Colorado 2020 U.S. House Redistricting Discussion

[Nyvin]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

[lfromnj]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

[S019]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

New Preliminary maps have been dropped.

https://redistricting.colorado.gov/content/staff-congressional-1

Bad news for Lauren Boebert as she has been drawn into a very heavily Democratic district. She will need to pack up the moving van if she wants to remain in Congress.

Wow, that's a total departure from what they had previously, aside from El Paso and Denver.

Boebert can still win in that southern district though.  Isn't she from Mesa County?

Garfield, though maybe she could carpetbag? Though apparently even CO-03 only voted for Trump by less than 5.

Boebert having to move will be the least of her problems - the bulk of her constituency remains in the same district. She could move with little consequence. The big problem for her is that if CO-03 is like this she could go down in defeat even in a good year for Reps.

[lfromnj]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

CO03 was Romney +4 and Trump +4.4 . CO04 on the other hand is zooming left pretty hard thanks to Fort Collins being back in and keeping Douglas County also being half the district. CO08 trended left in 2020 but had overall a moderate R trend from 2012  to 2020. It could theoretically go 8-0 if 2016 > 2020 trends continue in CO.

[ProgressiveModerate]

This new map is slightly better for Dems than the original map, but not by much. The original map averaged 5.14D - 2.86R, while this map is 5.19D - 2.81R. The big difference is the competitiveness jumps up from 20.13 to 30.07.

The 2020n results by district are:

1: Biden + 61.27
2: Biden + 27.62
3: Trump + 4.37
4: Trump + 8.27
5: Trump + 10.19
6: Biden + 24.37
7: Biden + 12.12
8: Biden + 4.81

[patzer]

It’s an interesting map. It doesn’t look like a gerrymander- which is of course the intention- but when you look further in...

It looks like a 4-3-1, but in practice: the 8th should be easy enough to hold as the Hispanic population there steadily rises; and of the three Republican districts... the 3rd is close enough to quite easily be competitive, especially if Boebert stands in it; the 5th will flip whenever El Paso County does (likely in the middle of the decade), and the 4th is also racing left (Douglas County all staying in the 4th, as well as it gaining Fort Collins, helps).

In other words: the two most Republican seats have some of the areas that are going left most strongly, and there aren’t actually any R safe seats in this map if trends there continue for the next few years.

That’s a very good prospect for Dems from a map drawn specifically to be unbiased.

[Sestak]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

CO03 was Romney +4 and Trump +4.4 . CO04 on the other hand is zooming left pretty hard thanks to Fort Collins being back in and keeping Douglas County also being half the district. CO08 trended left in 2020 but had overall a moderate R trend from 2012  to 2020.

*Trump 4.4 in 2020 after being Trump +10.2 in '16.

Who knows what happens there long term but given Colorado's overall swing plus Boebert...well, being Boebert, there could be some possibilities medium-term here. Buck seat is an obvious longterm play and overall this map seems like they're trying to squeeze longterm potential out of the map if they continue making gains across the state.

[Pink Panther]

Honestly, I prefer the first map a lot more. It kept COI's together, clean, and made sense. I really don't like how Ft. Collins is added to the 4th district for randomness or how the 7th district includes a solid amount of non-Denver Metro areas.

[Nyvin]

The end result of the map (besides the Hispanic stuff) is to spread out the Republican vote more than the previous map.   They basically have no real vote sinks left anywhere. 

I'd think the COGOP would prefer this to the other one, other than Boebert.

[lfromnj]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

CO03 was Romney +4 and Trump +4.4 . CO04 on the other hand is zooming left pretty hard thanks to Fort Collins being back in and keeping Douglas County also being half the district. CO08 trended left in 2020 but had overall a moderate R trend from 2012  to 2020.

*Trump 4.4 in 2020 after being Trump +10.2 in '16.

