2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:30:44 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: 2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan  (Read 40832 times)
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« on: February 05, 2020, 01:32:29 PM »

Ottawa County under 2010 numbers is sufficient for one SD by itself but under 2016 block estimates it is no longer so.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2020, 03:30:50 PM »

You seem to have the idea that everybody else is biased, whereas you are fair. The former may be true, the latter is frankly delusional. You're just much better at seeing other people's biases than admitting your own.

I would agree it's not necessarily a plan that is likely to be drawn, but that wasn't the point. It was just an experiment to see what happens if you draw a Lansing-Saginaw district. Answer: the Flint and Lansing districts are a bit odd, everything else makes sense in isolation but you split a few more counties than you necessarily need to.

A lot of the decisions on the map seem to come down to how Flint, Saginaw and the Thumb get treated. If you put Flint with the Thumb, you're drawing a Republican gerrymander. If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district and extend it to the Huron coast, you're going to produce a strong Democratic map around Detroit (as you soak up heavily Republican bits of northern Macomb and/or Oakland, allowing Democratic strongholds in the south of those counties to outvote lean-Republican areas further north.) If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district but let the Thumb district head north via Bay, it's more mixed but tends to benefit Republicans as they're going to be favoured to win the Macomb district.
I never claimed not to have biases, but on this map https://imgur.com/a/pQIkR45 I turned off partisan data and based it on 538's map keeping counties whole as much as possible.  Not every map I've drawn is fair but that one is as the data shows https://imgur.com/7d7Ddl7 6D, 6R, 1 even.    Also I don't think you can get a Flint-Saginaw district all the way to northern Macomb unless you make a weird tendril which the commission isn't doing.  You can get a Flint district to the Huron coast, only if you drop Saginaw.  I think the most fair and straightforward way to divide up the northern suburbs is a solid R district that includes Livingston county, northern and western Oakland, and northern Macomb.  Then a solid D district in the remainder of Oakland, and a tossup in the remainder of Macomb.  The one potential alteration is having a black seat go into southern Oakland to get more black voters, but that doesn't really change the partisan makeup because the Oakland seat still solidly votes Clinton due to Pontiac and places like Royal Oak.  1D-1T-1R is a fair breakdown of the Macomb-Oakland-Livingston area.  Those counties combined voted Trump narrowly and Obama narrowly. 
could you link me the map plz?
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2020, 04:30:20 PM »

You seem to have the idea that everybody else is biased, whereas you are fair. The former may be true, the latter is frankly delusional. You're just much better at seeing other people's biases than admitting your own.

I would agree it's not necessarily a plan that is likely to be drawn, but that wasn't the point. It was just an experiment to see what happens if you draw a Lansing-Saginaw district. Answer: the Flint and Lansing districts are a bit odd, everything else makes sense in isolation but you split a few more counties than you necessarily need to.

A lot of the decisions on the map seem to come down to how Flint, Saginaw and the Thumb get treated. If you put Flint with the Thumb, you're drawing a Republican gerrymander. If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district and extend it to the Huron coast, you're going to produce a strong Democratic map around Detroit (as you soak up heavily Republican bits of northern Macomb and/or Oakland, allowing Democratic strongholds in the south of those counties to outvote lean-Republican areas further north.) If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district but let the Thumb district head north via Bay, it's more mixed but tends to benefit Republicans as they're going to be favoured to win the Macomb district.
I never claimed not to have biases, but on this map https://imgur.com/a/pQIkR45 I turned off partisan data and based it on 538's map keeping counties whole as much as possible.  Not every map I've drawn is fair but that one is as the data shows https://imgur.com/7d7Ddl7 6D, 6R, 1 even.    Also I don't think you can get a Flint-Saginaw district all the way to northern Macomb unless you make a weird tendril which the commission isn't doing.  You can get a Flint district to the Huron coast, only if you drop Saginaw.  I think the most fair and straightforward way to divide up the northern suburbs is a solid R district that includes Livingston county, northern and western Oakland, and northern Macomb.  Then a solid D district in the remainder of Oakland, and a tossup in the remainder of Macomb.  The one potential alteration is having a black seat go into southern Oakland to get more black voters, but that doesn't really change the partisan makeup because the Oakland seat still solidly votes Clinton due to Pontiac and places like Royal Oak.  1D-1T-1R is a fair breakdown of the Macomb-Oakland-Livingston area.  Those counties combined voted Trump narrowly and Obama narrowly. 
could you link me the map plz?
https://davesredistricting.org/join/bf7fe969-7260-4079-9fba-713e5eb41629
I looked at presidential results and down-ballot tendencies and it would be like this:
4 safe R (6, 9, 10, 11)
2 lean R (7, 13)
2 tossups (1, Cool
1 lean D (12)
4 safe D (2, 3, 4, 5)
Based on the '12+'16 composite it's 6R-1T-6D
In addition to keeping counties whole, I tried my best to keep metros whole too.  MI has a lot of mid sized metros like Flint, Lansing, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, ect which can all have their own districts.
I quite honestly love your map, my only minor complaint relates to the 1st and 9th and the fact the border is not a straight line, but that's not really a major thing by any stretch.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2020, 04:56:56 PM »

