Ohio redistricting thread
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 25, 2022, 03:51:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
  Ohio redistricting thread
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40
Author Topic: Ohio redistricting thread  (Read 34519 times)
Unelectable Bystander
Rookie
**
Posts: 62
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #875 on: January 14, 2022, 04:03:29 PM »

At least hopefully it won’t matter in 2022 and there should be some dem gerrymanders that break sooner than later
Logged
BoiseBoy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 752
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.05, S: -1.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #876 on: January 14, 2022, 04:10:18 PM »

So much for Republican gerrymandering. But Dems getting >80% of the districts in Illinois is totally fine. Makes sense.
People need to litigate there. Cope and seethe.
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,763
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #877 on: January 14, 2022, 04:13:14 PM »

So much for Republican gerrymandering. But Dems getting >80% of the districts in Illinois is totally fine. Makes sense.

Republicans are free to support the Democrats' federal legislation that would ban gerrymandering nationwide if they feel aggrieved by this.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,078
Samoa


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #878 on: January 14, 2022, 04:18:26 PM »
« Edited: January 14, 2022, 04:36:30 PM by Torie »

Below is a link to the decision. The court got the legal standard exactly right*, but then went hackish big time**. Bottom line is that, by applying inconsistent standards, in addition to Cincy, the Dems are going to get another seat in NE Ohio and the Columbus burbs, so that Badger will not have to further endure the horror of being represented by a Pub Congressperson. So instead of getting the expected one seat, the Dems are going to pick up three more for a huge win, at least absent a red wave.

https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Clerk/ecms/#/caseinfo/2021/1428

And this will all be done again in 4 years.

*If neutral redistricting criteria hewing to the specific line drawing rules give the Dems more seats than what they got, and what they got is not proportional, you have an unduly favoring problem.

**I don't think hewing to neutral redistricting criteria give the Dems another seat in NE Ohio and the Columbus burbs. Instead they get a another swing seat in NE Ohio.
Logged
Nyvin
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,495
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #879 on: January 14, 2022, 04:23:44 PM »

Reading the points on remapping in the court order, seems they're aiming for something like this?





https://davesredistricting.org/join/111853b3-1e1d-47f1-be3c-c681c9f12850
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,078
Samoa


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #880 on: January 14, 2022, 04:35:19 PM »

The map above is actually what the Dem experts are demanding that the court majority is channeling, although NE Ohio instead of two marginal seats might be one more lean Dem and one more lean Pub. Well done.
Logged
Doctor V
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,498
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #881 on: January 14, 2022, 04:36:46 PM »

Excellent decision. Glad to see state courts still willing to enforce some degree of democratic accountability, even when the SCOTUS so cravenly shirked this responsibility in  2018.
Logged
CookieDamage
cookiedamage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,742


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #882 on: January 14, 2022, 04:45:17 PM »

So much for Republican gerrymandering. But Dems getting >80% of the districts in Illinois is totally fine. Makes sense.

Yeah why didn't the Ohio Supreme Court strike down Illinois' map??
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,750


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #883 on: January 14, 2022, 04:46:14 PM »
« Edited: January 14, 2022, 04:50:20 PM by lfromnj »

So much for Republican gerrymandering. But Dems getting >80% of the districts in Illinois is totally fine. Makes sense.

Don't know whats the point of mentioning Illinois. I guess one could mention the legislative maps which are obviously illegal but the IL congressional maps are perfectly legal until you use PAs standard.

A better comparison would be Oregon however which has similar statute language to Ohio.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,509


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #884 on: January 14, 2022, 04:54:01 PM »


I mean that general geographic alignment of the districts has basically been the online and activist consensus for a while now, it's no surprise the court wants something like it. I seen the map with various alterations at the margins probably more than 20 times. Here's my third and most recent version - note that it features a barely  Trump Toledo seat rather than a barely Biden one, cause I wanted to put Erie inside the Cleveland grouping.

Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,750


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #885 on: January 14, 2022, 04:55:49 PM »


I mean that general geographic alignment of the districts has basically been the online and activist consensus for a while now, it's no surprise the court wants something like it. I seen the map with various alterations at the margins probably more than 20 times. Here's my third and most recent version - note that it features a barely  Trump Toledo seat rather than a barely Biden one, cause I wanted to put Erie inside the Cleveland grouping.


