Senatorial districts maps

[bagelman]

I'm sure it's been done before but I just whipped up a whole batch of 'em on DRA. Idea is that senate seats are not statewide, instead each state is divided into two equally populous districts. In this scenario, congressional committees are put in charge of drawing all the districts, and a lot of horse trading takes place...

Alabama - the south is a longshot Democrat district, probably at least Likely R, and the north would be safe for Senator Roy Moore.

Arkansas both East and West are Safe R

Arizona Not a good map for Democrats pre-Trump. The Inner district could elect Sinema post-Trump, while the outer district will become better for Republicans.

California No attempt at partisanship here, just SoCal vs. the rest. This is very good for the former, as both OTL senators are Bay Area giants.

Colorado Inner district Democratic, Outer district Republican but could fall in a landslide thanks to Boulder County.

Connecticut Both districts Democrat

Florida North is solidly R, while the South is generally D but could easily be taken by Rubio in a wave.

Georgia Gerrymandered to force an even map. "Outer" district solidly R, "Inner" district for Democrats.

Iowa Democrats in the East, Republicans in the West (which includes Des Moines).

Illinois Easy to allow Republican seat, just keep Cook whole in the Metro district and the downstate district will lean rightward.

Indiana Combining Indy and the northeast creates a swing seat, alongside a Safe R East/South seat.

Kansas Eastern seat is less safe, especially after Trump, but still fairly conservative.

Kentucky I probably could make an east/west map but I didn't feel like it. North/South works fine, given how the rural east has been trending for a long time. North is probably still Safe R, but it's enough to get people's hopes up.

Louisana East/West divide, both Safe R.

Massachusetts East/West divide, both Safe D, probably could be better but my priority was making sure the southeast doesn't mess around in the west's primaries.

Maryland This one turned out nicely. The Outer seat is a Lean R seat, while the Inner seat is a well packed black plurality 80% Dem seat.

Michigan Inner seat is Safe D, Outer Seat could be won by a Democrat in OTL 2012 but not after Trump.

Missouri Combining St. Louis and Columbia in the eastern seat is the best Democrats can do to defend McCaskill. West is Safe R.

Mississippi Hideous map, but for good reason: West district is the only black majority seat nationwide. East seat, of course, is Safe R.

North Carolina No gerrymandering here, Lean D (east) and Likely R (west).

North Dakota No reason to bother with anything other than a simply east/west split. Heidi might survive in the east, or might not.

Nebraska Democrat gerrymander so they might win the Inner/East seat.

New Jersey South winnable for Republicans but is Lean D, North is Safe D.

New Mexico Went with metro/non metro split here.

Nevada The only way to split Nevada in the 21st century.

New York Because none of Long or Staten Island can be separated from the downstate seat, the upstate seat includes most of the Bronx. As such, both Safe D.

Ohio tried to do both an east/west split and a north/south split, but it makes since given the placements of Cleveland and Cincinnati. Northeast seat should be secure for Brown, despite Trump and some conservative areas. Southwest, despite Columbus, should be secure for Portman.

Oklahoma Safe R

Oregon Northwest is Safe D, outer seat is Tossup.

Pennslyvania Dem East, GOP West. Pittsburgh is inevitably screwed.

South Carolina South is probably Lean R but winnable, North is Safe R.

South Dakota East is somewhat winnable in a pre-Trump Democratic wave.

Tennessee West is clearly more moderate.

Texas Democratic gerrymander so they can win the South, which includes Houston, Austin, El Paso, and the Rio Grande valley. Ted Cruz is doomed. North is Safe R.

Utah Metro is winnable post-Trump.

Vermont West Sanders, East Safe D.

Virginia Not a favorite of mine, I guess you could call it an R gerrymander. Very important for me, if probably inconsequential, that Loundoun county is in the R seat to block it from having in nominating a senate Democrat.

Washington Like in Oregon, one seat is Safe D and the other is competitive.

Wisconsin Southern Dems, North Reps, clean and simple.