You seem to have the idea that everybody else is biased, whereas you are fair. The former may be true, the latter is frankly delusional. You're just much better at seeing other people's biases than admitting your own.

I would agree it's not necessarily a plan that is likely to be drawn, but that wasn't the point. It was just an experiment to see what happens if you draw a Lansing-Saginaw district. Answer: the Flint and Lansing districts are a bit odd, everything else makes sense in isolation but you split a few more counties than you necessarily need to.

A lot of the decisions on the map seem to come down to how Flint, Saginaw and the Thumb get treated. If you put Flint with the Thumb, you're drawing a Republican gerrymander. If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district and extend it to the Huron coast, you're going to produce a strong Democratic map around Detroit (as you soak up heavily Republican bits of northern Macomb and/or Oakland, allowing Democratic strongholds in the south of those counties to outvote lean-Republican areas further north.) If you put Flint and Saginaw in the same district but let the Thumb district head north via Bay, it's more mixed but tends to benefit Republicans as they're going to be favoured to win the Macomb district.
I never claimed not to have biases, but on this map https://imgur.com/a/pQIkR45 I turned off partisan data and based it on 538's map keeping counties whole as much as possible.  Not every map I've drawn is fair but that one is as the data shows https://imgur.com/7d7Ddl7 6D, 6R, 1 even.    Also I don't think you can get a Flint-Saginaw district all the way to northern Macomb unless you make a weird tendril which the commission isn't doing.  You can get a Flint district to the Huron coast, only if you drop Saginaw.  I think the most fair and straightforward way to divide up the northern suburbs is a solid R district that includes Livingston county, northern and western Oakland, and northern Macomb.  Then a solid D district in the remainder of Oakland, and a tossup in the remainder of Macomb.  The one potential alteration is having a black seat go into southern Oakland to get more black voters, but that doesn't really change the partisan makeup because the Oakland seat still solidly votes Clinton due to Pontiac and places like Royal Oak.  1D-1T-1R is a fair breakdown of the Macomb-Oakland-Livingston area.  Those counties combined voted Trump narrowly and Obama narrowly.  
could you link me the map plz?
https://davesredistricting.org/join/bf7fe969-7260-4079-9fba-713e5eb41629
I looked at presidential results and down-ballot tendencies and it would be like this:
4 safe R (6, 9, 10, 11)
2 lean R (7, 13)
2 tossups (1, Cool
1 lean D (12)
4 safe D (2, 3, 4, 5)
Based on the '12+'16 composite it's 6R-1T-6D
In addition to keeping counties whole, I tried my best to keep metros whole too.  MI has a lot of mid sized metros like Flint, Lansing, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, ect which can all have their own districts.
Is it possible to better compactness by putting Oscoda and Crawford counties in the 1st in return for Osceola joining the 9th?
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2020, 06:33:55 PM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/435dcad3-d0f2-435b-abe8-c5eee7aa8575
In this map we have:
a 1st district more along the lines of the 2000s iteration of the district
a Flint-Thumb district, with Saginaw and Midland thrown in a Lansing district
a nice, neat, compact Grand Rapids seat
1 seat nested entirely within Macomb, another nested solely within Oakland, and 2 nested solely with Wayne, and then 2 seats around those, enveloping them
Kalamazoo and Battle Creek are kept in the same seat
the Macomb CD and Flint CD are the tipping point districts
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2020, 07:23:27 PM »

