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

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:05:14 PM
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]
Author Topic: 2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan  (Read 40825 times)
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« on: February 06, 2020, 07:08:47 AM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/21a90af8-a1a5-4a7f-b51c-ef28e70cbfe6
https://davesredistricting.org/join/db73d662-b1fc-4fb4-acf6-905ad66fef2a
2 potential maps.  Detroit area gets shifted a lot once drawing a map based on compactness rather than tendrils for partisan reasons.  The only main difference between my 2 maps is whether Flint and Lansing are in the same district.  A decade ago that would've been seen as a Dem pack but looking forward it makes a Clinton+14 (ideal margin, enough to be safe but not so lopsided it wastes Dem votes) seat outside of Detroit metro.  Without combining the 2 cities, it's difficult to create a safe dem district outside of Detroit, due to political geography.  My second map gives Flint and Lansing each their own districts, but both districts are competitive, one leaning R one leaning D.  It is true Trump wins a majority of seats on both maps, but that is basically inevitable due to political geography on any fair map.  Dems are heavily packed into Wayne County (which can't be cracked due to the VRA) and sprinkled out throughput the rest of the state.  Any map where Clinton wins 7 or even 6 seats is probably a Dem gerrymander, compensating for Dem's geographical disadvantage rather than drawing fair lines.  The real debate will on exactly what each side wants to compromise on, and whether each side values more safe seats or more competitive seats. 

As the Arizona independent commission has proved, independent commissions actually don't draw bipartisan gerrymanders or give any consideration to the political interests of the parties. The Michigan Independent Commission has very clear criteria which they must abide by in this order:
Equal Population, Geographical Contiguity, Communities of Interest, Partisan Fairness, favouring or disfavouring incumbents, respecting county and municipal boundaries and compactness.
And I'll just quote the Michigan Constitution on the fourth criteria
Quote
(d) Districts shall not provide a disproportionate advantage to any political party. A disproportionate advantage to a political party shall be determined using accepted measures of partisan fairness.
The commission will draw a map similar to those the AZ commission draws. Prioritising COIs, Compactness and Partisan Fairness (so an 8-5 map is clearly not acceptable) and not giving any consideration to the concerns and demands of political parties.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2020, 05:19:08 PM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/21a90af8-a1a5-4a7f-b51c-ef28e70cbfe6
https://davesredistricting.org/join/db73d662-b1fc-4fb4-acf6-905ad66fef2a
2 potential maps.  Detroit area gets shifted a lot once drawing a map based on compactness rather than tendrils for partisan reasons.  The only main difference between my 2 maps is whether Flint and Lansing are in the same district.  A decade ago that would've been seen as a Dem pack but looking forward it makes a Clinton+14 (ideal margin, enough to be safe but not so lopsided it wastes Dem votes) seat outside of Detroit metro.  Without combining the 2 cities, it's difficult to create a safe dem district outside of Detroit, due to political geography.  My second map gives Flint and Lansing each their own districts, but both districts are competitive, one leaning R one leaning D.  It is true Trump wins a majority of seats on both maps, but that is basically inevitable due to political geography on any fair map.  Dems are heavily packed into Wayne County (which can't be cracked due to the VRA) and sprinkled out throughput the rest of the state.  Any map where Clinton wins 7 or even 6 seats is probably a Dem gerrymander, compensating for Dem's geographical disadvantage rather than drawing fair lines.  The real debate will on exactly what each side wants to compromise on, and whether each side values more safe seats or more competitive seats. 