West Virginia whatever

Wyoming

[Joseph Cao]

I tried rating the partisan breakdown of this hypothetical Senate. Presuming Senate seats to be relatively correlated with presidential results, districts decided within 5 points at the presidential level are rated as Tossups, between 5 and 10 as Leaning towards a party, between 10 and 15 as Likely, and above 15 as Safe, although ratings are necessarily approximate.
For the states you’ve mapped out, assuming all are open seats in politically neutral years (with special notes for a few senators with a proven ability to outrun their partisan baselines):

SAFE D (22 seats)
CA–North, CA–South
CT–East, CT–West
GA–Inner
IL–North
MD–Inner
MA–East, MA–West
MI–Inner
MS–West
NV–Inner
NJ–North
NM–Inner
NY–South
OR–Inner
PA–East
VT–East, VT–West
VA–Inner
WA–Inner
WI–South

LIKELY D (3 seats)
CO–Inner
NY–North (trending R)
TX–South (trending D)

LEAN D (3 seats)
FL–South
NC–East
SC–South (!) (trending D)

TOSSUP (8 seats)
AZ–Inner (trending D)
IA–East (trending R)
IN–North (slightly trending R)
NE–East
NJ–South (trending R)
OH–Northeast (trending R as an open seat; Likely D with Brown)
UT–Inner (trending D, depending on Mormon/McMullin voters)
WA–Outer

LEAN R (4 seats)
KS–East (trending D)
MD–Outer (trending D)
NM–Outer (trending R)
OR–Outer (trending R)

LIKELY R (12 seats)
AL–South
AZ–Outer (trending R)
CO–Outer (trending R)
IA–West
IL–South (trending R)
MI–Outer (trending R)
MO–East (trending R)
NV–Outer
NC–West (trending R)
OH–Southwest
TN–West
VA–Outer (trending R)

SAFE R (30 seats)
AL–North
AR–East, AR–West
FL–North
GA–Outer
IN–South
KS–West
KY–North, KY–South
LA–East, LA–West
MS–East
MO–West
NE–West
ND–East (Heitkamp loses), ND–West
OK–East, OK–West
PA–West
SC–North
SD–East, SD–West
TN–East
TX–North
UT–Outer
WV–North, WV–South (as an open seat; Manchin probably ekes out a win here given his performance in the coalfields vs. the rest of the state, but I am not fully certain)
WI–North
WY–East, WY–West

There are nine missing states. No maps for these, but I estimated the following breakdowns based on their political geography (which may therefore be somewhat inaccurate):
AK (1 R, 1 T)
DE (2 Ds)
HI (2 Ds)
ID (2 Rs)
ME (1 D, 1 R)
MN (1 D, 1 R) (whichever D senator held the non-Twin Cities seat would have lost in the past few years)
MT (1 R, 1 T) (IIRC Tester lives in the eastern, more Republican seat)
NH (1 D, 1 T)
RI (2 Ds) (one of which is probably trending R)
Which split approximately as follows: nine Democrats, six Republicans, and three Tossups.

So the final breakdown is: 37 Democrats, 52 Republicans, and 11 Tossups. Brutal for Ds, and that cluster of rural WWC Likely R (trending R) states is the clearest indicator as to why the Democratic Party is operating at such a massive disadvantage in the Senate.

[bagelman]

I did do some maps for the missing states, but forgot to link them here:

Alaska Both seem pretty Safe R to me, although Alaska's a state willing to elect independents, so who knows?

Delaware Getting two Safe D seats requires an ugly gerrymander. The current political coalition of urban democrats vs. rural republicans is really a big R advantage in the senate, as Dems self pack themselves both in terms to concentrating themselves in only a few states and concentrating themselves within certain areas within states.

Minnesota About what you expected. Klobuchar would be able to hold the outer seat if that was hers, but she lives in Minneapolis IIRC.

Montana

I didn't bother drawing maps for the states that already have two seats because they're pretty much already set up. Hawaii is Safe D regardless of how you slice it, opposite for Idaho. New Hampshire and Maine are drawn fairly as it is. That leaves Rhode Island, which is a mild Democratic gerrymander by splitting Providence to shore up the "outer"/southwestern seat - a fairer map for R's would be this one divided east/west.

[Joseph Cao]

Delaware Getting two Safe D seats requires an ugly gerrymander. The current political coalition of urban democrats vs. rural republicans is really a big R advantage in the senate, as Dems self pack themselves both in terms to concentrating themselves in only a few states and concentrating themselves within certain areas within states.

Ah, I forgot about Delaware Ds’ self-packing into New Castle County. The more you know!

Montana

The western district isn’t the tossup I originally guessed it was, but Tester won it with a margin in the high single digits, so as an open seat it could conceivably flip in a Democratic wave.

Anyway, when you add these states to the tally the Republicans make some slight gains, and we end up with 36 Democrats, 55 Republicans, and 9 Tossups. To get to a majority, Democrats would then have to sweep the Tossups and all of the Lean R states as well as reaching into the Likely R group, not unlike the strategy they currently employ – but the electoral calculus is much harder for them now that states like Downstate Illinois and ME–2 have moved into the Lean/Likely R column.

[インターネット掲示板ユーザー Punxsutawney Phil]

I literally did something like this a long time ago, but this seems to be a different twist on the concept, being relatively less mindful of partisan factors.