Ohio redistricting thread

[Tekken_Guy]

The Dem proposal doesn't help dewine, all it does is draw out moderate Republicans allies in Franklin/Cuyahoga county.

The state House seems to be more problematic on that note. However, Republicans currently have a massive 25-8 majority in the state Senate. It seems likely if there's a proportionally fair map for the state Senate that an 18R-15D map would be quite useful for DeWine. Even if Republicans got back up to 20 on that map, they'd need to hold their entire caucus together.

Commission has adopted the Republican plan on a 5-2 vote. The map will last four years, instead of ten.

For the legislature or the Congressional map? Also, what are the partisan leans of said approved map(s)?

Slightly Seperate topic but one reason why the senate GOP advantage is so massive is because the Franklin delegation just completely fell apart for the GOP In the state house bar one seat while the GOP still has 1 state senate seat wholly within Franklin and another third with Deleware.  That along with the other side with the most extreme trends near Youngstown/Warren still having 2 state house Democrats but both senate seats flipping to the GOP. The last part obviously also can't be attributed to any gerrymandering as we are talking about an area that swung 40 points right.

The thing is that Franklin seat would be normally unwinnable for the GOP. The State House PV in the 3 nested districts was pretty Democratic while the senate seat was GOP by like 100 votes. Logically you think the GOP would concede that seat try to do a South County + Pickaway seat. It’s much more durable for them than the other seat would be.

[Padfoot]

Why is Dublin still attached to Union County?

Dublin + Marysville is actually a legit COI if you think about it.  The reason Dublin's Asian population is so high is because of Honda in Marysville.

[lfromnj]

It is kind of funny how despite Cleveland being perfectly fit for one senate district everyone wants to split it. (Well it is 4.9% above population once you add Beachwood as well but the entire region has to have overpopulated districts anyway). Democrats obviously want to split it because they want 4 Safe seats from the county. Republicans actually need to keep it split because otherwise the western Cuyahoga seat which is R held will need to take in Lakewood moving that from single digit to double digit Biden.  



Geographically my configuration is more similar to the GOP map but putting Lakewood in the Western seat moves it to Biden +12. Perhaps winnable for the GOP as Rs  easily hold a Biden +8 seat currently but it also isn't as R downballot due to the inclusion of Lakewood/Parma. After that there has to be weird leftover Geagua, Northern Summit and rest of Cuyahoga seat which is narrowly Trump in my map.

Its really amazing how one of the "non partisan map" split Cleveland 4 ways. The actual fair option is just keep it whole because it clearly is a decent district and keeping it whole has advantages and disadvantages for each party. It fits well with any VRA concerns as the city is plurality AA and the Eastern seat would also almost be majority black.

More than anything else for legislative redistricting  even if one wanted to replace the system the most important Ohio Democrats would need is to replace the 3/5 veto override with 2/3. 3/5 is really easy for the OH gop to get. But 2/3 would be easier to prevent .

[Former President tack50]

I've tried to make a Republican gerrymander that would comply with the ruling if I understand correctly? Basically I tried to avoid splitting the counties mentioned in the ruling (or split them as little as possible). I also did not pay any attention to incumbency or stuff like that.

I am still not sure if the map would be legal or not and it might be a bit of a "dummymander" (there are a ton of Trump by mid to high single digits districts) but still; I imagine a riskier map would be better?



https://davesredistricting.org/join/f7de4cd2-ef51-4655-b937-e08e4f3a3da9

OH-01: Biden+15, D+4
OH-02: Trump+36, R+20
OH-03: Biden+45, D+20
OH-04: Trump+31, R+18
OH-05: Trump+7, R+5
OH-06: Trump+19, R+11
OH-07: Trump+10, R+7
OH-08: Trump+25, R+16
OH-09: Trump+20, R+11
OH-10: Trump+17, R+10
OH-11: Biden+58, D+28 (45% black VAP)
OH-12: Trump+6, R+5
OH-13: Trump+5, R+4
OH-14: Trump+15, R+9
OH-15: Trump+36, R+20

There is potential for the map to go as bad as 9R-6D or even 8R-7D in an absolutely amazing year for Dems I suppose; but under most circumstances the map should hold at 12R-3D which is just 1 seat concession to Dems compared to the initial map?