As the Arizona independent commission has proved, independent commissions actually don't draw bipartisan gerrymanders or give any consideration to the political interests of the parties. The Michigan Independent Commission has very clear criteria which they must abide by in this order:
Equal Population, Geographical Contiguity, Communities of Interest, Partisan Fairness, favouring or disfavouring incumbents, respecting county and municipal boundaries and compactness.
And I'll just quote the Michigan Constitution on the fourth criteria
Quote
(d) Districts shall not provide a disproportionate advantage to any political party. A disproportionate advantage to a political party shall be determined using accepted measures of partisan fairness.
The commission will draw a map similar to those the AZ commission draws. Prioritising COIs, Compactness and Partisan Fairness (so an 8-5 map is clearly not acceptable) and not giving any consideration to the concerns and demands of political parties.
a map with partisan fairness won't always have a partisan breakdown identical to the state due to political geography.  Ironically doing so could be a gerrymander for one party. 
You are talking about drawing a map without consideration of partisanship. Partisan fairness means drawing a map that represents the politics of the state, and it does mean drawing lines to achieve that, as Independent Commissions already do. Trump 7-6 Clinton seems like a reasonable assumption, with one competitive D seat and one or two competitive R seats.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2020, 05:24:59 PM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/21a90af8-a1a5-4a7f-b51c-ef28e70cbfe6
https://davesredistricting.org/join/db73d662-b1fc-4fb4-acf6-905ad66fef2a
2 potential maps.  Detroit area gets shifted a lot once drawing a map based on compactness rather than tendrils for partisan reasons.  The only main difference between my 2 maps is whether Flint and Lansing are in the same district.  A decade ago that would've been seen as a Dem pack but looking forward it makes a Clinton+14 (ideal margin, enough to be safe but not so lopsided it wastes Dem votes) seat outside of Detroit metro.  Without combining the 2 cities, it's difficult to create a safe dem district outside of Detroit, due to political geography.  My second map gives Flint and Lansing each their own districts, but both districts are competitive, one leaning R one leaning D.  It is true Trump wins a majority of seats on both maps, but that is basically inevitable due to political geography on any fair map.  Dems are heavily packed into Wayne County (which can't be cracked due to the VRA) and sprinkled out throughput the rest of the state.  Any map where Clinton wins 7 or even 6 seats is probably a Dem gerrymander, compensating for Dem's geographical disadvantage rather than drawing fair lines.  The real debate will on exactly what each side wants to compromise on, and whether each side values more safe seats or more competitive seats. 

As the Arizona independent commission has proved, independent commissions actually don't draw bipartisan gerrymanders or give any consideration to the political interests of the parties. The Michigan Independent Commission has very clear criteria which they must abide by in this order:
Equal Population, Geographical Contiguity, Communities of Interest, Partisan Fairness, favouring or disfavouring incumbents, respecting county and municipal boundaries and compactness.
And I'll just quote the Michigan Constitution on the fourth criteria
Quote
(d) Districts shall not provide a disproportionate advantage to any political party. A disproportionate advantage to a political party shall be determined using accepted measures of partisan fairness.
The commission will draw a map similar to those the AZ commission draws. Prioritising COIs, Compactness and Partisan Fairness (so an 8-5 map is clearly not acceptable) and not giving any consideration to the concerns and demands of political parties.
a map with partisan fairness won't always have a partisan breakdown identical to the state due to political geography.  Ironically doing so could be a gerrymander for one party. 
You are talking about drawing a map without consideration of partisanship. Partisan fairness means drawing a map that represents the politics of the state, and it does mean drawing lines to achieve that, as Independent Commissions already do. Trump 7-6 Clinton seems like a reasonable assumption, with one competitive D seat and one or two competitive R seats.
But once you account for COIs, 2 vra seats in Detroit, ect it's difficult to get 6  Clinton seats. It is possible with 4 in Detroit, 1 in Flint, and 1 in Lansing, but it's risky for Dems because margins in the Detroit and Lansing seats would be razor thin.  In order to pass a bipartisan commission, you can't draw a Dem gerrymander.
Once again, it isn't a bipartisan commission. It's an independent commission. There is a difference between them that you don't seem to understand.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2020, 08:27:12 PM »


https://davesredistricting.org/join/f1e1bee7-6029-41ce-b898-8ba4e67cd46f
1 - R+10
2 - R+3
3 - R+15
4 - D+3
5 - R+2
6 - R+11
7 - D+2
8 - R+13
9 - R+2
10 - D+1
11 - D+10
12 - D+31 (49% Black)
13 - D+24 (49% Black)