Lakewood is more dense than Cleveland itself. It clearly belongs with Cleveland. Its an old historical suburb that has also been facing declining population as long as Cleveland.. Placing the far south of Cuyahoga before Lakewood is pretty similar to what the GOP did in Cinci although not as bad.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,509


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #886 on: January 14, 2022, 05:00:16 PM »


I mean that general geographic alignment of the districts has basically been the online and activist consensus for a while now, it's no surprise the court wants something like it. I seen the map with various alterations at the margins probably more than 20 times. Here's my third and most recent version - note that it features a barely  Trump Toledo seat rather than a barely Biden one, cause I wanted to put Erie inside the Cleveland grouping.

Lakewood is more dense than Cleveland itself. It clearly belongs with Cleveland. Placing the far south of Cuyahoga before Lakewood is pretty similar to what the GOP did in Cinci although not as bad.


You can argue that stuff all you want, but since the imposed standard is now partisan fairness, sinking a community Biden won by 50 points with the Cleveland seat is no longer going to cut it when it can be used to help facilitate a new swing seat. So you now want to put GOP areas with Cleveland before Dem ones.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,682
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #887 on: January 14, 2022, 05:02:19 PM »

Reading the points on remapping in the court order, seems they're aiming for something like this?





https://davesredistricting.org/join/111853b3-1e1d-47f1-be3c-c681c9f12850

Why are Warren and Butler in separate districts?
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,750


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #888 on: January 14, 2022, 05:02:45 PM »
« Edited: January 14, 2022, 05:45:38 PM by lfromnj »


I mean that general geographic alignment of the districts has basically been the online and activist consensus for a while now, it's no surprise the court wants something like it. I seen the map with various alterations at the margins probably more than 20 times. Here's my third and most recent version - note that it features a barely  Trump Toledo seat rather than a barely Biden one, cause I wanted to put Erie inside the Cleveland grouping.

Lakewood is more dense than Cleveland itself. It clearly belongs with Cleveland. Placing the far south of Cuyahoga before Lakewood is pretty similar to what the GOP did in Cinci although not as bad.


You can argue that stuff all you want, but since the imposed standard is now partisan fairness, sinking a community Biden won by 50 points with the Cleveland seat is no longer going to cut it when it can be used to help facilitate a new swing seat. So you now want to put GOP areas with Cleveland before Dem ones.

If partisan fairness is a standard then the Dayton Springfield district is unneccesary. You made the median seat Trump +3 instead of +8 with a more logical Dayton seat based with it taking in Northern Warren/Troy.

If competiveness is a standard Akron doesn't need to take in Shaker heights.

There doesn't seem to be any standard for your map

It's not  even Lakewood is what makes it swing, you can still keep it as a Trump +2 swing district in your format by taking the more logical areas rather than obviously forcing what is effectively a neighborhood of Cleveland into the seat. If one is doing a Lorain-Cuyahoga 2 district set up then yes it would be a East-West split but you clearly had space to put Lakewood into the Cleveland district.
Logged
LimoLiberal
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,449


Political Matrix
E: -3.71, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #889 on: January 14, 2022, 05:40:01 PM »

Would something like this get Dem votes on the commission?




I tried to keep districts as close to the map that was struck down as possible while addressing the court's complaints.

OH-01: Clinton +9/Biden +14, takes in most of 2 & 8's territory in Hamilton County, loses Warren County. Chabot relocates to K street.

OH-02: Trump +41/Trump +39, loses its chunk of Hamilton County, takes in Warren, takes in Clinton from 15 as 15 contracts, loses territory to the east to compensate

OH-03: Clinton+44/Biden +47, similar to before, Franklin County portions of Columbus and the bluest suburbs

OH-04: Trump +41/Trump +43, loses Delaware County to the new 15, picks up territory from 12 in the east to compensate

OH-05: Trump +23/Trump +25, some small reshuffling of its borders with 4 & 8

OH-06: Trump +19/Trump +23, identical to before

OH-07: Trump +25/Trump +25, takes in Medina County as 13 shifts east, takes in geographically closer towns in Summit County compared to the prior configuration

OH-08: Trump +35/Trump +34, loses most of its chunk of Hamilton County and takes in bits of 4, 5, and 15's territory to compensate

OH-09: Trump +2/Trump +4, identical to before

OH-10: Trump +6/Trump +4, identical to before

OH-11: Clinton +68/Biden +65, similar to before, takes in some western shore towns, 43% Black VAP

OH-12: Trump +31/Trump +34, drops south to pick up territory from 2 & 15

OH-13: Clinton +5/Biden +7, similar to before but loses Medina County and takes in more of Summit County to address court's complaints, Anthony Gonzalez is retiring anyways.