[Ritz]

I've tried to make a Republican gerrymander that would comply with the ruling if I understand correctly? Basically I tried to avoid splitting the counties mentioned in the ruling (or split them as little as possible). I also did not pay any attention to incumbency or stuff like that.

This map wouldn't comply with the ruling because it still packs Dem voters in Franklin, cracks them in Hamilton, and the 7th and 9th seats are clearly drawn to avoid a Dem leaning seat in suburban Cuyahoga. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP tried to submit something like this, given how they're acting with the state leg maps.

[Former President tack50]

I've tried to make a Republican gerrymander that would comply with the ruling if I understand correctly? Basically I tried to avoid splitting the counties mentioned in the ruling (or split them as little as possible). I also did not pay any attention to incumbency or stuff like that.

This map wouldn't comply with the ruling because it still packs Dem voters in Franklin, cracks them in Hamilton, and the 7th and 9th seats are clearly drawn to avoid a Dem leaning seat in suburban Cuyahoga. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP tried to submit this something like this, given how they're acting with the state leg maps.

For what is worth the Hamilton crack is just an attempt to try to make that district as Republican as possible; though I will say that given the result is still pretty much Safe D (unless 2020 was a big fluke in the area) I guess it's an optional thing to do.

And the Franklin pack, while relatively obvious, still does seem somewhat justifyable to me? (I am not familiar at all with the area, but "Rest of Franklin+southern suburbs" seems reasonable on a vacuum?)
 
I agree the 7th-9th thing is probably too obvious though. (or the 13th I drew for that matter, to a lesser extent)

[Ritz]

I've tried to make a Republican gerrymander that would comply with the ruling if I understand correctly? Basically I tried to avoid splitting the counties mentioned in the ruling (or split them as little as possible). I also did not pay any attention to incumbency or stuff like that.

This map wouldn't comply with the ruling because it still packs Dem voters in Franklin, cracks them in Hamilton, and the 7th and 9th seats are clearly drawn to avoid a Dem leaning seat in suburban Cuyahoga. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP tried to submit this something like this, given how they're acting with the state leg maps.

For what is worth the Hamilton crack is just an attempt to try to make that district as Republican as possible; though I will say that given the result is still pretty much Safe D (unless 2020 was a big fluke in the area) I guess it's an optional thing to do.

And the Franklin pack, while relatively obvious, still does seem somewhat justifyable to me? (I am not familiar at all with the area, but "Rest of Franklin+southern suburbs" seems reasonable on a vacuum?)
 
I agree the 7th-9th thing is probably too obvious though. (or the 13th I drew for that matter, to a lesser extent)

Well, with Franklin, the OHSC ruling was based on witness testimony that nearly all configurations prioritizing compactness would result in two Dem seats, with the northern one going into Delaware and part of a third county. Your map is basically the same as the original in that it combines parts of downtown Columbus with "far-flung rural communities."

They basically wanted something like this:

[kwabbit]

If the OH GOP draws a map that the court finds unsatisfactory once again, does the court then draw it? Perhaps the court is fully aware of this and wants this regardless, but making an OH map truly proportional requires a lot of Dem friendly choices. I think a court may actually be too uncomfortable to make a 8-7. I think a map that is proportional enough for the court to accept would be farther left than what the court draws itself.

[Ritz]

If the OH GOP draws a map that the court finds unsatisfactory once again, does the court then draw it? Perhaps the court is fully aware of this and wants this regardless, but making an OH map truly proportional requires a lot of Dem friendly choices. I think a court may actually be too uncomfortable to make a 8-7. I think a map that is proportional enough for the court to accept would be farther left than what the court draws itself.

