2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Gonna work on a 10-29 map.

edit: thinking 10-29 isn't possible, probably gonna do 11-29.

D sinks would be 3 Dallas/ 3 Houston

1 Austin
1 Austin to San antonio
1 San Antonio.
1 Rio grande valley sink
1 El paso.

Do 3 Dallas/3 Houston at your own risk. I really wouldn't count on that holding.

Doesn't need to hold all decade.  If it starts at 3 Dem seats in (say) DFW and all but one R seat is safe all decade, that's better than 4 sinks. 

I wouldn't count on it holding just in 2022. Don't forget how overpopulated the current D seats are. There isn't much of the Texas Triangle you can crack these seats out to.

You are adding 1 sink in Dallas and for Houston you got Montgomery county and other areas all around.

But in Houston all 3 have to be VRA seats and I don't think you can effectively crack all of West Harris/Fort Bend.

If West Harris is becoming so blue then why did Lizzie Fletcher win re-election by only three points, half the margin she won by in 2018?

Remember, all these districts are going to shed like 100k people. Which means Fletcher's zooms left and the districts bordering the VRAs do too. Obviously we need to wait for precinct results but I doubt a 3-Dem Harris crack can hold with population adjustments.

https://www.azavea.com/blog/2020/07/29/which-congressional-districts-are-over-and-under-populated/
Per DRA's 2018 population estimates the four Dem hold seats in Houston will only need to lose 220k in population between them, or 55k each. Likewise the three Dem held seats in DFW will only need to lose 130k population between them, or 40k each. The population growth isn't that strong in the blue inner suburbs and is counterbalanced by continued stagnation and decline in the non-white inner city.
Though regardless I agree that a 3 Dem Harris is untenable long-term, as is a 2 Dem DFW. 4 Dem packs in Houston and 3 Dem packs in DFW should keep the rest of the suburbs in safe seats for the rest of the decade.

[dpmapper]

Here's what I mocked up.  TX-23 goes to Odessa instead of El Paso, it's 59.6% Hispanic by CVAP and 53.8-42.1 Trump in 2016.  (Clinton won the current version by 3.4%, so this should make Gonzales quite safe.)  You can up the Hispanic numbers a bit by playing around with the precincts in San Antonio.  

Cuellar's TX-28 (pink) is 60.7% Hispanic, 59.8% Clinton, about the same as before.  Again you can play around with the precincts in San Antonio if you like, I wasn't very careful with those.  

TX-15 in orange is 64.7% Hispanic by CVAP, and Trump won 48.5-47.3 in 2016.  Trump lost the current version by 16.7 points in 2016.  If De la Cruz-Hernandez runs again here, she'd be favored in a Biden midterm, I would think, given that she lost by less than 3% this time.  

The district that goes to Corpus Christi in lighter green is 63.1% Hispanic CVAP.  Trump won in 2016 by 49.1%-47%.  This is very similar to the district Blake Farenthold initially won in, except Brownsville is out and Harlingen in (which is a good trade for Republicans).  The current TX-34 was won by Hillary 59.2-37.7.  Vela only won by 13 this year, so he'd probably run in the other district.  

Speaking of which, the border district in dark green is 91% Hispanic by CVAP, 73.6% Hillary.  

One potential issue is that TX-35 will end up contracting to just Travis County and will no longer be majority Hispanic, but since it elected Doggett anyway maybe that's not such a big deal.  

[Sol]

Interestingly, I wonder if this new swing to Republicans in the RGV might mean the end of fajitas in the area, at least if you're drawing fairly. Biden seems to still have won the Latino vote in South Texas but it went to only being like 55-45--that might require higher Latino percentages than the current fajitas for those districts to elect Latino candidates of choice under the VRA.