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.
An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2020, 07:33:50 PM »

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.
An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.
But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2020, 08:28:52 PM »
« Edited: February 09, 2020, 08:35:13 PM by Southern Speaker Punxsutawney Phil »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/435dcad3-d0f2-435b-abe8-c5eee7aa8575
In this map we have:
a 1st district more along the lines of the 2000s iteration of the district
a Flint-Thumb district, with Saginaw and Midland thrown in a Lansing district
a nice, neat, compact Grand Rapids seat
1 seat nested entirely within Macomb, another nested solely within Oakland, and 2 nested solely with Wayne, and then 2 seats around those, enveloping them
Kalamazoo and Battle Creek are kept in the same seat
the Macomb CD and Flint CD are the tipping point districts
I like your map, it does split counties more than mine but I'd say respects COIs a bit better.  I see you made the Lansing district more dem but the Flint district is more competitive.  Some might criticize your map due to the tipping point districts being red leaning in 2016, but down ballot Flint and Macomb are more Dem than they are presidentially so those districts would be closer to true tossups.  I like how you fixed my long western MI strip and made more compact districts.  My only criticism of your map is the UP-Bay City district.  I'd trade Traverse City and Bay City between their respective districts.  Other than that, I would support this map as a commissioner.  
for what its worth you could shift Bay, Arenac, Iosco, Omegaw, Roscommon, and Gladwin into the Muskegon seat and Grand Traverse, Wexford, Mason, Manistee, Benzie, and Leelanau into the UP district. But this overall arrangement hurts compactness a bit. UP is 58 and Muskegon is 43 - in my original its 59 and 88, respectively.
And in all honesty I'm not sure if UP is necessarily a better fit with any specific area of the LP besides the counties immediately to its south in an around the Mackinac bridge. At least here we have Western Michigan less divided.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2020, 11:53:11 PM »
« Edited: February 11, 2020, 12:07:29 AM by Southern Speaker Punxsutawney Phil »

I don't really see the point of Oakland getting it's own district.   It seems...meaningless.  Oakland is huge and very diverse,  both with income and demographics.    It's as though it's making a district simply to follow county lines and literally nothing else.  

It makes the most sense to have southern Oakland cross into either Wayne or Washtenaw,  depending on what communities you want to put together.  

I could understand a Macomb-exclusive district though.   That makes way more sense since it's much more White Working Class and generally is it's own community.
An all-Oakland seat is logical especially because 8 Mile Road is better not crossed if one can help it and/or its not absolutely essential to one's plans elsewhere. The main benefit is not necessarily in a homogenous CoI but better districts elsewhere. There is much reason and much elegance in two exurban districts wrapping around the more urban metro Detroit districts.

The 8 mile rd thing is more for the Macomb-Wayne border than Oakland,  since it's what separates Black Detroit from White Macomb (the difference really is pretty stark).   In Oakland you have Oak Park and Southfield areas to the north of Detroit which are both pretty black, and the difference between the two is minimal further west.
But you don't have to reach into Oakland for an adequate black district, and the more areas you take from Southern Oakland the more you need to eat into exurban metro Detroit, which is a CoI worth keeping together.
So crossing 8 Mile is still undesirable in most cases.

Even then,  Detroit is in Northeastern Wayne, and southeastern Oakland is more "Metro" and urban than southern Wayne.    There's exurban metro Detroit in western and southern Wayne, and suburban Detroit in Oakland.  

Anyway you put it the county borders don't really mean much in Detroit,  at least in respect to Oakland and Wayne.  