OH-14: Trump +8/Trump +8, similar to before, some town reshuffling to accommodate 13's shift

OH-15: Trump +5/Biden +2, because Delaware and Franklin combined are 40,000 short of exactly two CDs I think the court will be skeptical of any map that has them in 3+. This new configuration pairs Delaware and Madison counties with the northern, western, and southern suburbs of Columbus as well as some of the "reddest" parts of the city.

Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,750


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #890 on: January 14, 2022, 05:42:13 PM »

Would something like this get Dem votes on the commission?




illegal, can't have that double cross in Columbus. Also one whole county in each district or entirely within 1 district so the Cuyahoga Akron district is a no go.
Logged
LimoLiberal
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,449


Political Matrix
E: -3.71, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #891 on: January 14, 2022, 05:46:42 PM »

Would something like this get Dem votes on the commission?




illegal, can't have that double cross in Columbus. Also one whole county in each district or entirely within 1 district so the Cuyahoga Akron district is a no go.

RIP I forgot about the county rules.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,682
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #892 on: January 14, 2022, 06:06:19 PM »

Would something like this get Dem votes on the commission?




I tried to keep districts as close to the map that was struck down as possible while addressing the court's complaints.

OH-01: Clinton +9/Biden +14, takes in most of 2 & 8's territory in Hamilton County, loses Warren County. Chabot relocates to K street.

OH-02: Trump +41/Trump +39, loses its chunk of Hamilton County, takes in Warren, takes in Clinton from 15 as 15 contracts, loses territory to the east to compensate

OH-03: Clinton+44/Biden +47, similar to before, Franklin County portions of Columbus and the bluest suburbs

OH-04: Trump +41/Trump +43, loses Delaware County to the new 15, picks up territory from 12 in the east to compensate

OH-05: Trump +23/Trump +25, some small reshuffling of its borders with 4 & 8

OH-06: Trump +19/Trump +23, identical to before

OH-07: Trump +25/Trump +25, takes in Medina County as 13 shifts east, takes in geographically closer towns in Summit County compared to the prior configuration

OH-08: Trump +35/Trump +34, loses most of its chunk of Hamilton County and takes in bits of 4, 5, and 15's territory to compensate

OH-09: Trump +2/Trump +4, identical to before

OH-10: Trump +6/Trump +4, identical to before

OH-11: Clinton +68/Biden +65, similar to before, takes in some western shore towns, 43% Black VAP

OH-12: Trump +31/Trump +34, drops south to pick up territory from 2 & 15

OH-13: Clinton +5/Biden +7, similar to before but loses Medina County and takes in more of Summit County to address court's complaints, Anthony Gonzalez is retiring anyways.

OH-14: Trump +8/Trump +8, similar to before, some town reshuffling to accommodate 13's shift

OH-15: Trump +5/Biden +2, because Delaware and Franklin combined are 40,000 short of exactly two CDs I think the court will be skeptical of any map that has them in 3+. This new configuration pairs Delaware and Madison counties with the northern, western, and southern suburbs of Columbus as well as some of the "reddest" parts of the city.



Once again, why are Butler and Warren in separate districts?
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,509


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #893 on: January 14, 2022, 06:10:17 PM »
« Edited: January 14, 2022, 06:15:16 PM by Oryxslayer »

Note that in the exhibits of evidence provided to the suit one can find attached images of the top place finishers of both The Fair Districts Mapping Competition and the Citizen's redistricting Commission's (an advocacy group) map.

They are all variations on the common design, so this is probably what the court is looking for. Some notable differences from the maps posted here are either to put Canton city but not the GOP environs with Summit, or to do the Summit-Portage-Geauga seat which while compact produces a swing rather than dem seat.