Who knows what happens there long term but given Colorado's overall swing plus Boebert...well, being Boebert, there could be some possibilities medium-term here. Buck seat is an obvious longterm play and overall this map seems like they're trying to squeeze longterm potential out of the map if they continue making gains across the state.

Agree if  2016>2020 trends continue its def going 8-0 by 2028 or something.  I just felt it was important to point out the 2012>2020 trend in this case.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

Minority interests = democratic gerrymander only because they vote democrat. Like would you have the map ignore minority interests or force republican seats in blue areas to counter balance?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The end result of the map (besides the Hispanic stuff) is to spread out the Republican vote more than the previous map.   They basically have no real vote sinks left anywhere. 

I'd think the COGOP would prefer this to the other one, other than Boebert.

This is the gist of it in regards to the differences between the two maps, imo.
Worth noting that probably only 1/5 of this CO-04, at most, lives outside Douglas, Weld, and Larimer...

[Drew]

Neguse is already fundraising off of it:

https://twitter.com/joeneguse/status/1433941758170128385?s=21

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Neguse is already fundraising off of it:

https://twitter.com/joeneguse/status/1433941758170128385?s=21

Very cheeky indeed.
Can't hurt to raise money early though...

[Calthrina950]

Neguse is already fundraising off of it:

https://twitter.com/joeneguse/status/1433941758170128385?s=21

Boebert lost Garfield County to Diane Mitsch-Bush last year, if I'm not mistaken.

[patzer]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

CO03 was Romney +4 and Trump +4.4 . CO04 on the other hand is zooming left pretty hard thanks to Fort Collins being back in and keeping Douglas County also being half the district. CO08 trended left in 2020 but had overall a moderate R trend from 2012  to 2020.

*Trump 4.4 in 2020 after being Trump +10.2 in '16.

Who knows what happens there long term but given Colorado's overall swing plus Boebert...well, being Boebert, there could be some possibilities medium-term here. Buck seat is an obvious longterm play and overall this map seems like they're trying to squeeze longterm potential out of the map if they continue making gains across the state.

Agree if  2016>2020 trends continue its def going 8-0 by 2028 or something.  I just felt it was important to point out the 2012>2020 trend in this case.

Not even as far as 2028.

This is what happens if we extrapolate 2016-20 trends to 2020-24:

1: D +59.0 in 2016;  D +61.3 in 2020;  D +63.6 in 2024
2: D +20.7 in 2016;  D +27.6 in 2020;  D +34.5 in 2024
3: R +11.3 in 2016;  R +4.4 in 2020;   D +2.5 in 2024
4: R +18.3 in 2016;  R +8.3 in 2020;   D +1.7 in 2024
5: R +24.3 in 2016;  R +10.2 in 2020;  D +3.9 in 2024
6: D +14.9 in 2016;  D +24.4 in 2020;  D +33.9 in 2024
7: D +1.4 in 2016;   D +12.1 in 2020;   D +22.8 in 2024
8: R +1.4 in 2016;   D + 4.8 in 2020;   D +11.0 in 2024

Obviously expecting trends like that to repeat is ambitious, but it’s still at least conceivable that it could go for 8 Dems as soon as 2024.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Neguse is already fundraising off of it:

https://twitter.com/joeneguse/status/1433941758170128385?s=21

Boebert lost Garfield County to Diane Mitsch-Bush last year, if I'm not mistaken.

yep, she did

[Nyvin]

Maybe nationally the Democrats realize they'll lose the House in 2022 and are planning redistricting for 2024 and beyond...?

[ProgressiveModerate]

Maybe nationally the Democrats realize they'll lose the House in 2022 and are planning redistricting for 2024 and beyond...?

Then why not just go with an  8-0 or 7-1 now that is more likely to hold into 2024 instead of relying on trends.

[patzer]

Maybe nationally the Democrats realize they'll lose the House in 2022 and are planning redistricting for 2024 and beyond...?

Then why not just go with an  8-0 or 7-1 now that is more likely to hold into 2024 instead of relying on trends.