The current MI-11 was probably drawn as a Suburban district surrounding the AA districts, which puts all the communities of interests together, and the current MI-9 is pretty close to the Macomb working class district.

The current MI-09/11 were drawn to to maximize GOP potential in the Metro region. The 9th packs in the near suburbs which at the time were the solid obama parts of the region. The 11th is designed to squiggle around and collect the 'further' suburbs which at the time were more GOP friendly. As people moved further out, as the exurbs got pushed further back, and as attitudes changed, this no longer was a viable dichotomy that made much sense. Instead, the defining divide is now between the well understood 2016 style coalitions. In fact, one could say those coalitions are even more stark here because this is Detroit, the epicenter of the financial crash where it all began. Looking to these districts for guides on....anything is a horrible choice.

Thanks for the history lesson, but that completely misses the point.  

MI-11 was drawn to maximize GOP influence in the district, by incorporating certain groups of people in it, and MI-9 was drawn as a vote sink with other groups of people.  

The districts have changed their voting patterns, but the people are still there generally.  Northwest Wayne has way more in common (today) with parts of southern Oakland than it does with other parts of Wayne, the vice versa is still true today.

Anyway,  I'll drop the point,  doesn't seem anyone here really agrees.

Well, I agree with you on the  topic of wayne parts vs other wayne  parts, I just think the pop and the commission rules favor the later. It also allows the west suburbs to go potentially with Ann Arbor and Washtenaw, which they also share common traits with. Or they could go with other wayne towns like Dearborn and bits of detroit part of a Arab access seat.

While we are  on this topic though, I'm surprised there are not many maps that try to get a non-detroit seat purely in Wayne, something like what occurs below. I guess it's because the numbers are less favorable this cycle when compared to the last when it comes to wayne vs the suburbs. Such a seat would have cascading effects like requiring both minority seats to head north and then push the suburban seats even further north. Livingston couldn't be paired fully with Oakland. Maybe I will play around with it since it will Allow Livonia & Co. to be paired with the near side of Oakland, even though it would be in a AA seat.


https://davesredistricting.org/join/f9f2fff2-6ca3-4bd6-a202-511f71a26636
This is my take on this concept. Two black seats forced north into Oakland > rest of Oakland+Macomb CD makes Bay City-Thumb district inevitable > Flint+Saginaw seat formed and whole county district formed in SE MI east of Wayne > Livingston threw in with Lansing metro and Calhoun added for partisan balance reasons and Grand Rapids-Muskegon CD also created for partisan balance reasons > the rest of map draws itself.
(ignore the district numbers - assume they'd be numbered in a continuity-driven matter)
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #9 on: February 11, 2020, 02:27:22 AM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b99a88d3-23fe-4d86-a4e3-8a237a3424da
another map, the aim here was (unsuccessfully) a nice, compact, whole county CD with Washtenaw in it, and for the all-of-southern Wayne district to move south if so necessary. I compromised and then the rest of the map basically fell into place into place. On a sidenote: this makes the Muskegon-Grand Rapids more natural looking on the map, due to Ottawa having to pair with Michiana as opposed to areas north and east of Grand Rapids. Overall the Washtenaw CD becomes more marginal, going down to D+2. The Oakland district's partisanship is barely affected despite its losing its tiny share of Macomb, as Southern Oakland is paired with southern Macomb. The Thumb-Bay City district loses Midland as it is pushed further south, forcing Saginaw to separate from Flint due to the need to avoid Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City all ending up in different districts. Flint's district is forced south into Metro Lansing, and the Lansing CD switches out Battle Creek for Kalamazoo. Saginaw and Midland meanwhile are thrown in with a wide area of rural Michigan.
This map is a bit more D-favorable and an argument could be made it is D-leaning.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2020, 04:25:25 AM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b99a88d3-23fe-4d86-a4e3-8a237a3424da
another map, the aim here was (unsuccessfully) a nice, compact, whole county CD with Washtenaw in it, and for the all-of-southern Wayne district to move south if so necessary. I compromised and then the rest of the map basically fell into place into place. On a sidenote: this makes the Muskegon-Grand Rapids more natural looking on the map, due to Ottawa having to pair with Michiana as opposed to areas north and east of Grand Rapids. Overall the Washtenaw CD becomes more marginal, going down to D+2. The Oakland district's partisanship is barely affected despite its losing its tiny share of Macomb, as Southern Oakland is paired with southern Macomb. The Thumb-Bay City district loses Midland as it is pushed further south, forcing Saginaw to separate from Flint due to the need to avoid Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City all ending up in different districts. Flint's district is forced south into Metro Lansing, and the Lansing CD switches out Battle Creek for Kalamazoo. Saginaw and Midland meanwhile are thrown in with a wide area of rural Michigan.
This map is a bit more D-favorable and an argument could be made it is D-leaning.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/945fa102-1e26-4ee0-859a-1fbe56ec6af2 I made this based on your map, but united Ottawa and Kent instead.  The shifts is causes are particularly noticeable in Detroit, including a swing seat nearly all in Wayne, which I didn't know was possible.  I'd say this is more fair, but dems have big potential if they can keep improving in the suburbs since there are 3 suburban swing seats.
Interestingly this only further highlights the rotation involved.
Calhoun and Branch taken from Washtenaw CD forces it to take in the rest of Washtenaw and most of Monroe > southern Wayne CD takes in Livonia and other areas > NW Detroit CD takes in SE Oakland > almost-all-Macomb CD is created > Bay-Thumb CD takes in Saginaw > Midland CD takes in Muskegon > Grand Rapids CD has to take in most of Ottawa County.
I would like to assume that the double splitting of both Jackson and Hillsdale counties was a mistake - that's not something permitted under Michigan law with the sole exception of VRA compliance (something that MI Rs used in 2011).
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2020, 03:54:33 PM »


