2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[I’m not Stu]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/c8622acc-5237-4f4e-a50a-3fbd04efe2ed
This is maybe a more realistic GOP gerrymander.  23-2-14.  The 2 swing seats are Trump+8 (rio grande) and Trump+12 (Highland Park-prosper).  Incumbents protected.
1. Safe R, Tyler to Mesquite, Trump+33, Louie Gohmert
2. Safe R, northeastern Houston suburbs/exurbs, Trump+31, Dan Crenshaw
3. Safe R, Plano to Marshall, Trump+33, Van Taylor
4. Safe R, Texarkana to McKinney, Trump+34, open
5. Safe R, Garland to Longview, Trump+34, Lance Gooden
6. Safe R, Arlington and southern DFW exurbs, Trump+29, Ron Wright
7. Safe D, northern and western Houston, Clinton+43, Lizzie Fletcher (vulnerable to non-white primary challenger)
8. Safe R, The Woodlands to Jersey Village, Trump+34, Kevin Brady
9. Safe D, Fort Bend and SW Harris, Clinton+46, Al Green
10. Safe R, western Harris to Louisiana border, Trump+33, Michael McCaul?
11. Safe R, Midland to northern Bexar, Trump+31, August Pfluger
12. Safe R, Fort Worth to Weatherford, Trump+30, Kay Granger
13. Safe R, Amarillo to Wichita Falls, Trump+60, Ronny L. Jackson
14. Safe R, Galveston to Beaumont, Trump+24, Randy Weber
15. Safe D, McAllen to Corpus Christi, Clinton+29, Vicente Gonzalez
16. Safe D, El Paso, Clinton+33, Veronica Escobar
17. Safe R, Bryan to North Travis, Trump+22, Pete Sessions
18. Safe D, central to south Houston, Clinton+56, Sheila Jackson Lee
19. Safe R, Lubbock to western Travis, Trump+31, Jodey Arrington
20. Safe D, western San Antonio, Clinton+27, Joaquin Castro
21. Safe R, northern San Antonio suburbs/exurbs, Trump+28, Chip Roy
22. Safe R, Fort Bend to Gonzales County, Trump+30, Troy Nehls?
23. Likely R, El Paso to southern Bexar, Trump+8, open
24. Safe R, northern Tarrant to southern Denton, Trump+31, Beth Van Duyne?
25. Safe R, Abilene to Pflugerville, Trump+30, Roger Williams
26. Safe R, eastern Denton to Stevens County, Trump+29, Michael Burgess
27. Safe R, Corpus Christi to southern Houston exurbs, Trump+31, Michael Cloud,
28. Safe D, McAllen to eastern Bexar, Clinton+38, Henry Cuellar
29. Safe D, Houston to Pasadena, Clinton+51, Sylvia Garcia
30. Safe D, southern Dallas and Arlington, Clinton+53, Eddie Bernice Johnson
31. Safe R, Round Rock to Hood County, Trump+29, John Carter
32. Safe D, Downtown Dallas and northern suburbs, Clinton+39, Colin Allred
33. Safe D, Fort Worth to Grand Prairie, Clinton+49, Marc Veasey
34. Safe D, Brownsville to Corpus Christi, Clinton+27, Filemon Vela Jr.
35. Safe D, San Antonio to Austin, Clinton+43, open
36. Safe R, Jasper to Pearland, Trump+33, Brian Babin
37. Safe D, Austin, Clinton+53, Lloyd Doggett
38. Likely R, Highland Park to Prosper, Trump+12, open
39. Safe R, Hunters Creek Village to Livingston, Trump+30, open

But aren’t Texas and Florida GOP run states that have no qualms about drawing out incumbent Republicans?

I think they's prefer to preserve their incumbents, and this map proves it can be done with maximizing partisan performance.  This map likely ends up as 25-14, with one GOP seat with a risk of flipping,the north Dallas one.  But Trump+12 is decent.

Don't Florida Republicans frequently draw out incumbent Republicans to encourage primary challenges from the right?

I'm not aware of that.  In TX, idk who they'd target.  My districts are already so red a primary challenge becomes more likely.  My map does kind of screw over McCaul tho, his district drastically changes and he'd be vulnerable to a primary challenge.  I suspect he'd prefer it to his currently district however, better to risk primary battle than certain general election defeat.  His current district is basically a tossup trending D now.  Also Van Taylor gets a very different district, but it's needed to keep it totally safe.  My map prioritized seat safety first, maximizing GOP seats second, and incumbents 3rd.  Usually I got all 3.

