2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania

[Unelectable Bystander]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

[Brittain33]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

I don't even think it has to be minor. By the end of the decade, I expect at least two of the Michigan seats to be R (the Flint and Lansing seats), and two of the PA seats (Scranton + Lehigh Valley).

[Libertas Vel Mors]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

[kwabbit]

Changes from 2020

PA-01: Biden +5.8 to Biden +4.6
PA-02: Biden +41.0 to Biden +42.7
PA-03: Biden +83.2 to Biden +80.9
PA-04: Biden +24.1 to Biden +18.9
PA-05: Biden +31.1 to Biden +32.3
PA-06: Biden +15.0 to Biden +14.8
PA-07: Biden +4.8 to Biden +0.6
PA-08: Trump +4.4 to Trump +2.9
PA-10: Trump +2.9 to Trump +4.1

Good for PA-08 but crappy for PA-07, while Dean is losing a chunk of Dems - where did they go? Are those the ones going to PA-05? Because that district is only 1% more Dem.

PA-01 and PA-10 kinda suck. Little to no chance that Dems can get those back even in a good year at this point with Fitz and now that PA-10 is more GOP and Perry won more than Trump in 2020.

You forgot the most important change, R's lose an entire seat yet 3/4 Dem swing seats get shored up.

Right, but the GOP should lose a seat. They have the most population loss and they lost the state in 2020.

That was always agreed upon since the begining of this cycle. The Democratic seats still needed to pick up 300k in population of blood red territory. Considering 3/4 swing seats for Democrats got shored up despite that, that's a swell courtmander they got.

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::48bc041f-ff25-42bc-a74d-d90f325dde0e

Look at Palandios map. Democrats gain like 14 points from PA17 moving it from somewhere around Trump +8 to Biden +6. They gain like 10 points for PA06 with the tri chop of Berks to drown it out with Montgomery and Chester. . That's a whole 25 points worth gained in swing districts .

It's a neutral map in wbrock67's alternate reality where Biden actually won PA by 9.

Huh? What the f**k are you actually talking about? Biden won Pennsylvania. It's a 9-8 Biden map. Biden won PA slightly. The map has a slight Biden won edge. How is that objectionable? This is literally what a fair map looks like. If Trump won PA slightly, then you'd expect it to be a 9-8 Trump map. How are people actually having an issue with this?!

Because the map was explicitly drawn to help Democrats and explicitly chosen to help Democrats.

If you determine a fair map solely on partisanship then it could be considered fair, but the conventional definition of a fair map is one that is not drawn to maximize a certain political party, which is what this one does.

The map isn't terrible outside of PA-17. There is no VRA seat in Pittsburgh, but keeping the more diverse eastern suburbs with the city is the fair choice, not cleaving them to make PA-17 more democratic. There should be a seat entirely inside Allegheny and that seat should have Pittsburgh. Such a seat already exists, but the PA Court decided that such a setup was not beneficial enough for Democrats.

[Roll Roons]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

If you're using Bucks as an example, the reason Democrats haven't been able to win that seat isn't because of muh "discrimination". In case you forget, Biden carried the current seat by 6 points. Tom Wolf won it by 18 and Bob Casey won it by 15. Fitzpatrick just so happens to be an extremely strong incumbent who maintains a lot of crossover appeal. That's all it is.

All Democrats ever do is bitch and moan about how everything is rigged against them. You're starting to sound like Trump.

[lfromnj]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

Your statement is true but your reasoning is suspect. If you have such an issue with segregation(anyone should regarding black-white segregation in northern cities, ) why not place AA's with Lower Merion who actually do border the 90% black areas while Bucks does not. PA-03 is only 52% black but is the most D district in the entire nation. Tn 9th is nearly 2/3 blacks but is only like 75 25 and I don't see much push for splitting Memphis to even out the 8th and the 9th. The same holds true in Wisconsin. It is truly a very segregated area but in 2012 you would not have supported evening out WI05/WI04 which were close to 50/50. Now they are Biden +10 combined. Did segregation change? Not really, a few more whites may have left but minorities are also moving to the suburbs. PA-03 is a pack not merely because of the black people living there but also because of the whites being very Democratic. If PA03 whites voted 60% R or 70% R you wouldn't have any issue with such a district.

Now You could argue to split Bucks and place Lower Bucks with Eastern Philly into a seat that is Biden +10 while placing middle Bucks with a safe D seat in montco and lastly upper bucks with a seat in Berks/upper montco. The partisan ship would still be fairly similar all around. Eastern Philly and Lower Bucks are actually fairly diverse areas right now with not much strong segregation other than a few white ethnic enclaves.