If the Commission decides to prioritise partisan fairness and competitiveness. COIs still respected. 6 seats have a D PVI, 7 seats have a R PVI. 6 seats voted Clinton, 7 seats voted Trump. 4 seats are safe R, 3 seats are Safe D, and the remaining 6 are competitive, with 3 leaning left and 3 leaning right. Only 3 townships + Detroit are split.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2020, 10:35:03 PM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f1e1bee7-6029-41ce-b898-8ba4e67cd46f
1 - R+10
2 - R+3
3 - R+15
4 - D+3
5 - R+2
6 - R+11
7 - D+2
8 - R+13
9 - R+2
10 - D+1
11 - D+10
12 - D+31 (49% Black)
13 - D+24 (49% Black)

If the Commission decides to prioritise partisan fairness and competitiveness. COIs still respected. 6 seats have a D PVI, 7 seats have a R PVI. 6 seats voted Clinton, 7 seats voted Trump. 4 seats are safe R, 3 seats are Safe D, and the remaining 6 are competitive, with 3 leaning left and 3 leaning right. Only 3 townships + Detroit are split.
Why split Kent County?  Also the 3 way cut of Genesee is unnecessary and unfair to the Flint community.
Why not read the description. This map is merely an example of what a commission could do if they prioritised competitive districts.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2020, 11:40:09 PM »

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f1e1bee7-6029-41ce-b898-8ba4e67cd46f
1 - R+10
2 - R+3
3 - R+15
4 - D+3
5 - R+2
6 - R+11
7 - D+2
8 - R+13
9 - R+2
10 - D+1
11 - D+10
12 - D+31 (49% Black)
13 - D+24 (49% Black)

If the Commission decides to prioritise partisan fairness and competitiveness. COIs still respected. 6 seats have a D PVI, 7 seats have a R PVI. 6 seats voted Clinton, 7 seats voted Trump. 4 seats are safe R, 3 seats are Safe D, and the remaining 6 are competitive, with 3 leaning left and 3 leaning right. Only 3 townships + Detroit are split.
Why split Kent County?  Also the 3 way cut of Genesee is unnecessary and unfair to the Flint community.
Why not read the description. This map is merely an example of what a commission could do if they prioritised competitive districts.
Competitive districts can be achieved without dicing up communities.
The competitive map respects COIs just as much as your map does.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2020, 04:55:10 AM »
« Edited: February 08, 2020, 07:37:58 PM by AustralianSwingVoter »

not really.  You just want them together so the seat doesn't vote Trump.  Saginaw and Flint are different cities, not a single COI.  Now if I'm a Republican on the commission, I might still agree to a Flint-Saginaw district, it's a small concession.  But the other side would need to cooperate in other areas.  It's inevitable some districts will be drawn in a way that disproportionately favor one party, but the whole map can't be drawn with subtle decisions that all happen to favor 1 party.

The commission isn't made up of political apparatchiks or rabid party hacks. All the members are selected at random from a pool of independent applicants. And to serve on the commission you can't actually have any political ties whatsoever (no position within a party, staffer, lobbyist, consultant etc), merely that you registered as a member of a party on voter rolls. Just look at the Arizona commission for what the membership will be like. All lawyers, most with doctorates and additional degrees, and with no actual political links.
The aim of the commission is not to draw a bipartisan gerrymander. It's to draw a fair map that prioritises COIs while making sure it doesn't advantage either party (and yes that means adjusting for the geographic disadvantage).
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2020, 10:35:46 PM »


https://davesredistricting.org/join/b89d1b54-490e-4440-b3b6-29d27d0081dd
1 - R+11
2 - R+7
3 - R+7
4 - R+4
5 - R+5
6 - R+5
7 - R+4
8 - R+5
9 - R+6
10 - R+6
11 - D+18
12 - D+28
13 - D+32
The Michigan GOP would like to introduce you to this totally fair map which definitely has no ulterior motives.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2020, 02:59:23 AM »