Cliff Stearns was drawn out in Florida. Was it specifically done to target him so that he would get primaried?

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/c8622acc-5237-4f4e-a50a-3fbd04efe2ed
This is maybe a more realistic GOP gerrymander.  23-2-14.  The 2 swing seats are Trump+8 (rio grande) and Trump+12 (Highland Park-prosper).  Incumbents protected.
1. Safe R, Tyler to Mesquite, Trump+33, Louie Gohmert
2. Safe R, northeastern Houston suburbs/exurbs, Trump+31, Dan Crenshaw
3. Safe R, Plano to Marshall, Trump+33, Van Taylor
4. Safe R, Texarkana to McKinney, Trump+34, open
5. Safe R, Garland to Longview, Trump+34, Lance Gooden
6. Safe R, Arlington and southern DFW exurbs, Trump+29, Ron Wright
7. Safe D, northern and western Houston, Clinton+43, Lizzie Fletcher (vulnerable to non-white primary challenger)
8. Safe R, The Woodlands to Jersey Village, Trump+34, Kevin Brady
9. Safe D, Fort Bend and SW Harris, Clinton+46, Al Green
10. Safe R, western Harris to Louisiana border, Trump+33, Michael McCaul?
11. Safe R, Midland to northern Bexar, Trump+31, August Pfluger
12. Safe R, Fort Worth to Weatherford, Trump+30, Kay Granger
13. Safe R, Amarillo to Wichita Falls, Trump+60, Ronny L. Jackson
14. Safe R, Galveston to Beaumont, Trump+24, Randy Weber
15. Safe D, McAllen to Corpus Christi, Clinton+29, Vicente Gonzalez
16. Safe D, El Paso, Clinton+33, Veronica Escobar
17. Safe R, Bryan to North Travis, Trump+22, Pete Sessions
18. Safe D, central to south Houston, Clinton+56, Sheila Jackson Lee
19. Safe R, Lubbock to western Travis, Trump+31, Jodey Arrington
20. Safe D, western San Antonio, Clinton+27, Joaquin Castro
21. Safe R, northern San Antonio suburbs/exurbs, Trump+28, Chip Roy
22. Safe R, Fort Bend to Gonzales County, Trump+30, Troy Nehls?
23. Likely R, El Paso to southern Bexar, Trump+8, open
24. Safe R, northern Tarrant to southern Denton, Trump+31, Beth Van Duyne?
25. Safe R, Abilene to Pflugerville, Trump+30, Roger Williams
26. Safe R, eastern Denton to Stevens County, Trump+29, Michael Burgess
27. Safe R, Corpus Christi to southern Houston exurbs, Trump+31, Michael Cloud,
28. Safe D, McAllen to eastern Bexar, Clinton+38, Henry Cuellar
29. Safe D, Houston to Pasadena, Clinton+51, Sylvia Garcia
30. Safe D, southern Dallas and Arlington, Clinton+53, Eddie Bernice Johnson
31. Safe R, Round Rock to Hood County, Trump+29, John Carter
32. Safe D, Downtown Dallas and northern suburbs, Clinton+39, Colin Allred
33. Safe D, Fort Worth to Grand Prairie, Clinton+49, Marc Veasey
34. Safe D, Brownsville to Corpus Christi, Clinton+27, Filemon Vela Jr.
35. Safe D, San Antonio to Austin, Clinton+43, open
36. Safe R, Jasper to Pearland, Trump+33, Brian Babin
37. Safe D, Austin, Clinton+53, Lloyd Doggett
38. Likely R, Highland Park to Prosper, Trump+12, open
39. Safe R, Hunters Creek Village to Livingston, Trump+30, open

But aren’t Texas and Florida GOP run states that have no qualms about drawing out incumbent Republicans?

I think they's prefer to preserve their incumbents, and this map proves it can be done with maximizing partisan performance.  This map likely ends up as 25-14, with one GOP seat with a risk of flipping,the north Dallas one.  But Trump+12 is decent.

Don't Florida Republicans frequently draw out incumbent Republicans to encourage primary challenges from the right?

I'm not aware of that.  In TX, idk who they'd target.  My districts are already so red a primary challenge becomes more likely.  My map does kind of screw over McCaul tho, his district drastically changes and he'd be vulnerable to a primary challenge.  I suspect he'd prefer it to his currently district however, better to risk primary battle than certain general election defeat.  His current district is basically a tossup trending D now.  Also Van Taylor gets a very different district, but it's needed to keep it totally safe.  My map prioritized seat safety first, maximizing GOP seats second, and incumbents 3rd.  Usually I got all 3.