[lfromnj]

You don't get to claim that the fajittas should be cancelled now that the hispanics in the area maybe vote like 57 43. Your fair map should not rely on that. I will keep for my fair map the 3 compact seats. but others who drew Fajitas should not be changing their mind. If the districts slightly go against the hispanic community by a narrow margin that is not a massive error it just means they are swing voters where it is much tougher to apply the VRA.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

You don't get to claim that the fajittas should be cancelled now that the hispanics in the area maybe vote like 57 43. Your fair map should not rely on that. I will keep for my fair map the 3 compact seats. but others who drew Fajitas should not be changing their mind. If the districts slightly go against the hispanic community by a narrow margin that is not a massive error it just means they are swing voters where it is much tougher to apply the VRA.

Doesn't the DRA dictate that districts must be drawn to elect the racial minority's preference? In which case a map that relies on whites+a Latino minority would be illegal.

[lfromnj]

You don't get to claim that the fajittas should be cancelled now that the hispanics in the area maybe vote like 57 43. Your fair map should not rely on that. I will keep for my fair map the 3 compact seats. but others who drew Fajitas should not be changing their mind. If the districts slightly go against the hispanic community by a narrow margin that is not a massive error it just means they are swing voters where it is much tougher to apply the VRA.

Doesn't the DRA dictate that districts must be drawn to elect the racial minority's preference? In which case a map that relies on whites+a Latino minority would be illegal.

A racial minority preference is much more loose when its a swing minority, the only other area we have seen this really are the Cuban seats where FL 26th/FL 27th failed in 2018.  They didn't have a clear preference in 2018 although they clearly did vote R.

There is no reason to expect SCOTUS to interpret the VRA that strictly and a fair map would have always been 3 compact seats in the RGV but now people want to backtrack to those 3 seats  because it doesn't give Democrats more seats.


https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=358741.msg7176737#msg7176737

To give you credit Blairite I think you did support the compact districts rather than trying to Gerrymander more hispanic seats.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

To give you credit Blairite I think you did support the compact districts rather than trying to Gerrymander more hispanic seats.

Yeah I've always thought the argument that compact seats in overwhelmingly minority areas deprive them of representation was pretty weak but it is my understanding that it's mandated by the law anyway.

[lfromnj]

To give you credit Blairite I think you did support the compact districts rather than trying to Gerrymander more hispanic seats.

Yeah I've always thought the argument that compact seats in overwhelmingly minority areas deprive them of representation was pretty weak but it is my understanding that it's mandated by the law anyway.

I was actually planning to ask Fajita defenders before the election what they would do if the Hispanic vote became swingier, damn I wish I did

Anyway it depends on how SCOTUS interprets the VRA, I doub the current SCOTUS would have required the fajitas anyway and I think even Breyer has some skepticism on them.

Overall I don't really see how if gerrymandering the Hispanic seats would massively harm the Hispanic community in the RGV. It would obviously still be a partisan advantage against Democrats. but Its not like the GOP would just be able to do whatever they want as they do in most gerrymandered areas as if the Hispanics return to 70 -30 D in the RGV then they lose all the districts, the GOP would still have to fight for the votes and pay attention to the community.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So genuine question

To all those who supported drawing the fajitas in a fair Texas map do you still support them?

Im sticking by my compact seats for my fair map and gonna be consistent.

I still support the fajitas, yes. My map in fact has four of them.

[lfromnj]

So genuine question

To all those who supported drawing the fajitas in a fair Texas map do you still support them?

Im sticking by my compact seats for my fair map and gonna be consistent.

I still support the fajitas, yes. My map in fact has four of them.

So you won't significantly change your maps in south texas excluding for population changes

Good on you then, we can agree to keep our differences on what should be done in a fair Texas map. Atleast its consistent.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So genuine question

To all those who supported drawing the fajitas in a fair Texas map do you still support them?

Im sticking by my compact seats for my fair map and gonna be consistent.

I still support the fajitas, yes. My map in fact has four of them.

So you won't significantly change your maps in south texas excluding for population changes

Good on you then, we can agree to keep our differences on what should be done in a fair Texas map. Atleast its consistent.