https://davesredistricting.org/join/b89d1b54-490e-4440-b3b6-29d27d0081dd
1 - R+11
2 - R+7
3 - R+7
4 - R+4
5 - R+5
6 - R+5
7 - R+4
8 - R+5
9 - R+6
10 - R+6
11 - D+18
12 - D+28
13 - D+32
The Michigan GOP would like to introduce you to this totally fair map which definitely has no ulterior motives.
how do u directly upload a pic like that?
but it's amazing u could draw a map that lopsided that clean looking.  The only obvious give away is arm reaching into Pontiac.
And the arm reaching to Pontiac can be justified under the VRA without too much effort.
And it's a reminder that just because a map that looks clean doesn't mean it's at all fair. That's why Independent Commissions take into account partisan fairness.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2020, 06:22:47 AM »


https://davesredistricting.org/join/ee18ca89-11d7-4635-9684-3dfb273592b1
1 - R+11
2 - R+12
3 - D+5
4 - D+6
5 - R+15
6 - D+6
7 - D+5
8 - R+14
9 - D+6
10 - D+6
11 - D+6
12 - D+14 (47% Black)
13 - D+11 (47% Black)
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2020, 07:10:18 AM »

My latest version, which solves the Livingston problem by pairing with Washtenaw and Oakland in a coherent D+1.66 district that is quickly trending more D.  Oakland, Macomb and Wayne each have a district entirely within them.  The-Oakland only district is D+0.76 but Clinton won by 5.  The white parts of Wayne are reasonably paired with Monroe; it's basically a tossup district (DRA says R+0.61).  Flint/Saginaw and Lansing/Isabella districts are D+3 and D+0.15 but Trump very narrowly won both.  
I'd say good map but Rs will hate all those suburban swing seats and Dems will be sweating since  Clinton won only 4 seats!  Of course it is a citizen's commission.  If they prioritize competitiveness we could see something like this.  But I predict they'll focus more on keeping boundaries unbroken and COIs.
Well given the political parties have literally no input into the commission it doesn't really matter what they think. It'll be whatever 13 random citizens with no political links who are probably lawyers think best fits the criteria they follow.
And it should be noted that respecting COIs is completely different from keeping Counties intact. And the commission is bound by law to prioritise respecting COIs and competitive elections over county and municipality integrity.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2020, 12:29:17 AM »

I would also note that it's not even an either/or whether Saginaw goes with Genesee or with Bay and Midland. Based on 2018 numbers, that four county group has about 2% too many people, which can easily be dealt with by cutting out western Midland or northern Bay, neither or which are obviously out of place in a northern Michigan district. Your argument actually depends upon the notion that the Thumb can't go with exurban Macomb and/or Oakland, which is not a proposition you've actually made coherently yet.

Genesee+Tri-Cities counties is indeed only 16k over pop on 2018 estimates. And for comparison they were 57k over in 2010 and 35k over in 2016. Given the rate of decline it looks very likely that Genesee+Saginaw+Bay+Midland Counties will be extremely close to perfect population in the 2020 census. Which only makes the Flint+Tri-Cities pairing more appealing.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #12 on: February 18, 2020, 02:14:17 AM »

I would also note that it's not even an either/or whether Saginaw goes with Genesee or with Bay and Midland. Based on 2018 numbers, that four county group has about 2% too many people, which can easily be dealt with by cutting out western Midland or northern Bay, neither or which are obviously out of place in a northern Michigan district. Your argument actually depends upon the notion that the Thumb can't go with exurban Macomb and/or Oakland, which is not a proposition you've actually made coherently yet.