Cliff Stearns was drawn out in Florida. Was it specifically done to target him so that he would get primaried?

not sure

[lfromnj]

Hard to see incumbents besides the Austin ones being drawn out due to TX gaining 2 to 3 seats.

[Idaho Conservative]

Hard to see incumbents besides the Austin ones being drawn out due to TX gaining 2 to 3 seats.

and the Austin ones will get winnable districts, just might not live in them.

[I’m not Stu]

District data for my map:

District 1: Trump+61 (First West Texas vote sink)
District 2: Trump+45 (Second West Texas vote sink)
District 3: Trump+58 (Third West Texas vote sink)
District 4: Clinton+41 - 76% Hispanic CVAP (El Paso)
District 5: Clinton+21 - 78% Hispanic CVAP (Rio Grande district which becomes fourth fajita)
District 6: Clinton+18 - 75% Hispanic CVAP (First Hispanic fajita)
District 7: Clinton+17 - 75% Hispanic CVAP (Second Hispanic fajita)
District 8: Clinton+18 - 74% Hispanic CVAP (Third Hispanic fajita)
District 9: Clinton+12 - 61% Hispanic CVAP (New Hispanic-majority San Antonio seat)
District 10: Clinton+25 - 58% Hispanic CVAP (Current Hispanic-majority San Antonio seat)
District 11: Trump+18 (Ancestrally German Republican suburban San Antonio)
District 12: Clinton+21 (Newly Democratic suburban Austin)
District 13: Clinton+42 (Austin vote sink)
District 14: Trump+8 (Swingy Round Rock)
District 15: Trump+41 (Central Texas vote sink)
District 16: Trump+43 (Southeast Texas vote sink)
District 17: Clinton+4 - 21% Black / 19% Hispanic / 18% Asian CVAP (Left-zooming minority coalition Fort Bend)
District 18: Trump+20 (Galveston and friends)
District 19: Clinton+4 (Fast left-zooming West Houston White pack)
District 20: Clinton+60 - 45% Black CVAP (Latino-ifying Black South Houston seat)
District 21: Clinton+60 - 50% Black CVAP (Less Latino-ifying Black Central Houston seat)
District 22: Clinton+28 - 55% Hispanic CVAP (Current Hispanic-majority East Houston seat)
District 23: Clinton+18 - 42% Hispanic / 16% Black CVAP (New Hispanic-opportunity West Houston seat)
District 24: Trump+32 (Houston suburbs and Bryan/College Station vote sink)
District 25: Trump+44 (Houston suburbs and The Woodlands/Conroe vote sink)
District 26: Trump+30 (Houston suburbs and Beaumont/Port Arthur vote sink)
District 27: Trump+51 (First East Texas vote sink)
District 28: Trump+54 (Second East Texas vote sink)
District 29: Trump+51 (Third East Texas vote sink)
District 30: Trump+17 (First rump Tarrant and exurbs Republicanland)
District 31: Clinton+59 - 53% Black CVAP (Less Latino-ifying Black South Dallas seat)
District 32: Clinton+32 - 47% Hispanic / 16% Black CVAP (Ugly Hispanic-opportunity Metroplex seat)*
District 33: Clinton+22 - 25% Black / 25% Hispanic CVAP (Minority coalition North Dallas vote sink)
District 34: Trump+5 (Suburban Metroplex seat - left-zooming - the most interesting one)
District 35: Trump+23 (Second rump Tarrant and exurbs Republicanland)
District 36: Clinton+1 (Fast left-zooming Plano / North Metroplex)
District 37: Trump+24 (Denton County vote sink)
District 38: Trump+28 (Collin County vote sink)
District 39: Trump+49 (Third rump Tarrant and exurbs Republicanland)



*Maybe Marc Veasey would survive. Ideally the district should be represented by a Hispanic?

Veasey might survive. He’s entrenched.

[Sol]

I have a fair Texas map which still needs a lot of work--it's done but I think I need to play around with the lines a lot more--but one thing I've noticed is that it's possible to draw a pretty reasonable district just in the city of Austin:



You could probably draw a more compact version which hews less closely to Austin's goofy municipal lines.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I have a fair Texas map which still needs a lot of work--it's done but I think I need to play around with the lines a lot more--but one thing I've noticed is that it's possible to draw a pretty reasonable district just in the city of Austin:

You could probably draw a more compact version which hews less closely to Austin's goofy municipal lines.