The court has to decide who would draw the map if they reject it again. On the other part, I don't think drawing an 8-7 map is that hard. The court guidance would more or less lead to one. Dems would get one seat from Cincinnati, two from Columbus, one from Akron, two from the Cleveland metro, and one from Toledo.

[Oryxslayer]

If the OH GOP draws a map that the court finds unsatisfactory once again, does the court then draw it? Perhaps the court is fully aware of this and wants this regardless, but making an OH map truly proportional requires a lot of Dem friendly choices. I think a court may actually be too uncomfortable to make a 8-7. I think a map that is proportional enough for the court to accept would be farther left than what the court draws itself.

I mean we will see with the state  legislature maps right now. The court could accept, reject and say try again until a product is satisfactory, or, more likely in my opinion given the time constraints and how little the passed maps reflect some other submitted as evidence the court for acceptable, find them in contempt of the court and change the game so things are not stuck in place. Whatever happens will probably impact the congressional calculus.

[Padfoot]

If the OH GOP draws a map that the court finds unsatisfactory once again, does the court then draw it? Perhaps the court is fully aware of this and wants this regardless, but making an OH map truly proportional requires a lot of Dem friendly choices. I think a court may actually be too uncomfortable to make a 8-7. I think a map that is proportional enough for the court to accept would be farther left than what the court draws itself.

I mean we will see with the state  legislature maps right now. The court could accept, reject and say try again until a product is satisfactory, or, more likely in my opinion given the time constraints and how little the passed maps reflect some other submitted as evidence the court for acceptable, find them in contempt of the court and change the game so things are not stuck in place. Whatever happens will probably impact the congressional calculus.

The plaintiffs are officially taking the new legislative maps back to court so we shall see what happens ...

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/01/25/redistricting-new-legislative-maps-still-violate-ohio-constitution/9200031002/

[BoiseBoy]

Ohio Redistricting Commission’s Republicans ask Supreme Court to punt decisions on gerrymandered maps past 2022 elections

"Republicans on the Ohio Redistricting Commission asked the state supreme court to issue a ruling on their newly drawn legislative districts by February 11– or potentially stay any decision until after the 2022 general election."

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Ohio Redistricting Commission’s Republicans ask Supreme Court to punt decisions on gerrymandered maps past 2022 elections

"Republicans on the Ohio Redistricting Commission asked the state supreme court to issue a ruling on their newly drawn legislative districts by February 11– or potentially stay any decision until after the 2022 general election."

Lol

[Unelectable Bystander]

Personally I think commissions are doing too much with trying to match the exact partisanship of a state with an Ohio 8-7 map or a Michigan 7-6 map or something like that. Why don’t they maximize competitive seats within geographical reason and let the voters pick? A hard 8-7 map feels like a bipartisan gerrymander. Like Ohio Dems should be able to win 10 seats if they make a miraculous recovery or the GOP should get 12/13 if it ends up going the way of Kentucky. Anybody else feel this way with commissions?

[lfromnj]

Personally I think commissions are doing too much with trying to match the exact partisanship of a state with an Ohio 8-7 map or a Michigan 7-6 map or something like that. Why don’t they maximize competitive seats within geographical reason and let the voters pick? A hard 8-7 map feels like a bipartisan gerrymander. Like Ohio Dems should be able to win 10 seats if they make a miraculous recovery or the GOP should get 12/13 if it ends up going the way of Kentucky. Anybody else feel this way with commissions?

8 7 isn't that crazy in Ohio by just starting with the Lorain Cuyahoga district .    Its really the legislature where the demands are crazy.

[Nyvin]

The court didn't accept the replacement legislative maps.