I mean, for a commission-made map that looks fair you’ve got to at least make it seem fair in current numbers. That’s what the commission is for. You’ve got to leave three currently-R districts really, the commission surely wouldn’t sign off on a 7-1.

So all you can do is try to make a map that advantages you on trends.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I'm reading this is actually a staff map that was presented to the commission, not a commission drawn map.

Yeah that's what happened last time. Still interesting to note in how it was heavily influenced by an obvious Democratic gerrymander proposal yet somehow managed to be not a major Democratic gerrymander. Its quite weird what the staff is doing.

This map is probably better for Republicans in the short run though, the median seat is now Biden+5 rather than Biden+9, there is potential long term benefit from the Democrats, but other than the Col. Springs seat, idk if any of the other GOP seats (i.e. the two slope ones) will trend D long term in a significant way.

CO03 was Romney +4 and Trump +4.4 . CO04 on the other hand is zooming left pretty hard thanks to Fort Collins being back in and keeping Douglas County also being half the district. CO08 trended left in 2020 but had overall a moderate R trend from 2012  to 2020.

*Trump 4.4 in 2020 after being Trump +10.2 in '16.

Who knows what happens there long term but given Colorado's overall swing plus Boebert...well, being Boebert, there could be some possibilities medium-term here. Buck seat is an obvious longterm play and overall this map seems like they're trying to squeeze longterm potential out of the map if they continue making gains across the state.

Agree if  2016>2020 trends continue its def going 8-0 by 2028 or something.  I just felt it was important to point out the 2012>2020 trend in this case.

Not even as far as 2028.

This is what happens if we extrapolate 2016-20 trends to 2020-24:

1: D +59.0 in 2016;  D +61.3 in 2020;  D +63.6 in 2024
2: D +20.7 in 2016;  D +27.6 in 2020;  D +34.5 in 2024
3: R +11.3 in 2016;  R +4.4 in 2020;   D +2.5 in 2024
4: R +18.3 in 2016;  R +8.3 in 2020;   D +1.7 in 2024
5: R +24.3 in 2016;  R +10.2 in 2020;  D +3.9 in 2024
6: D +14.9 in 2016;  D +24.4 in 2020;  D +33.9 in 2024
7: D +1.4 in 2016;   D +12.1 in 2020;   D +22.8 in 2024
8: R +1.4 in 2016;   D + 4.8 in 2020;   D +11.0 in 2024

Obviously expecting trends like that to repeat is ambitious, but it’s still at least conceivable that it could go for 8 Dems as soon as 2024.

What do gubernatorial numbers look like for these districts?

[lfromnj]

Maybe nationally the Democrats realize they'll lose the House in 2022 and are planning redistricting for 2024 and beyond...?

Then why not just go with an  8-0 or 7-1 now that is more likely to hold into 2024 instead of relying on trends.

I mean, for a commission-made map that looks fair you’ve got to at least make it seem fair in current numbers. That’s what the commission is for. You’ve got to leave three currently-R districts really, the commission surely wouldn’t sign off on a 7-1.

So all you can do is try to make a map that advantages you on trends.

The thing is that Latino map had like 5 Biden Districts that were all solidly safe and 1 Trump +0 district.

[patzer]

The thing is that Latino map had like 5 Biden Districts that were all solidly safe and 1 Trump +0 district.

That's probably the exact reason why the Commission didn't accept the Latino group's map as-is? Harder to defend a 5-2-1 map as fair.

If it were possible to get a way with a map like that, yeah, it'd be better.

What do gubernatorial numbers look like for these districts?

Here's the table from their website:

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I think Ken Buck actually lives in the new 8th but I would guess he runs in the 4th.

Either way from a non-partisan perspective it's absolutely abominable that Greeley ends up somehow in a Denver metro district while Fort Collins gets lumped in to a district with the plains. For that matter lumping in Loveland with Boulder and the NW quarter of the state is also pretty bad.