My opinion is that since the part of Travis County that lies above the Colorado River fits exactly in one district, that is a very obvious district.

By the way, how much Democratic would your compact Austin district be? I imagine something like Clinton+60?

[lfromnj]

I have a fair Texas map which still needs a lot of work--it's done but I think I need to play around with the lines a lot more--but one thing I've noticed is that it's possible to draw a pretty reasonable district just in the city of Austin:

You could probably draw a more compact version which hews less closely to Austin's goofy municipal lines.

My opinion is that since the part of Travis County that lies above the Colorado River fits exactly in one district, that is a very obvious district.

By the way, how much Democratic would your compact Austin district be? I imagine something
like Clinton+60?

Yeah its probably the most liberal district for a 1000 miles(Boulder/Denver or Chicago Lakeshore)

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

If TX Republicans go for the Austin superpack approach, I'd expect something like this:



It's Clinton+58, stays within the city limits, and doesn't include the homes of any current GOP representatives. Staying north of the river doesn't make sense from the TXGOP perspective because a lot of the territory in the NE and NW of the county gives Dems much lower margins.

[lfromnj]

If TX Republicans go for the Austin superpack approach, I'd expect something like this:



It's Clinton+58, stays within the city limits, and doesn't include the homes of any current GOP representatives. Staying north of the river doesn't make sense from the TXGOP perspective because a lot of the territory in the NE and NW of the county gives Dems much lower margins.

I mean in a fair map this doesn't matter. You should now have one swingy west austin district and williamson and then one safe d east austin and hays/caldwell/bastrop. That district is a reasonable and relatively compact. However the GOP will crack the rest of the Austin metro which is a gerrymander.



The 5 county austin metro is almost 3 districts so this feels like a fairly logical split. The green is  Clinton +13. Its a bit ugly within Travis county because I wanted to see maximum hispanic percentage.One can clean it up with the blue Clinton +45 district if one wishes. Purple is lean to Likely R at trump +12. Also kept Waco and Bell county together. If one wishes they can remove the rurals from the green counties and the rural purple county and just keep the added population in Killeen from Bell county.




Heres another version. Clinton +3 purple and Trump +8 Blue.If Texas does have 39 districts 2018 >2020 growth should make the purple district even smaller. An aggressive GOP gerrymander would crack both the blue and purple while a safer GOP gerrymander would put a 2nd pack running from San Antonio to Purple for a hispanic district. Overall a central Austin "pack" and then divide it East/West seems like a fairly reasonable way of splitting Austin IMO and also relatively fair partisan-ally, although partisanship wasn't my goal here.

[Sol]

I'm pretty sure your 1st map of Austin and mine are identical, lol

[lfromnj]

I'm pretty sure your 1st map of Austin and mine are identical, lol

Yup the only unfortunate part are the 3 rural counties that get slapped in(or the san antonio exurbs) but by 2020 the remaining growth in austin could probably reduce it to 1 rural. Also did you include maximizing the minority population in the Eastern district by identical? Its a bit ugly and slightly less compact but its not the worst idea as its still all in the same metro.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

If TX Republicans go for the Austin superpack approach, I'd expect something like this:



It's Clinton+58, stays within the city limits, and doesn't include the homes of any current GOP representatives. Staying north of the river doesn't make sense from the TXGOP perspective because a lot of the territory in the NE and NW of the county gives Dems much lower margins.

I mean in a fair map this doesn't matter. You should now have one swingy west austin district and williamson and then one safe d east austin and hays/caldwell/bastrop. That district is a reasonable and relatively compact. However the GOP will crack the rest of the Austin metro which is a gerrymander.



The 5 county austin metro is almost 3 districts so this feels like a fairly logical split. The green is  Clinton +13. Its a bit ugly within Travis county because I wanted to see maximum hispanic percentage.One can clean it up with the blue Clinton +45 district if one wishes. Purple is lean to Likely R at trump +12. Also kept Waco and Bell county together. If one wishes they can remove the rurals from the green counties and the rural purple county and just keep the added population in Killeen from Bell county.

Of course. I suggested this specifically to serve as the boundaries of an Austin pack in a TXGOP gerry. I'd expect something like this in the end, although given the GOP districts all hover around 60% Trump, I'd want to see the 2018 Sen numbers and seriously think about conceding another Austin or Austin-San Antonio split Dem pack district.
 

