total, this map should have a lot of competitive or potentially competitive districts. In an R wave the GOP could get up to 2-13 in fact! (although 4-11 is way more likely). Similarly in a D wave Democrats can probably get up to 10-5.

In a perfectly neutral year how many seats would the Ds win?

It would depend on a lot of factors like trends, incumbency and what not.

Still, for a perfectly neutral year in 2022 I think Dems should win the 2 safe seats (2 and 4); the 2 borderline safe seats (1 and 3), the likely seat (11) and the tossup 5th district; for a total of 6 Dem districts on a purely neutral year. The 10th I think would go GOP by an incredibly narrow margin but still goes R by like 0.1 or something. It would be a true pure tossup.

So basically in a neutral year it should be 6D-9R on average; but 5D-10R and 7D-8R are both perfectly doable.

sounds like a very fair map then. Ohio is GOP leaning after all.

[lfromnj]

As per usual, decided to try to make a fair map and compact map with 2018 numbers. Here it is:



https://davesredistricting.org/join/327146eb-0778-408e-824f-4be3bc9dab31

And the statistics for the districts (using PVI and 2012-2016 composite numbers):

OH-01: 55D-45R; D+3;
OH-02: 78D-22R; D+27; 47% black, 44% white
OH-03: 55D-45R; D+3
OH-04: 65D-35R; D+14
OH-05: 51D-49R; EVEN
OH-06: 34D-66R; R+18
OH-07: 46D-54R; R+6
OH-08: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-09: 48D-52R; R+4
OH-10: 51D-49R; R+1
OH-11: 54D-46R; D+2
OH-12: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-13: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-14: 37D-63R; R+15
OH-15: 31D-69R; R+21

So in total, this map should have a lot of competitive or potentially competitive districts. In an R wave the GOP could get up to 2-13 in fact! (although 4-11 is way more likely). Similarly in a D wave Democrats can probably get up to 10-5.

In a perfectly neutral year how many seats would the Ds win?

It would depend on a lot of factors like trends, incumbency and what not.

Still, for a perfectly neutral year in 2022 I think Dems should win the 2 safe seats (2 and 4); the 2 borderline safe seats (1 and 3), the likely seat (11) and the tossup 5th district; for a total of 6 Dem districts on a purely neutral year. The 10th I think would go GOP by an incredibly narrow margin but still goes R by like 0.1 or something. It would be a true pure tossup.

So basically in a neutral year it should be 6D-9R on average; but 5D-10R and 7D-8R are both perfectly doable.

Again the 3rd isn't really safe and the 11th actually voted for Trump, the tossup 5th is actually more Safe than the 3rd or the 11th. Also the 5th seat should include all of northern Franklin including Dublin, Dublin would make the district a decent bit more R(its composite R is 55 R to D but Clinton actually won Dublin by 2 points!)

[Badger]

Reminder that OH redistricting reform forbids cutting counties more than once unless they are the largest five - in which case they can be cut twice. You are also required to base a district out of those cities large enough to dominate said district (Columbus and Cleveland) and any county between 95% and 105% of a district needs to have a seat based in it (Cincinnati). I also think there are restrictions/bans on parallel cuts (two districts cutting two same counties), but the text is ambiguous in regards to them. There is also minor provisions regarding large locales and how they can't be cut if they are of a significant size, and how one should make an effort to keep them with their surroundings.

The reform is rather strict in it's guidelines, but is lax as far as the gerrymanders observe said guidelines.

That rule, along with the exception to splitting cities applying to only Cleveland and Cincinnati, sounds to me like some real packing and cracking garbage, with emphasis on the former.

Trust me, I know how Ohio Republicans think, and they are is every bit ruthless and shamefaced as their counterparts in North Carolina and Texas about blatant gerrymandering and thinking of any way they can get away with it to maximize their power.

I assure you that the mathematical equation prohibiting splitting cities of over 100,000 unless they're County can support multiple congressional districts is by no means coincidental, as opposed to explicitly planned when the language of this proposal was drafted.

[Nyvin]

Reminder that OH redistricting reform forbids cutting counties more than once unless they are the largest five - in which case they can be cut twice. You are also required to base a district out of those cities large enough to dominate said district (Columbus and Cleveland) and any county between 95% and 105% of a district needs to have a seat based in it (Cincinnati). I also think there are restrictions/bans on parallel cuts (two districts cutting two same counties), but the text is ambiguous in regards to them. There is also minor provisions regarding large locales and how they can't be cut if they are of a significant size, and how one should make an effort to keep them with their surroundings.