So explain why WI04 should be cracked now but not in 2012?


*Latino/Asian segregation are largely due to self choice of immigrants similar to Irish/Italian enclaves, one can see it as problematic to some degree but it has less due to with any systemic issues .


 In the end most Bucks district are still a Biden district and very much winnable for Democrat without Fitzpatrick. Democrats have the 6 seats there, not sure why Philly segregation patterns means the core of Pittsburgh which would still be a 70+% white district needs to be split in 2 or Berks needs to be cut in 3.

[Nyvin]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

[Unelectable Bystander]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Yes they do lol nobody (except Texas and Tennessee partisans) actually increases rural influence. Do you ever hear about a commission splitting rurals to maximize their influence or give the COI’s more of a vote? Honestly if packing and cracking poor white rural voters was forbidden by the VRA, R’s would gain DOZENS more seats. But I shouldn’t point that out, because of course the electoral college, the senate, the house, state governments, redistricting, supreme courts, lower courts, and every other institution is perpetually rigged against dems

[ProgressiveModerate]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Yes they do lol nobody (except Texas and Tennessee partisans) actually increases rural influence. Do you ever hear about a commission splitting rurals to maximize their influence or give the COI’s more of a vote? Honestly if packing and cracking poor white rural voters was forbidden by the VRA, R’s would gain DOZENS more seats. But I shouldn’t point that out, because of course the electoral college, the senate, the house, state governments, redistricting, supreme courts, lower courts, and every other institution is perpetually rigged against dems

Yep the new AZ-01 was intentionally drawn to combine urban and rural areas to create a politically diverse district according to Neuberg. Also GOP tried to defend their Utah map using the argument rurales would have influence in all 4 districts

[Nyvin]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

My view on it is that proportionality should be used to an extend that is acceptable.   Make the map equal to the point that voters can translate votes to seats at a level that is proportionate to their statewide vote share, but if that requires distorting the seats to an extent that voters can't really know what district they're in (weird tentacles or awkward splits, etc) then that's a step too far.

Proportionality is one of the best ways we have to give a map true legitimacy because it's based on simple math rather than what looks good.  It's probably why the concept has taken hold in courts and commissions around the country so strongly.

[lfromnj]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Yes they do lol nobody (except Texas and Tennessee partisans) actually increases rural influence. Do you ever hear about a commission splitting rurals to maximize their influence or give the COI’s more of a vote? Honestly if packing and cracking poor white rural voters was forbidden by the VRA, R’s would gain DOZENS more seats. But I shouldn’t point that out, because of course the electoral college, the senate, the house, state governments, redistricting, supreme courts, lower courts, and every other institution is perpetually rigged against dems

Yep the new AZ-01 was intentionally drawn to combine urban and rural areas to create a politically diverse district according to Neuberg. Also GOP tried to defend their Utah map using the argument rurales would have influence in all 4 districts

What do you mean the new Arizona 1? Do you mean the Scottsdale district which is almost entirely suburban other than like a few thousand rural precicnts within Maricopa?  This district is pretty fair and clocks in at Biden +1.Do you mean the Native district up north? That entire region is weird  but its definetely fairer than the previous version. Do you mean the East Tucson seat? This one has legitimate D gripes as the R's managed to get a few extra miles on where to place the Tucson split. On the other hand OP's claim of the VRA screwing VRA's is a joke although it does Screw R's in Tucson.

[lfromnj]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

My view on it is that proportionality should be used to an extend that is acceptable.   Make the map equal to the point that voters can translate votes to seats at a level that is proportionate to their statewide vote share, but if that requires distorting the seats to an extent that voters can't really know what district they're in (weird tentacles or awkward splits, etc) than that's a step too far.

Proportionality is one of the best ways we have to give a map true legitimacy because it's based on simple math rather than what looks good.  It's probably why the concept has taken hold in courts and commissions around the country so strongly.

It's not based on simple math. Who decides what #'s to use? Should a map be changed if it deviates from proportionality due to coalitian shifts such as Wisconsin?

If proportionality is such a great standard then why is the Michigan commision's state senate map 22/38 Biden seats? I was told they were the gold standard.

Minnesotas map in 2010 had 6/8 Obama seats although 3 of them were within 2 points. It then moved to 3 Clinton seats and now its 4-4 Biden . The 2020 map is pretty close and I do agree there was one slightly R favorable decision but the median district still has a strong R bias either way.