[lfromnj]

If TX Republicans go for the Austin superpack approach, I'd expect something like this:



It's Clinton+58, stays within the city limits, and doesn't include the homes of any current GOP representatives. Staying north of the river doesn't make sense from the TXGOP perspective because a lot of the territory in the NE and NW of the county gives Dems much lower margins.

I mean in a fair map this doesn't matter. You should now have one swingy west austin district and williamson and then one safe d east austin and hays/caldwell/bastrop. That district is a reasonable and relatively compact. However the GOP will crack the rest of the Austin metro which is a gerrymander.



The 5 county austin metro is almost 3 districts so this feels like a fairly logical split. The green is  Clinton +13. Its a bit ugly within Travis county because I wanted to see maximum hispanic percentage.One can clean it up with the blue Clinton +45 district if one wishes. Purple is lean to Likely R at trump +12. Also kept Waco and Bell county together. If one wishes they can remove the rurals from the green counties and the rural purple county and just keep the added population in Killeen from Bell county.

Of course. I suggested this specifically to serve as the boundaries of an Austin pack in a TXGOP gerry. I'd expect something like this in the end, although given the GOP districts all hover around 60% Trump, I'd want to see the 2018 Sen numbers and seriously think about conceding another Austin or Austin-San Antonio split Dem pack district.
 

https://twitter.com/mattmxhn/status/1288706065748590592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1288706065748590592%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftalkelections.org%2FFORUM%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D366539.150

You can use this for the beto numbers, its pretty simple to use. Anyway the point I was making is that a mega D austin pack is pretty fair(although not 100% maximized at Clinton +58, probably in the lower 50's).

 Putting in a 2nd Austin pack is pretty much a waste as its only Clinton +13 so just push half/half San antonio and Austin and you also keep the minority oppurtunity seat. Also you may not want to maximize the Clinton percentage margin but rather look at the raw votes for the mega packed seat. Picking up white lib areas may get you more bang for your buck.

[Idaho Conservative]

If TX Republicans go for the Austin superpack approach, I'd expect something like this:



It's Clinton+58, stays within the city limits, and doesn't include the homes of any current GOP representatives. Staying north of the river doesn't make sense from the TXGOP perspective because a lot of the territory in the NE and NW of the county gives Dems much lower margins.

I mean in a fair map this doesn't matter. You should now have one swingy west austin district and williamson and then one safe d east austin and hays/caldwell/bastrop. That district is a reasonable and relatively compact. However the GOP will crack the rest of the Austin metro which is a gerrymander.



The 5 county austin metro is almost 3 districts so this feels like a fairly logical split. The green is  Clinton +13. Its a bit ugly within Travis county because I wanted to see maximum hispanic percentage.One can clean it up with the blue Clinton +45 district if one wishes. Purple is lean to Likely R at trump +12. Also kept Waco and Bell county together. If one wishes they can remove the rurals from the green counties and the rural purple county and just keep the added population in Killeen from Bell county.



Heres another version. Clinton +3 purple and Trump +8 Blue.If Texas does have 39 districts 2018 >2020 growth should make the purple district even smaller. An aggressive GOP gerrymander would crack both the blue and purple while a safer GOP gerrymander would put a 2nd pack running from San Antonio to Purple for a hispanic district. Overall a central Austin "pack" and then divide it East/West seems like a fairly reasonable way of splitting Austin IMO and also relatively fair partisan-ally.

I think this is a more fair map of Austin,Travis only cut once.  The eastern Travis seat is D+27, Clinton+59, safe D.  Western Travis seat is only D+1 but is Clinton+13.  Lean/likely D on paper but probably safe in practice.  The exurban seat R+19 and Trump+30, safe R.
I don't think Dems potentially getting 3 Austin seats is fair.  Travis+south Williamson cleanly fit 2 seats.

[lfromnj]

potentially getting 3 austin seats isn't fair or unfair it was a fairly natural way to Divide austin into the more minority/working class/  eastern suburbs along with a college town and then the richer Williamson county and Western suburbs. Your is ok as Pflugerville probably does work well with Round rock and its the one area that got left out. The main problem with your map is Caldwell and Bastrop being seperated from the Austin metro when they clearly are part of it. As I said earlier, by 2020 the Austin metro will literally be 3 districts so why not keep all 3 districts there?