The reform is rather strict in it's guidelines, but is lax as far as the gerrymanders observe said guidelines.

That rule, along with the exception to splitting cities applying to only Cleveland and Cincinnati, sounds to me like some real packing and cracking garbage, with emphasis on the former.

Trust me, I know how Ohio Republicans think, and they are is every bit ruthless and shamefaced as their counterparts in North Carolina and Texas about blatant gerrymandering and thinking of any way they can get away with it to maximize their power.

I assure you that the mathematical equation prohibiting splitting cities of over 100,000 unless they're County can support multiple congressional districts is by no means coincidental, as opposed to explicitly planned when the language of this proposal was drafted.

Being able to pass a map with a simple majority was very much explicitly planned as well.

I'd say it's like 95% chance a 4 year map is what ends up getting passed next year, probably with only Republican votes.

[lfromnj]

Reminder that OH redistricting reform forbids cutting counties more than once unless they are the largest five - in which case they can be cut twice. You are also required to base a district out of those cities large enough to dominate said district (Columbus and Cleveland) and any county between 95% and 105% of a district needs to have a seat based in it (Cincinnati). I also think there are restrictions/bans on parallel cuts (two districts cutting two same counties), but the text is ambiguous in regards to them. There is also minor provisions regarding large locales and how they can't be cut if they are of a significant size, and how one should make an effort to keep them with their surroundings.

The reform is rather strict in it's guidelines, but is lax as far as the gerrymanders observe said guidelines.

That rule, along with the exception to splitting cities applying to only Cleveland and Cincinnati, sounds to me like some real packing and cracking garbage, with emphasis on the former.

Trust me, I know how Ohio Republicans think, and they are is every bit ruthless and shamefaced as their counterparts in North Carolina and Texas about blatant gerrymandering and thinking of any way they can get away with it to maximize their power.

I assure you that the mathematical equation prohibiting splitting cities of over 100,000 unless they're County can support multiple congressional districts is by no means coincidental, as opposed to explicitly planned when the language of this proposal was drafted.

Being able to pass a map with a simple majority was very much explicitly planned as well.

I'd say it's like 95% chance a 4 year map is what ends up getting passed next year, probably with only Republican votes.

Wouldn't it be 85-90%? . If D's flip the Ohio Supreme Court I can't see R's being as stupid as PA R's and not atleast drawing a reasonable map.

[Oryxslayer]

Everything about this 'reform' was planned. The GOP's problem is that unless they produce something 'reasonable,' the law would be sidelined in favor of true redistricting reform via a new ballot initiative. 

[I’m not Stu]

A four-year map only happens if the first three rounds to fail. Isn’t it more likely the GOP draws a slightly less favorable map than the current one for 10 years?

[lfromnj]

A four-year map only happens if the first three rounds to fail. Isn’t it more likely the GOP draws a slightly less favorable map than the current one for 10 years?

Why would a 4 year map be bad for the GOP?
I guess there is the slight risk of losing two statewide races(governor + auditor) and then the D's can gerrymander to a degree back but its unlikely and 4 year maps are also good in the sense that they now a legal excuse to do a Delaymander to fix any possible "trends" such as swing backs in the Mahoning Valley or further trends in Columbus.

[I’m not Stu]

A four-year map only happens if the first three rounds to fail. Isn’t it more likely the GOP draws a slightly less favorable map than the current one for 10 years?

Why would a 4 year map be bad for the GOP?
I guess there is the slight risk of losing two statewide races(governor + auditor) and then the D's can gerrymander to a degree back but its unlikely and 4 year maps are also good in the sense that they now a legal excuse to do a Delaymander to fix any possible "trends" such as swing backs in the Mahoning Valley or further trends in Columbus.

Is there any chance that both parties will agree in round 1, 2, or 3?

[lfromnj]

A four-year map only happens if the first three rounds to fail. Isn’t it more likely the GOP draws a slightly less favorable map than the current one for 10 years?

Why would a 4 year map be bad for the GOP?
I guess there is the slight risk of losing two statewide races(governor + auditor) and then the D's can gerrymander to a degree back but its unlikely and 4 year maps are also good in the sense that they now a legal excuse to do a Delaymander to fix any possible "trends" such as swing backs in the Mahoning Valley or further trends in Columbus.

Is there any chance that both parties will agree in round 1, 2, or 3?

Again depends on Ohio Supreme court, assuming it doesn't flip then D's should honestly just cave at 4 or 5 seats and not be stupid there.

[I’m not Stu]

I think Democrats get 5 or 6 out of the 15 seats. Chabot’s Cincinnati district becomes Democratic. O’Connor might get a seat in Columbus.

