MT Congressional Redistricting

[Nyvin]

This seems like the cleanest map, no county splits and almost all the Native American population is in MT-2 (for whatever that's worth).






https://davesredistricting.org/join/6ee8c186-bb8e-4fe5-9aba-21e276830b1b

Exluding the flathead area it's even geographically consistent,  keeping the Long Mountain to Custer NF areas with the mountainous west.

This isn't made to maximize Dem votes in the western district either.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/collapsible_b/status/1388221962187587589

If anyone is wondering why the Billings to Kalispell district is bad from a "good government" point of view.

Given how the commission was rigged AZ style, that's probably what we are going to get

Not denying that, just explaining to atlas why its probably a bad map.

You have to break up the mountains at some point anyway, there's too much population in the west.   Plus "following the mountains" as they're suggesting breaks up Native reservations.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/collapsible_b/status/1388221962187587589

If anyone is wondering why the Billings to Kalispell district is bad from a "good government" point of view.

Given how the commission was rigged AZ style, that's probably what we are going to get

Not denying that, just explaining to atlas why its probably a bad map.

You have to break up the mountains at some point anyway, there's too much population in the west.   Plus "following the mountains" as they're suggesting breaks up Native reservations.

No it doesn't really break up any reservations. Flathead does not include the Blackfeet native reservation. And yes you do have to break up the mountains but clearly there are more relatively flatter areas near Bozeman/Helena. Kalispell/Whitehead is in the core of the mountain region.There are areas in Flathead which have like 12% native bordering the reservation but its like 42 Native Americans who live like a whole hour away.

 To go on further your map actually splits the Flathead reservation slightly as it goes into Missoula County a bit at least looking at this map. Although the Flathead reservation is more integrated than other reservations which is interesting.
http://opi.mt.gov/Educators/Teaching-Learning/Indian-Education-for-All/Indian-Education-General-Information

Easy enough fix but that then breaks the rule of no county splits if you want to defend the map on that ground. Not that 1 county split is unreasonable.

It's literally one precinct which is 62% white at that with 1.2k people total.   The only inhabited portion in Missoula County is a tiny farming area.   I did say "almost" in the original description.   If people are going to make a fuss about that precinct then no map is going to be acceptable.

[Nyvin]

I've seen the district I posted put up by others elsewhere a couple times now, I really don't think excluding Flathead is as "toxic" as some here are making it out to be.

https://twitter.com/senhorraposa/status/1196541450529517568

[Nyvin]

https://www.ktvh.com/news/montana-politics/commission-parties-gear-up-for-battle-over-mts-congressional-districts?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

Everyone obviously so far agrees on East vs West split. Democrats want to create a district that is competitive and they proposed the Cascade Falls West but Kalispell East map. The GOP prefers excluding Bozeman .
We all know how this is going to end anyway.

WHOOOOOAAAA!!!

THEY DREW MY MAP!!!

(literally an exact copy of it!!)

How cool is that?

Here's the description:

A plan floating around Democratic circles would take Republican-leaning northwest Montana, including Kalispell, and attach it to the eastern-Montanan district, leaving Missoula, Bozeman, Butte and Helena in the remaining district, which would lean Democratic.

[Nyvin]

Still pretty easy to draw a map with no county splits that looks nice -




https://davesredistricting.org/join/2b9579a9-1252-41a1-965a-b689a4d832bc

Almost all Native American reservations in MT-2 (yes, excluding that one precinct in Missoula) and only 88 deviation total, no county splits.

Maybe the commission will copy this one too :-D

[Nyvin]

Still pretty easy to draw a map with no county splits that looks nice -




https://davesredistricting.org/join/2b9579a9-1252-41a1-965a-b689a4d832bc

Almost all Native American reservations in MT-2 (yes, excluding that one precinct in Missoula) and only 88 deviation total, no county splits.

Maybe the commission will copy this one too :-D

Did Biden win the blue district?

Trump+2 in 2020.

[Nyvin]

Both seats will be Republican if the independent redistricting commission is truly nonpartisan
(Though full disclosure - without hindsight, before the new district numbers came out for 2021-2031, I was pretty sure MT was going to stay at one at-large seat, not gain a second one, so I would've then gone with option 3.)

Yes, it seems Republicans on this board think that every redistricting decision everywhere should always favor Republicans.

It's almost like this weird per-conceived notion that redistricting is intended to be a benefit for Republicans exclusively.   It's really kinda strange.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/PoliticsReid/status/1445748016103575552?s=20

Quite a few "best case scenario" maps for the Dems here, none are overly aggressive for the Rs.

Bottom Right!  Let's Goooooooo!!

[Nyvin]

I drew the map below which nobody else on the planet seemed to replicate. I guess that means I am uniquely perspicacious or uniquely obtuse.

The Dem court appointed 5th commission person seems intent on not being hackish and hopes not to be the tie breaking vote. If so (this person is not Mathis 2), making the western CD as competitive as possible should not be given much weight, because that is well, partisan. So I start with something that looks pretty to the eyes, and minimizes county chops, and the size of the one chop, and where it seems logical to put it. Some of the maps look butt ugly (some of the Dem ones). I would suggest the idea for the Dems is to make a case for something that looks appealing and has some good justification other than competitiveness, that makes it more desirable on neutral redistricting principles than say this map or other more Pub friendly versions.

Wouldn't this be accomplished by proposal two?   It keeps the native american reservations together, no county splits, is relatively compact, and looks pretty good.

The only real reason I've seen not to do it is it creates a competitive district, but if that's the only reason to "not" draw it, then what they're really doing is drawing a map to favor Republicans, and that, in turn, is partisan.

[Nyvin]

It's pretty good, it's a map I'd expect a commission to draw.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1598543160921280514?cxt=HHwWhMC-jaKila8sAAAA

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::e89899d3-fc18-4e5b-99a6-9e77d1ac9211

Montana legislative maps just came out, should remove the GOP supermajorities they just picked up. 57 Trump 43 Biden seats.

Wtf happened? Did the tiebreaker have to choose between a D and an R gerrymander? That seems like some very aggressive cracking of Missoula and Bozeman to squeeze out a bunch of D-leaning seats. Gives me vibes of the MI State House map on steroids.

Given downballot results in Western MT, Democrats could plausibly control a chamber after a wave.  Wow!

Continues the theme of Democrats generally getting better legislative maps and Republicans generally getting better congressional maps from officially neutral processes.

But this feels like a pretty clear gerrymander; Dems are very purposefully unpacked. It wasn't like they just got lucky with key decisions in some key seats.

It's definitely a D gerrymander - Those lines in Bozeman aren't natural at all.  Also they split Whitefish in two when it fits in one district fine.