For example Caldwell+Bastrop and the eastern Austin suburbs all would have a COI of the new Tesla factory being added so they might need a congressman more favorable to the industrial side of Austin.

[Idaho Conservative]

potentially getting 3 austin seats isn't fair or unfair it was a fairly natural way to Divide austin into the more minority/working class/  eastern suburbs along with a college town and then the richer Williamson county and Western suburbs. Your is ok as Pflugerville probably does work well with Round rock and its the one area that got left out. The main problem with your map is Caldwell and Bastrop being seperated from the Austin metro when they clearly are part of it. As I said earlier, by 2020 the Austin metro will literally be 3 districts so why not keep all 3 districts there?

For example Caldwell+Bastrop and the eastern Austin suburbs all would have a COI of the new Tesla factory being added so they might need a congressman more favorable to the industrial side of Austin.

I'm just prioritizing county boundaries over other characteristics, and also Dems would be so lucky to get my map, 2 dem seats in Austin is a dream, when they're likely to get 1.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Tried a Central TX GOP Gerry that I *think* can hold through the 2020s.



Purple: Central Austin--O'Rourke+64 (Davis)
Teal: Central and Western San Antonio--O'Rourke+45 (Latino VRA) (Castro)
Blue: East Austin, East San Antonio, San Marcos--O'Rourke+25 (Latino VRA) (Doggett)
Green: Southwest Austin, San Angelo--Cruz+18 (McCaul)
Red: North San Antonio, Hill Country--Cruz+8 (Hurd/Vacant)
Yellow: West Austin, Round Rock, Gatesville--Cruz+17 (Carter)
Brown: Georgetown, College Station--Cruz+21 (Flores)
Violet: Waco, Temple, Killeen--Cruz+23 (Vacant)
Lime: Victoria, East Austin, Pflugerville--Cruz+22 (Cloud)

Worst case scenario here for the GOP is a 4-5 delegation later on in the decade which isn't bad for an area that'll be 60-40 Dem by 2030. I'm guessing Wendy Davis beats Chip Roy this time around allowing McCaul to slip into the green district unopposed. It is worth noting that this map will make it

[Roll Roons]

Tried a Central TX GOP Gerry that I *think* can hold through the 2020s.



Purple: Central Austin--O'Rourke+64 (Davis)
Teal: Central and Western San Antonio--O'Rourke+45 (Latino VRA) (Castro)
Blue: East Austin, East San Antonio, San Marcos--O'Rourke+25 (Latino VRA) (Doggett)
Green: Southwest Austin, San Angelo--Cruz+18 (McCaul)
Red: North San Antonio, Hill Country--Cruz+8 (Hurd/Vacant)
Yellow: West Austin, Round Rock, Gatesville--Cruz+17 (Carter)
Brown: Georgetown, College Station--Cruz+21 (Flores)
Violet: Waco, Temple, Killeen--Cruz+23 (Vacant)
Lime: Victoria, East Austin, Pflugerville--Cruz+22 (Cloud)

Worst case scenario here for the GOP is a 4-5 delegation later on in the decade which isn't bad for an area that'll be 60-40 Dem by 2030. I'm guessing Wendy Davis beats Chip Roy this time around allowing McCaul to slip into the green district unopposed. It is worth noting that this map will make it

I wouldn't be surprised to see Hurd try and come back if Trump loses, especially if there's a safer district that he can run in.

[lfromnj]

You gotta crack harder lol, Draw it further out NW and add another crack.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

You gotta crack harder lol, Draw it further out NW and add another crack.

Wouldn't that make cracking Dallas/Fort Worth impossible? You run into VRA issues to the south and west and if you go any further east then Houston becomes a huge liability.

[I’m not Stu]

You gotta crack harder lol, Draw it further out NW and add another crack.

Wouldn't that make cracking Dallas/Fort Worth impossible? You run into VRA issues to the south and west and if you go any further east then Houston becomes a huge liability.

Yes, that would run into VRA issues.

[Idaho Conservative]

You can use Midland/Odessa and maybe even Lubbock

[Idaho Conservative]

Here Midland, Hill Country, Lubbock, Abilene, and Waco are used in each district to crack the San Antonio and Austin suburbs, and the San Antonio to Austin VRA seat is now 71% Hispanic and only 18% White, it should perform.  Each district is approx Trump+30

Austin can be cracked without threatening DFW or Houston.  The key is 3 dem packs between SA and Austin.

[I’m not Stu]

Is a 28R-11D map possible? This means no gains from 2018, as well as three new Republican seats.