[GALeftist]

https://twitter.com/umichvoter/status/1490819731993071623

Lmao at this graph

[ProgressiveModerate]

Ngl, even as a Dem, i think advocating for truly proportional legislative maps in a tilted state like Ohio is kinda messed up since the only way to achieve that is by basically making a Dem gerry.

[Oryxslayer]

Link to the brief here.

Notes how some obvious changes that could have been made were ignored, and how the plan started with the illegal maps and edited the cracking seats so that there were now marginal D seats - which it finds inadequate based on quality. Revised plan invalidated in entirety like previously.

Commission has until February 17 for new Leg lines. It seems the court will play ping-pong rather than hold the mappers in contempt...for now.


Also, in an unrelated note, we may be seeing some congressional lines tomorrow.

[lfromnj]

Ouch the GOP is really stuck in a hard place in Hamilton.  They agreed to split Cincinatti to create 5 D leaning seats in the composite. Now the thing is without splitting Cincinatti you only have 1 D senate district. Now they could claim non partisan wise they didn't want to split Cincinatti regarding the senate districts but they already did split it so they don't have that excuse anymore.

[GALeftist]

The Ohio House cancelled the meeting tomorrow for congressional redistricting lmao. Less than a week left

[UncleSam]

Ngl, even as a Dem, i think advocating for truly proportional legislative maps in a tilted state like Ohio is kinda messed up since the only way to achieve that is by basically making a Dem gerry.

Ya this push for 'proportionality' in places with GOP-favored geography and 'clean maps' in places with Dem-favored geography is pretty much the number one reason why I don't take Dems seriously when it comes to redistricting reform anymore. I used to think Dems were significantly better than Rs on this issue but now I actually think Dems might be worse (or are at best equal).

[lfromnj]

Ngl, even as a Dem, i think advocating for truly proportional legislative maps in a tilted state like Ohio is kinda messed up since the only way to achieve that is by basically making a Dem gerry.

Ya this push for 'proportionality' in places with GOP-favored geography and 'clean maps' in places with Dem-favored geography is pretty much the number one reason why I don't take Dems seriously when it comes to redistricting reform anymore. I used to think Dems were significantly better than Rs on this issue but now I actually think Dems might be worse (or are at best equal).

I think its possible congressionally in Ohio albeit with a lot of weak swing districts for Dems. One key difference between Democratic groups vs a non partisan map in Ohio is Dayton. Any non partisan Dayton district is Trump+7 to 8. Most of these so called fair maps groups draw it to be Trump +2 which is a Democratic gerrymander as a district but it also makes the median district in the state 6 points left of the state as a whole which shows they dont really care about fair partisanship but merely want a Dem friendly map.

[GALeftist]

Ngl, even as a Dem, i think advocating for truly proportional legislative maps in a tilted state like Ohio is kinda messed up since the only way to achieve that is by basically making a Dem gerry.

Ya this push for 'proportionality' in places with GOP-favored geography and 'clean maps' in places with Dem-favored geography is pretty much the number one reason why I don't take Dems seriously when it comes to redistricting reform anymore. I used to think Dems were significantly better than Rs on this issue but now I actually think Dems might be worse (or are at best equal).

I mean, it's in the Constitution. The Court didn't ask for proportionality in the congressional map.

[UncleSam]

Ngl, even as a Dem, i think advocating for truly proportional legislative maps in a tilted state like Ohio is kinda messed up since the only way to achieve that is by basically making a Dem gerry.

Ya this push for 'proportionality' in places with GOP-favored geography and 'clean maps' in places with Dem-favored geography is pretty much the number one reason why I don't take Dems seriously when it comes to redistricting reform anymore. I used to think Dems were significantly better than Rs on this issue but now I actually think Dems might be worse (or are at best equal).

I mean, it's in the Constitution. The Court didn't ask for proportionality in the congressional map.

This is reasonable and makes this case less egregious. Proportionality is an insane standard but follow-up: how was the horrendous gerrymander of the last decade allowed to stand if there was a proportionality standard?