[lfromnj]

I think Democrats get 5 or 6 out of the 15 seats. Chabot’s Cincinnati district becomes Democratic. O’Connor might get a seat in Columbus.

6 seats is going really far and what a fair map would result in and only happens if the Ohio GOP doesn't control the supreme court, if they do the best I would expect is one Cinci, One columbus, Cleveland VRA, Lean D toledo and Akron/Youngstown and everything else Likely/Safe R, and reminder its still legal to draw a 13-2 map
https://twitter.com/kkrz1211/status/1252801397831188483

(Krazen's account btw so mods can give a fair "warning" if im a sock

[I’m not Stu]

I think Democrats get 5 or 6 out of the 15 seats. Chabot’s Cincinnati district becomes Democratic. O’Connor might get a seat in Columbus.

6 seats is going really far and what a fair map would result in and only happens if the Ohio GOP doesn't control the supreme court, if they do the best I would expect is one Cinci, One columbus, Cleveland VRA, Lean D toledo and Akron/Youngstown and everything else Likely/Safe R, and reminder its still legal to draw a 13-2 map
https://twitter.com/kkrz1211/status/1252801397831188483

(Krazen's account btw so mods can give a fair "warning" if im a sock

Then it’s 10-5 (with a Democratic Cincinnati district).

[lfromnj]

I think Democrats get 5 or 6 out of the 15 seats. Chabot’s Cincinnati district becomes Democratic. O’Connor might get a seat in Columbus.

6 seats is going really far and what a fair map would result in and only happens if the Ohio GOP doesn't control the supreme court, if they do the best I would expect is one Cinci, One columbus, Cleveland VRA, Lean D toledo and Akron/Youngstown and everything else Likely/Safe R, and reminder its still legal to draw a 13-2 map
https://twitter.com/kkrz1211/status/1252801397831188483

(Krazen's account btw so mods can give a fair "warning" if im a sock

Then it’s 10-5 (with a Democratic Cincinnati district).

Thats if the GOP's feeling worried about voter backlash btw.

[I’m not Stu]

Cincinnati gets a Democratic district. Chabot has one of the most ridiculous districts.

[lfromnj]

Cincinnati gets a Democratic district. Chabot has one of the most ridiculous districts.

Oh its definitely a bad district, don't get me wrong its just a question of whether the GOP feels like passing a similar Ohio 1st would result in similar voter anger.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What if they did a simple chop of the county where one district is Butler+as much of Hamilton as possible and the rest is thrown in with Clermont and other counties to the east? It'd look very clean...

[lfromnj]

What if they did a simple chop of the county where one district is Butler+as much of Hamilton as possible and the rest is thrown in with Clermont and other counties to the east? It'd look very clean...

You mean as Krazen did?
Yeah its relatively clean although its hard to argue why a county in a corner of a state that makes up almost exactly one district should be split.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What if they did a simple chop of the county where one district is Butler+as much of Hamilton as possible and the rest is thrown in with Clermont and other counties to the east? It'd look very clean...

You mean as Krazen did?
Yeah its relatively clean although its hard to argue why a county in a corner of a state that makes up almost exactly one district should be split.

I was thinking more a simple mostly north-south line.

[lfromnj]

What if they did a simple chop of the county where one district is Butler+as much of Hamilton as possible and the rest is thrown in with Clermont and other counties to the east? It'd look very clean...

You mean as Krazen did?
Yeah its relatively clean although its hard to argue why a county in a corner of a state that makes up almost exactly one district should be split.

I was thinking more a simple mostly north-south line.

Might need to split Cinci which isn't legal.? Can you try making it in DRA? After finishing it also show the city lines in the map.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What if they did a simple chop of the county where one district is Butler+as much of Hamilton as possible and the rest is thrown in with Clermont and other counties to the east? It'd look very clean...

You mean as Krazen did?
Yeah its relatively clean although its hard to argue why a county in a corner of a state that makes up almost exactly one district should be split.

I was thinking more a simple mostly north-south line.

Might need to split Cinci which isn't legal.? Can you try making it in DRA?

Yeah I'm testing this out in DRA.

[lfromnj]

Heres the thing about the Cincinatii seat, It doesn't help the rest of the map at all,   Either you get one Clinton +10 district and one Trump +20 or two Trump +10ish(with some margin such as Ohio 1st)
For example keeping a similar youngstown sink would still help the GOP because it could prevent NE from going 1 D - 3R to 3 or 4 D seats.  So maybe the R's could offer the Ds Tim ryans seat and a tossup Toledo seat but Chabot is saved.