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=366539.msg7700855#msg7700855
What were your overall thoughts on this map anyway? It didn't get any commentary of any kind.

[Idaho Conservative]

So genuine question

To all those who supported drawing the fajitas in a fair Texas map do you still support them?

Im sticking by my compact seats for my fair map and gonna be consistent.

I still support the fajitas, yes. My map in fact has four of them.

So you won't significantly change your maps in south texas excluding for population changes

Good on you then, we can agree to keep our differences on what should be done in a fair Texas map. Atleast its consistent.

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=366539.msg7700855#msg7700855
What were your overall thoughts on this map anyway? It didn't get any commentary of any kind.

I like them fajitas

[Sol]

The important thing is electing the Latino community's candidate of choice and any fair map should follow from that.

[avishwanath28]

Here's what I mocked up.  TX-23 goes to Odessa instead of El Paso, it's 59.6% Hispanic by CVAP and 53.8-42.1 Trump in 2016.  (Clinton won the current version by 3.4%, so this should make Gonzales quite safe.)  You can up the Hispanic numbers a bit by playing around with the precincts in San Antonio.  

Cuellar's TX-28 (pink) is 60.7% Hispanic, 59.8% Clinton, about the same as before.  Again you can play around with the precincts in San Antonio if you like, I wasn't very careful with those.  

TX-15 in orange is 64.7% Hispanic by CVAP, and Trump won 48.5-47.3 in 2016.  Trump lost the current version by 16.7 points in 2016.  If De la Cruz-Hernandez runs again here, she'd be favored in a Biden midterm, I would think, given that she lost by less than 3% this time.  

The district that goes to Corpus Christi in lighter green is 63.1% Hispanic CVAP.  Trump won in 2016 by 49.1%-47%.  This is very similar to the district Blake Farenthold initially won in, except Brownsville is out and Harlingen in (which is a good trade for Republicans).  The current TX-34 was won by Hillary 59.2-37.7.  Vela only won by 13 this year, so he'd probably run in the other district.  

Speaking of which, the border district in dark green is 91% Hispanic by CVAP, 73.6% Hillary.  

One potential issue is that TX-35 will end up contracting to just Travis County and will no longer be majority Hispanic, but since it elected Doggett anyway maybe that's not such a big deal.  

Odd question for a first time post (but long-time lurker): I am unable to see maps that are posted as images in threads. I tried checking ad blocker, different browser, etc. The DRA ones that are just linked are fine, obviously, but I was wondering if there was some setting I need to change to view these maps?

[lfromnj]

The important thing is electing the Latino community's candidate of choice and any fair map should follow from that.

What is a candidate of choice if they start voting 60 40 ?
Its not a huge avoidance of their choice if that happens especially if the GOP makes sure the hispanic candidates choice wins in the primaries rather than letting Blake Farentolds get through.

What do you do mid decade if all 4 seats failed?
Redistrict because of partisan shifts?

[Continential]

Here's what I mocked up.  TX-23 goes to Odessa instead of El Paso, it's 59.6% Hispanic by CVAP and 53.8-42.1 Trump in 2016.  (Clinton won the current version by 3.4%, so this should make Gonzales quite safe.)  You can up the Hispanic numbers a bit by playing around with the precincts in San Antonio. 

Cuellar's TX-28 (pink) is 60.7% Hispanic, 59.8% Clinton, about the same as before.  Again you can play around with the precincts in San Antonio if you like, I wasn't very careful with those. 

TX-15 in orange is 64.7% Hispanic by CVAP, and Trump won 48.5-47.3 in 2016.  Trump lost the current version by 16.7 points in 2016.  If De la Cruz-Hernandez runs again here, she'd be favored in a Biden midterm, I would think, given that she lost by less than 3% this time. 

The district that goes to Corpus Christi in lighter green is 63.1% Hispanic CVAP.  Trump won in 2016 by 49.1%-47%.  This is very similar to the district Blake Farenthold initially won in, except Brownsville is out and Harlingen in (which is a good trade for Republicans).  The current TX-34 was won by Hillary 59.2-37.7.  Vela only won by 13 this year, so he'd probably run in the other district. 