[ProgressiveModerate]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Yes they do lol nobody (except Texas and Tennessee partisans) actually increases rural influence. Do you ever hear about a commission splitting rurals to maximize their influence or give the COI’s more of a vote? Honestly if packing and cracking poor white rural voters was forbidden by the VRA, R’s would gain DOZENS more seats. But I shouldn’t point that out, because of course the electoral college, the senate, the house, state governments, redistricting, supreme courts, lower courts, and every other institution is perpetually rigged against dems

Yep the new AZ-01 was intentionally drawn to combine urban and rural areas to create a politically diverse district according to Neuberg. Also GOP tried to defend their Utah map using the argument rurales would have influence in all 4 districts

What do you mean the new Arizona 1? Do you mean the Scottsdale district which is almost entirely suburban other than like a few thousand rural precicnts within Maricopa?  This district is pretty fair and clocks in at Biden +1.Do you mean the Native district up north? That entire region is weird  but its definetely fairer than the previous version. Do you mean the East Tucson seat? This one has legitimate D gripes as the R's managed to get a few extra miles on where to place the Tucson split. On the other hand OP's claim of the VRA screwing VRA's is a joke although it does Screw R's in Tucson.

Scottsdales district. Using the logic of urban and rural areas not overextending the influence, shouldn’t district 4 become the sole rural/exurban district while 8 and 1 were pushed inwards? The main reason that didn’t happen was for the sake of Partisan fairness. Without those rural/exurban precincts AZ-01 becomes Biden + 7 or so

[Ritz]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

If you're using Bucks as an example, the reason Democrats haven't been able to win that seat isn't because of muh "discrimination". In case you forget, Biden carried the current seat by 6 points. Tom Wolf won it by 18 and Bob Casey won it by 15. Fitzpatrick just so happens to be an extremely strong incumbent who maintains a lot of crossover appeal. That's all it is.

All Democrats ever do is bitch and moan about how everything is rigged against them. You're starting to sound like Trump.

All Democrats ever do is bitch and moan about how everything is rigged against them as I bitch and moan about how the courts are rigged against Republicans.

[Unelectable Bystander]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

My view on it is that proportionality should be used to an extend that is acceptable.   Make the map equal to the point that voters can translate votes to seats at a level that is proportionate to their statewide vote share, but if that requires distorting the seats to an extent that voters can't really know what district they're in (weird tentacles or awkward splits, etc) than that's a step too far.

Proportionality is one of the best ways we have to give a map true legitimacy because it's based on simple math rather than what looks good.  It's probably why the concept has taken hold in courts and commissions around the country so strongly.

There is no inherent right to have a map that reflects your state’s partisan lean. That is the job of the senate, where all voters in the state have the same influence. The job of the house is to give an equal and non-diluted vote to all voters in the COUNTRY. Gerrymandering towards a “fair” outcome is no better than gerrymandering towards a partisan outcome. Both actively disenfranchise voters in search of a pre-determined outcome, instead of letting the voters decide who to elect

[Nyvin]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

My view on it is that proportionality should be used to an extend that is acceptable.   Make the map equal to the point that voters can translate votes to seats at a level that is proportionate to their statewide vote share, but if that requires distorting the seats to an extent that voters can't really know what district they're in (weird tentacles or awkward splits, etc) than that's a step too far.

Proportionality is one of the best ways we have to give a map true legitimacy because it's based on simple math rather than what looks good.  It's probably why the concept has taken hold in courts and commissions around the country so strongly.

There is no inherent right to have a map that reflects your state’s partisan lean. That is the job of the senate, where all voters in the state have the same influence. The job of the house is to give an equal and non-diluted vote to all voters in the COUNTRY. Gerrymandering towards a “fair” outcome is no better than gerrymandering towards a partisan outcome. Both actively disenfranchise voters in search of a pre-determined outcome, instead of letting the voters decide who to elect

The seats are distributed based on a state's population and the district borders are restricted by state lines, so I don't see how the seats shouldn't be tied to the statewide vote and is only meant to represent the country, that makes no sense.

If you have a state that votes 48% for one party but the party only gets 13% of the seats that at a fundamental level is a very undemocratic (small d) system and morally wrong.  It can't just be brushed aside and needs SOME kind of remedy. 

Proportionality is simply the best way we have to offer such a remedy, at least the best way with the other rules we have in place currently.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I really hope there’s some kind of minor change in coalitions that allows some of the artificial D seats in PA, OH, NC, MI, etc to go red. I’m not sure how that would happen but it would be hilarious. The self-righteous D’s on this forum would very much deserve it for how much they are celebrating hideously gerrymandered seats in the name of partisan fairness. I’m not sure why the courts ever got this idea but the maps are intended to preserve communities of interest so that their geographical area can fairly select a representative. They are not supposed to legislate the national scoreboard and pre-determine who wins each seat.

Ah yes, the hideous gerrymander of Michigan!

