2020 Redistricting in Arizona

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I can't help but think there should be a single district taking in the urban core of the area, including Downtown Phoenix, the Biltmore Area, Downtown Scottsdale, and Downtown Tempe.

Sounds like a Dem vote sink that Republicans would create.

It's too big and Scottsdale still leans r.

No and no. This is a population-balanced 6-4 D map (7-3 if O'Halleran can hold on--AZ Republicans are seriously packed in  the far northwest valley, far east valley, and along the Colorado River.) By lumping in R-leaning Scottsdale with the white liberal core of Phoenix and college town Tempe, you get a D+19 district, but you allow for four more Maricopa-based Dem districts in Peoria/Glendale, South Phoenix/Buckeye, and Mesa/Chandler.)

It would look like this:

Just looking at it I have doubts to that maps legality. That grey district certainly doesn't look like it's anywhere near a HVAP majority, it looks more like a HVAP in the low 40s.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I can't help but think there should be a single district taking in the urban core of the area, including Downtown Phoenix, the Biltmore Area, Downtown Scottsdale, and Downtown Tempe.

Sounds like a Dem vote sink that Republicans would create.

It's too big and Scottsdale still leans r.

No and no. This is a population-balanced 6-4 D map (7-3 if O'Halleran can hold on--AZ Republicans are seriously packed in  the far northwest valley, far east valley, and along the Colorado River.) By lumping in R-leaning Scottsdale with the white liberal core of Phoenix and college town Tempe, you get a D+19 district, but you allow for four more Maricopa-based Dem districts in Peoria/Glendale, South Phoenix/Buckeye, and Mesa/Chandler.)

It would look like this:

Just looking at it I have doubts to that maps legality. That grey district certainly doesn't look like it's anywhere near a HVAP majority, it looks more like a HVAP in the low 40s.

Two things to consider.
1. 2010 HVAP data is not that relevant for a 2020 map, you ought to look at 2010 total population proportions instead.
2. The share of Pinal in that seat is actually quite a bit more non-white relative to the county as a whole. Looks can be deceiving.

1. Going off the 2015 ACS the Hispanic pop in the grey will increase by about 5% to 2020. In which case the HVAP in that seat is maybe 45%.
2. On a redrawing of the map in DRA following Blairite's map, the grey area in Pinal is only about 5% more Hispanic than the county as a whole.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

https://davesredistricting.org/join/11c5be7b-6cae-4cb0-9e35-cd41ba44b688

The map seems to totally ignore municipal lines (mainly in Maricopa of course) not to mention some rather odd districts which don't follow COIs, particularly the rural seats (splitting the NE Natives, Northern Pinal shoved in a rural seat while the 10th randomly takes rural Yavapai). So I'd question how this map is "fair".

[AustralianSwingVoter]

These gerrymandered maps aren't going to be drawn. AZ has a commission for a reason, it's not going to draw 6 solid seats for either party, also the AZ commission, in particular, seems to prioritize competitiveness, which makes the gerrymanders in this thread, even less likely.

The 2010 commission's left tilt did indeed result in them prioritising competitive districts at all costs, and resulted in maps which somewhat favoured Democrats. But the 2020 commissioners will all have to be vetted and approved by a court that Gov. Ducey has completely stacked in the Republicans favour, so it's logical to assume the maps for the next decade will prioritise Communities of Interest and Municipal Boundaries in such a way to somewhat favour the Republican Party.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Drew up the Commission's grid draft in DRA. 5D-4R in 2016 and 2020, however the 5th is a lot closer than it looks (Trump+2) so it would probably become 6D-3R in a couple years.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/a4cf6a5f-4142-4d74-9c83-f57a9dd9a4f0