Speaking of which, the border district in dark green is 91% Hispanic by CVAP, 73.6% Hillary. 

One potential issue is that TX-35 will end up contracting to just Travis County and will no longer be majority Hispanic, but since it elected Doggett anyway maybe that's not such a big deal. 

Odd question for a first time post (but long-time lurker): I am unable to see maps that are posted as images in threads. I tried checking ad blocker, different browser, etc. The DRA ones that are just linked are fine, obviously, but I was wondering if there was some setting I need to change to view these maps?

You need to get 20 posts in order to see images because a copywrite troll sued the website's owner over a image from 15 years ago.

[avishwanath28]

Here's what I mocked up.  TX-23 goes to Odessa instead of El Paso, it's 59.6% Hispanic by CVAP and 53.8-42.1 Trump in 2016.  (Clinton won the current version by 3.4%, so this should make Gonzales quite safe.)  You can up the Hispanic numbers a bit by playing around with the precincts in San Antonio. 

Cuellar's TX-28 (pink) is 60.7% Hispanic, 59.8% Clinton, about the same as before.  Again you can play around with the precincts in San Antonio if you like, I wasn't very careful with those. 

TX-15 in orange is 64.7% Hispanic by CVAP, and Trump won 48.5-47.3 in 2016.  Trump lost the current version by 16.7 points in 2016.  If De la Cruz-Hernandez runs again here, she'd be favored in a Biden midterm, I would think, given that she lost by less than 3% this time. 

The district that goes to Corpus Christi in lighter green is 63.1% Hispanic CVAP.  Trump won in 2016 by 49.1%-47%.  This is very similar to the district Blake Farenthold initially won in, except Brownsville is out and Harlingen in (which is a good trade for Republicans).  The current TX-34 was won by Hillary 59.2-37.7.  Vela only won by 13 this year, so he'd probably run in the other district. 

Speaking of which, the border district in dark green is 91% Hispanic by CVAP, 73.6% Hillary. 

One potential issue is that TX-35 will end up contracting to just Travis County and will no longer be majority Hispanic, but since it elected Doggett anyway maybe that's not such a big deal. 

Odd question for a first time post (but long-time lurker): I am unable to see maps that are posted as images in threads. I tried checking ad blocker, different browser, etc. The DRA ones that are just linked are fine, obviously, but I was wondering if there was some setting I need to change to view these maps?

You need to get 20 posts in order to see images because a copywrite troll sued the website's owner over a image from 15 years ago.

Got it, thanks!

[Idaho Conservative]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

[Idaho Conservative]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

[Idaho Conservative]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

Did you use 39 districts? Also if you want equal population then you do it based on total population if that is what you are asking, and if they do take in white areas, where do you plan to put the other minorities? Also keep in mind the map is being drawn for the whole decade, not just this election or next election.

[Idaho Conservative]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

Did you use 39 districts? Also if you want equal population then you do it based on total population if that is what you are asking, and if they do take in white areas, where do you plan to put the other minorities? Also keep in mind the map is being drawn for the whole decade, not just this election or next election.

Districts can be drawn with equal voter population rather than equal population.  I did use 39.  And when you use CVAP instead of total pop, the Houston VRAs grow by a lot.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

Did you use 39 districts? Also if you want equal population then you do it based on total population if that is what you are asking, and if they do take in white areas, where do you plan to put the other minorities? Also keep in mind the map is being drawn for the whole decade, not just this election or next election.

Districts can be drawn with equal voter population rather than equal population.  I did use 39.  And when you use CVAP instead of total pop, the Houston VRAs grow by a lot.

District drawing is traditionally done with total population, while VAP is used for minority seats to determine whether or not they will actually perform (especially with low turnout minorities such as Hispanics), these are two totally different things that they are used for.