https://davesredistricting.org/join/1a8fff1c-a5dc-4bf1-82aa-cd22367f05c1
my take on a "Washtenaw paired with Southern Oakland" arrangement paired with a Wayne non-AA seat. I tried to make it balanced but Rs still have a verrry slight advantage on this map.
Two black seats were possible even when only one of them crossed into southern Oakland AND Macomb has a CD to itself starting north from 8 Mile Road.
Clinton won the Washtenaw-southern Oakland seat by 24 points in 2016.
Dem-leaning seat can be created from northern Oakland and Genesee, but it's not safe.
Multiple whole county CDs can be formed.
Even with the inclusion of Saginaw, the Bay-Thumb district is very hard for Dems, measuring up to be R+9.
Only 4 Clinton districts. Ouch. The Washtenaw-southern Oakland seat reallly hurts here.
Tipping point seats are Lansing (R+1.71) and Macomb (R+1.93). Lansing is most likely to be marginal here due to Livingston having to end up somewhere. Lansing is the most natural place for it to go.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2020, 03:15:13 AM »


Michigan map premised on competitive districts.
10, 11, 12, and 13 are all safe Dem; 1, 2, 4 and 6 are safe GOP; and the rest of the districts are at least fairly evenly divided, if not very evenly divided. The map does have a slight GOP lean but I wouldn't make much of it.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/67c4b87b-568c-4733-93eb-06bf4571758d
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #13 on: August 12, 2020, 05:02:26 AM »


This was done without looking at partisan data. Emphasis was on county integrity and having an all-Oakland CD. Unlike the previous map it has 2 black-plurality seats, not just one.
Only 6 county splits.
7, 11, 12, and 13 are Democratic. 1, 2, 3, and 4 are Republican. Not all of these 8 seats are safe. All other districts are too competitive to consider leaning too much to either party.
Ironically, while not aiming specifically for more competitive seats, I got a more competitive map than last time.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/530ccacc-b579-42c9-99fb-785785196b7d
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2020, 05:16:29 PM »

Do I need to make a second AA seat in Detroit?

Bit of a bummer, I was surprised that Detroit could be fit into a nice, neat district. I suppose it can be rearranged without really changing the outcome of the map though.