Genesee+Tri-Cities counties is indeed only 16k over pop on 2018 estimates. And for comparison they were 57k over in 2010 and 35k over in 2016. Given the rate of decline it looks very likely that Genesee+Saginaw+Bay+Midland Counties will be extremely close to perfect population in the 2020 census. Which only makes the Flint+Tri-Cities pairing more appealing.
Clinton won such a a district by about 2,000 votes. If you do that, you all but assure a thumb+northern Macomb district.  This is similar to the current map, but there will definitely be differences.  I predict Lansing will be kept whole and an exurban Oakland+Livingston district.  MI-4 is likely the seat eliminated.
A Thumb+N Macomb/Oakland district seems like the best way to balance COIs. A Thumb+N Michigan would be better but then you either split the Tri Cities or force Flint into a horrid pairing with the Detroit exurbs or combined with Lansing in a clear gerrymander. The Thumb doesn't really have anywhere good to go that doesn't mess with other COIs, but combining it with the Detroit exurbs and rural fringe seems like the pairing that causes the least harm. And I don't think anyone debates that the 4th will be the seat that's eliminated. Hard to see how the 4th could possibly survive, really.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #13 on: February 18, 2020, 04:53:06 AM »

I would also note that it's not even an either/or whether Saginaw goes with Genesee or with Bay and Midland. Based on 2018 numbers, that four county group has about 2% too many people, which can easily be dealt with by cutting out western Midland or northern Bay, neither or which are obviously out of place in a northern Michigan district. Your argument actually depends upon the notion that the Thumb can't go with exurban Macomb and/or Oakland, which is not a proposition you've actually made coherently yet.

Genesee+Tri-Cities counties is indeed only 16k over pop on 2018 estimates. And for comparison they were 57k over in 2010 and 35k over in 2016. Given the rate of decline it looks very likely that Genesee+Saginaw+Bay+Midland Counties will be extremely close to perfect population in the 2020 census. Which only makes the Flint+Tri-Cities pairing more appealing.
Clinton won such a a district by about 2,000 votes. If you do that, you all but assure a thumb+northern Macomb district.  This is similar to the current map, but there will definitely be differences.  I predict Lansing will be kept whole and an exurban Oakland+Livingston district.  MI-4 is likely the seat eliminated.
A Thumb+N Macomb/Oakland district seems like the best way to balance COIs. A Thumb+N Michigan would be better but then you either split the Tri Cities or force Flint into a horrid pairing with the Detroit exurbs or combined with Lansing in a clear gerrymander. The Thumb doesn't really have anywhere good to go that doesn't mess with other COIs, but combining it with the Detroit exurbs and rural fringe seems like the pairing that causes the least harm. And I don't think anyone debates that the 4th will be the seat that's eliminated. Hard to see how the 4th could possibly survive, really.

Here is a map with a Flint+Tri Cities district.  Overall a pretty fair map and I could see the commission passing something like this.  Likely a 7R-6D map but either side could pick off another seat or 2 in a good year.

Somewhere between your map and the above map looks likely to result from the commission.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2020, 04:45:26 PM »

What areas of Wayne besides Dearborn have the highest concentrations of Arab-Americans? 

IIRC there are fair few Yemenis in Hamtramck.

I'm not sure Hamtramck is Muslim Majority, Wikipedia metions that it's city council is. Even though the Bengali and Pakistani Muslims are different from their Arab cousins, I'm sure they would prefer to be together rather than cracked between the AA seat. This is why I always reach an arm in there for my MI-12/13s. Heading west you got some in Livonia and the other townships in that western line (Redford, Plymouth, etc), though they are more of an Arab Christian Descent.


This seems like a useful image.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #15 on: February 23, 2020, 01:13:45 PM »


Very very interesting. To start off with Flint+Tri-Cities whole counties is 1.01100 quotas, or about only 7k excess population.
Logged
AustralianSwingVoter
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,956
Australia


« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2020, 09:03:41 AM »

Just to see if it's possible given how easy a 9-4 GOP gerry is, a solid attempt at a 9-4 Dem gerry. Every Dem incumbent resides in their own seat except for Slotkin who really lives in the worst place possible, though I assume she'd move to the 7th. The 3rd is marginal but trending blue while the 4th and 11th are both zooming right.
Overall it turned out a lot better than I was expecting.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/9f0a01dd-f779-4b11-82ce-ed008b8a1ce9
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.051 seconds with 13 queries.