Every one puts Lakewood with the suburbs rather than Cleveland. 2/4 keep a CD8 similar to the present one with only Butler and with CD2 taking in both Warren and Clermont, 2/4 redraw CD8 into a compact Bulter-Warren-west Hamilton seat.
Logged
LimoLiberal
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,449


Political Matrix
E: -3.71, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #894 on: January 14, 2022, 06:13:14 PM »


I'm just going off the proposed map, which had Butler, Warren, and Clermont in three separate districts.
Logged
Nyvin
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,495
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #895 on: January 14, 2022, 06:13:37 PM »

Why are Warren and Butler in separate districts?

They're in different districts in the current map also, but it's to make the Appalachia seat.  

You can push OH-2 eastward and put the remainder of Warren into OH-8, but that kinda makes the Appalachia seat (former OH-6) unworkable.  I kinda like the Appalachia district from a COI perspective, but it's not absolutely needed.

Here's an example of that-

https://davesredistricting.org/join/111853b3-1e1d-47f1-be3c-c681c9f12850




Logged
Boobs
HCP
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,830


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #896 on: January 14, 2022, 06:17:23 PM »

I agree with lfromnj. Lakewood MUST be in a district with Cleveland.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,078
Samoa


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #897 on: January 14, 2022, 07:17:43 PM »
« Edited: January 15, 2022, 09:09:17 AM by Torie »


I mean that general geographic alignment of the districts has basically been the online and activist consensus for a while now, it's no surprise the court wants something like it. I seen the map with various alterations at the margins probably more than 20 times. Here's my third and most recent version - note that it features a barely  Trump Toledo seat rather than a barely Biden one, cause I wanted to put Erie inside the Cleveland grouping.

Lakewood is more dense than Cleveland itself. It clearly belongs with Cleveland. Placing the far south of Cuyahoga before Lakewood is pretty similar to what the GOP did in Cinci although not as bad.


You can argue that stuff all you want, but since the imposed standard is now partisan fairness, sinking a community Biden won by 50 points with the Cleveland seat is no longer going to cut it when it can be used to help facilitate a new swing seat. So you now want to put GOP areas with Cleveland before Dem ones.

That is not the legal standard set by the court. The legal standard is to use neutral redistricting principles, to the extent there is a lack of proportionality. So turn off the partisan numbers and do what the law requires and otherwise comports to neutral redistricting principles. This is not Michigan where you gerrymander in favor of one party to make it fair. If that is what the court intended, at least in their ruling, then it would have said "unduly" means anything otherwise legal that fails to move towards proportionality. But they did not write that.

The above is the standard. What the court finally does may may make a mockery of their own standard. In that case maybe the court will finally have to draw the map itself. If that is the case, it may well be in place for only one election cycle. The Pubs should not draw a map that makes a mockery of the court's own standard.
Logged
Nyvin
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,495
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #898 on: January 14, 2022, 08:09:22 PM »
« Edited: January 14, 2022, 08:15:36 PM by Nyvin »

The map above is actually what the Dem experts are demanding that the court majority is channeling, although NE Ohio instead of two marginal seats might be one more lean Dem and one more lean Pub. Well done.

Hmm, like this?  I don't get that from the court reading, it seems they just want two compact districts around Cleveland.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/c10a7ab4-97ab-499d-9ad7-484e02affed1

It lowers OH-11's BVAP a few percentage points, but still functional.
Logged
cvparty
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,055
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #899 on: January 14, 2022, 09:22:07 PM »

I think I've finally made a map that I'm content with. 15 county splits apart from multi-county cities and very compact. It also keeps all major metro areas, Akron-Canton, Cleveland/Columbus/Cincinnati's suburbs, Amish communities, minority communities (two majority-minority seats) and most of Appalachian Ohio respectively together.

In addition to the COIs kept that I tried to maximize, it would fit the court's demand for partisan fairness pretty well: it goes 9-6 for Trump in 2016 and 2020. Any Democrat that wins the state carries a majority of districts; Obama would have won 8/15, and Dems won 7/15 in both their narrow GOV/AG losses in 2018, with the 8th seat being within a couple points of winning. Brown would have won 10/15
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40  
« previous next »
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 0.08 seconds with 12 queries.