Seriously though, Saginaw, Bay City, and Flint are a clear COI, Lansing should get a district based around it, and for Grand Rapids blame Ottowa County Rs who kept saying they didn’t want to be out with GR.

The commission easily could’ve done things like unpack Ann Arbour but they didnt (at least on the Congressional level)

If one is to have a problem with the MI map I’d say the state house where there is a clear affront to unpack Dems in many areas

[Brittain33]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

If you're using Bucks as an example, the reason Democrats haven't been able to win that seat isn't because of muh "discrimination". In case you forget, Biden carried the current seat by 6 points. Tom Wolf won it by 18 and Bob Casey won it by 15. Fitzpatrick just so happens to be an extremely strong incumbent who maintains a lot of crossover appeal. That's all it is.

All Democrats ever do is bitch and moan about how everything is rigged against them. You're starting to sound like Trump.

Congratulations on defeating an argument I didn’t make, also on handwaving away well-documented historical racist injustices as “bitching and moaning” and “everything is rigged against us.”

Bucks County has historically had a lot of segregation and exclusion of African-Americans. Whether or not it determined the outcome of PA-1, which has unique factors, is not the point.

[wbrocks67]

Some of you are getting way too in the weeds. A fair map is one that reflects partisanship of the state. Doesn't matter how it got there. At the end of the day a Biden 9-8 map that includes a few very competitive districts IS a fair map. If anything, you could even argue that it favors Rs a bit since even though Biden won some of those districts, they are more R by PVI

[lfromnj]

Some of you are getting way too in the weeds. A fair map is one that reflects partisanship of the state. Doesn't matter how it got there. At the end of the day a Biden 9-8 map that includes a few very competitive districts IS a fair map. If anything, you could even argue that it favors Rs a bit since even though Biden won some of those districts, they are more R by PVI

"competitve districts" are important

Also lets tri chop Berks to give Houlahan a safe seat.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Excluding some rare rural packs, Republicans are less concentrated in rural areas than Dems in urban areas.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Some of you are getting way too in the weeds. A fair map is one that reflects partisanship of the state. Doesn't matter how it got there. At the end of the day a Biden 9-8 map that includes a few very competitive districts IS a fair map. If anything, you could even argue that it favors Rs a bit since even though Biden won some of those districts, they are more R by PVI

Nope. It literally does not matter whether it reflects the partisanship of the state. A fair map is one that reflect the communities of interest of the state. We have a fundamental definitional disagreement of what a fair map is.

[lfromnj]

Some of you are getting way too in the weeds. A fair map is one that reflects partisanship of the state. Doesn't matter how it got there. At the end of the day a Biden 9-8 map that includes a few very competitive districts IS a fair map. If anything, you could even argue that it favors Rs a bit since even though Biden won some of those districts, they are more R by PVI

Fun Fact, Joe Torsella despite losing the state won a majority of districts. Does not represent PA voters confirmed. Infact using the 4 statewide races combined in PA for 2020 Democrats won 10/17 districts. So even by playing by your rules I can get some numbers that make it a gerrymandered map. People always say proportionality is easy but it really isn't unless you flat out institute proportional districts statewide. Proportionality is just as subjective as all other criteria in the end. Changing coalitians as well make it the most fickle of any such metric. I can draw a variation of my fair map which I edited from Palandio which is 13 Toomey districts. Yet at the same time Biden wins 8 districts and I think Shapiro wins 9 or 10 districts. Coalitians continiously change

[Libertas Vel Mors]

This is not what a fair map looks like because it gerrymanders to get Democrats to proportionality. Democrats are self-packed into Philly and Pittsburgh.

State-sponsored racial discrimination in housing, leading to 90+% African-American neighborhoods adjacent to places in Bucks County where they were forbidden to live, is not “self-packing.” Using racial discrimination as a justification for unequal distribution of political power is rewarding racists for their success.

It is self packing that Democratic vote shares are highly concentrated in urban areas.

Republicans are heavily concentrated in rural areas....do you penalize them for that?

Excluding some rare rural packs, Republicans are less concentrated in rural areas than Dems in urban areas.

To elaborate on this, I'd say that Republicans are hurt by rural self-packing versus their proportional % in Iowa, and they are (to some extent, defining a fair TX map is weird) by rural self-packing and non-citizens giving Dems greater voting power in TX. Arguably, NV is also an example of this although to a lesser extent. There are some states like UT where Republicans are also highly packed in certain areas, but Republicans getting non-insane but still high margins in the rest of the Wasatach Front there means that Dems only get 1/4 of the natural seats. CA may also be an example but I'm not sure, like TX defining a fair CA map can be weird because there are so many districts.