What qualifies as VRA compliant? I was able to make both Detroit CDs around 45% black. Should I shoot for 50?
A compact Detroit CD is excessive packing of black voters. That being said - you don't have to touch any CDs on the map other than 11 and 10. Just rearrange them.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #15 on: December 07, 2020, 05:20:03 PM »

Do I need to make a second AA seat in Detroit?

Bit of a bummer, I was surprised that Detroit could be fit into a nice, neat district. I suppose it can be rearranged without really changing the outcome of the map though.

What qualifies as VRA compliant? I was able to make both Detroit CDs around 45% black. Should I shoot for 50?
A compact Detroit CD is excessive packing of black voters. That being said - you don't have to touch any CDs on the map other than 11 and 10. Just rearrange them.
Rearranged above.
Ok, that's decent.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #16 on: December 07, 2020, 05:34:32 PM »

Do I need to make a second AA seat in Detroit?

Bit of a bummer, I was surprised that Detroit could be fit into a nice, neat district. I suppose it can be rearranged without really changing the outcome of the map though.

What qualifies as VRA compliant? I was able to make both Detroit CDs around 45% black. Should I shoot for 50?


The east Detroit is now down to 50% Black and the West Wayne is now 42% Black. DRA has minority rating at 98.

You can definitely get over 50% pretty easily and compactly. It does require dipping into Southfield and Pontiac, and you do have to do a little careful work to avoid splitting municipalities, but it's very doable.

Does going from 42 to 50% warrant another split of Oakland? I saw all of the Black population in South Oakland but I have an existing district with basically all of incorporated Oakland in it. Counties are pretty arbitrary political boundaries, but I don't like how Wayne/Washtenaw/Macomb/Oakland are all carved up in weird ways in the actual House map.
Imo, I think it can go either way. Going into Oakland or not going into it are both justifiable choices.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #17 on: December 07, 2020, 05:37:25 PM »

Pontiac shouldn't really be reached for, its way too far away and messes up the rest of the Oakland district.Southfield is ok though.
Yeah, Pontiac doesn't belong in there. Period. If you reach into Oakland, take Southfield. That's it.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #18 on: December 07, 2020, 06:12:42 PM »

You have to draw two Black districts in Detroit, suck it up.
The VRA does not require some grotesque arm leading up through Oakland all the way to Pontiac. Just no.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #19 on: December 07, 2020, 08:22:00 PM »

You have to draw two Black districts in Detroit, suck it up.
The VRA does not require some grotesque arm leading up through Oakland all the way to Pontiac. Just no.

Yeah, the Supreme Court has ruled that you can get a black performing district at like 42-44%.
Would the territory a performing black seat take on be relevant, if, say, an area was overwhelmingly registered R among whites, and another area not?
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #20 on: December 08, 2020, 07:42:53 AM »

the boundaries of Detroit itself I don't think have anything to do with race. The racial makeup of Detroit, though, has practically everything to do with race.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #21 on: December 08, 2020, 05:47:42 PM »

the boundaries of Detroit itself I don't think have anything to do with race. The racial makeup of Detroit, though, has practically everything to do with race.

The original boundaries aren't. The fact they haven't changed since the 1930s, however, is not disconnected from race. And elements of the boundaries have to do with class - for example, Redford Township still exists as a separate entity because it petitioned for a charter to stop Detroit annexing developed parts of it, which was definitely about more prosperous bits of the county wanting to remain separate from working-class Detroit.
Fair point.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2020, 03:24:15 PM »


Does this look good? (the two black seats are 45% and 45.3% black respectively)
https://davesredistricting.org/join/ca7bbf36-9aab-4ebb-8b09-46346f60fd15
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2020, 03:51:49 PM »

the Pontiac CD looks wonky but this is mainly to have a cleaner Oakland-Wayne leftovers district.
Logged
President Punxsutawney Phil
TimTurner
Atlas Politician
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,141
United States


« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2020, 03:59:54 PM »


Would this be preferable in Oakland?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
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 0.074 seconds with 12 queries.