MT Congressional Redistricting

[S019]

I drew this east-west split relatively clean map, with no county splits.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/6c88c10e-54fa-4f4c-b590-ae81490aa98b

[S019]

The west Montana seat will probably more often than not vote D due to MT's downballot quirkiness. It's Lean R on the presidential level, but surely not out of reach for PresiDem in a landslide victory..

[S019]

No, but also yes.

MT's western district, as a blue collar, rural white grouping, is shifting rightwards, but still has a significant amount of Democratic backbone. Still, politics changes. My prediction is that it is still wave territory in 2022-2026, but by 2030 is probably Safe R.

Under, say, this map for instance, (pop deviation of 5), my point is made very clear.



While Tester still won this district by 8.5 in 2018, and Obama actually won it in 08, it was also double digits for Trump and 90% white, and in context of its past partisanship even a number like Tester's starts looking a lot less impressive. If, as some posters on this forum certainly believe, we will see 20-25 point swings in districts like TX-26 between now and 2030, is it really so hard to believe that MT-01 here swings another 10 points to the right and becomes R Presidential +24 and R local +1.5 or something?

You clearly aren't aware how elastic MT is down ballot.

[S019]

How does the independent lean? This seems like an AZ/NJ style commission where the tiebreaker chooses a partisan leaning map.

[S019]

The idea that putting Gallatin County in the east is just as egregious as excluding NW Montana is nonsense, and any non-hackish observer will confirm this irrespective of their partisan affiliation. I would personally prefer the 'Great Falls/Helena east, Flathead and Gallatin west' compromise (with some adjustments to equalize population if necessary), but it’s honestly remarkable how Democrats always succeed at stacking these commissions with the most partisan hacks (and Joe Lamson is really a class of his own in this regard).

I’m also not aware of any requirement that districts need to be "as competitive as possible" (weird way of phrasing "compact," but I digress...).

If they really do opt for that D sink, I hope the GOP can pull off something similar in NH.

The GOP is already making plans to draw out Pappas per scoops from multiple outlets, including POLITICO and the CW has been that they'd do that, really since they gained the trifecta given that Ann Kuster's strength means they probably won't win both seats in the foreseeable future, so locking in a 1-1 would really help them.

Also not every commission has D hacks, AZ is probably going to be R leaning, and NJ was R leaning in 2012 (though will probably be D leaning this time due to both Governor Murphy and the anticipated Democratic takeover of the state Supreme Court).

Also I don't that map is really a D sink it was Trump+8, while Tester and Bullock did better, 2020 indicated that MT's ticket splitting tradition might be coming to an end. It'd probably be a tossup seat.

Also I drew the GOP proposal here: https://davesredistricting.org/join/343a5e9c-df80-4d07-b2fe-3d260a80f3d3

Western district is Trump+17, Bullock+7, Tester+6

[S019]

The idea that putting Gallatin County in the east is just as egregious as excluding NW Montana is nonsense, and any non-hackish observer will confirm this irrespective of their partisan affiliation. I would personally prefer the 'Great Falls/Helena east, Flathead and Gallatin west' compromise (with some adjustments to equalize population if necessary), but it’s honestly remarkable how Democrats always succeed at stacking these commissions with the most partisan hacks (and Joe Lamson is really a class of his own in this regard).

I’m also not aware of any requirement that districts need to be "as competitive as possible" (weird way of phrasing "compact," but I digress...).

If they really do opt for that D sink, I hope the GOP can pull off something similar in NH.

The GOP is already making plans to draw out Pappas per scoops from multiple outlets, including POLITICO and the CW has been that they'd do that, really since they gained the trifecta given that Ann Kuster's strength means they probably won't win both seats in the foreseeable future, so locking in a 1-1 would really help them.

Also not every commission has D hacks, AZ is probably going to be R leaning, and NJ was R leaning in 2012 (though will probably be D leaning this time due to both Governor Murphy and the anticipated Democratic takeover of the state Supreme Court).

Also I don't that map is really a D sink it was Trump+8, while Tester and Bullock did better, 2020 indicated that MT's ticket splitting tradition might be coming to an end. It'd probably be a tossup seat.

Also I drew the GOP proposal here: https://davesredistricting.org/join/343a5e9c-df80-4d07-b2fe-3d260a80f3d3

Western district is Trump+17, Bullock+7, Tester+6

The configuration that puts the northern Rockies into MT-02 along with the Plains will indeed make MT-01 a swing district, and as I mentioned earlier in this thread, it was a split decision in 2020, with four Democratic (Senate, House, Governor, and Superintendent of Public Instruction) and four Republican (President, Attorney General, State Auditor, and Secretary of State) statewide candidates winning it (and the key county is Lewis & Clark - in 2020, whichever candidate won L&C also won this set of counties overall). Thus, it can also be said that L&C is one place where ticket-splitting is still very much alive and well.

What were the Senate, Governor, House, and President margins?

[S019]

It seems they just agreed to advance two maps?

[S019]

It seems they just agreed to advance two maps?

They have. Public comment will be allowed during the 10/30 meeting. If after that point another map cannot be drawn based on feedback, the chair will pick either of the two proposed maps.

Do we know which two maps these were?

Well I now have an answer to my own question: https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1451310677918892038?s=20

[S019]

seems to be this one:

Another proposal:

and this one:

From the DEM side:



MT-01: R+3.6
MT-02: R+31.3