2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[I’m not Stu]

Is Lowenthal the only one other than Napolitano who doesn't have a district?

Basically, although I only cut one district. Lowenthal's was just really heavily shifted into OC. Some others don't resemble current districts at all though, particularly in the Central Valley.

Would Lowenthal likely retire? He will be 82, and his district loses Long Beach to Barragan.

Definitely. I expect Napolitano and Lowenthal to retire, with a new OC based rep taking over the new Asian Belt district and the bulk of Napolitano's district becoming part of Cisneros'.

What's the PVI of the district Lowenthal probably vacates?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Is Lowenthal the only one other than Napolitano who doesn't have a district?

Basically, although I only cut one district. Lowenthal's was just really heavily shifted into OC. Some others don't resemble current districts at all though, particularly in the Central Valley.

Would Lowenthal likely retire? He will be 82, and his district loses Long Beach to Barragan.

Definitely. I expect Napolitano and Lowenthal to retire, with a new OC based rep taking over the new Asian Belt district and the bulk of Napolitano's district becoming part of Cisneros'.

What's the PVI of the district Lowenthal probably vacates?

The OC Asian belt one?
Clinton+21.

It's a safe Dem seat.

[I’m not Stu]

Is Lowenthal the only one other than Napolitano who doesn't have a district?

Basically, although I only cut one district. Lowenthal's was just really heavily shifted into OC. Some others don't resemble current districts at all though, particularly in the Central Valley.

Would Lowenthal likely retire? He will be 82, and his district loses Long Beach to Barragan.

Definitely. I expect Napolitano and Lowenthal to retire, with a new OC based rep taking over the new Asian Belt district and the bulk of Napolitano's district becoming part of Cisneros'.

What's the PVI of the district Lowenthal probably vacates?

The OC Asian belt one?
Clinton+21.

It's a safe Dem seat.

I meant Cook PVI. Is it more or less Democratic than the current CA-47? Would it likely elect an Asian candidate?

[SevenEleven]

Cook PVI is pretty useless. If it's Clinton +21 it doesn't matter what the Romney vote was. If it's Clinton +5, it also probably doesn't matter if it was Romney +5.

[I’m not Stu]

Cook PVI is pretty useless. If it's Clinton +21 it doesn't matter what the Romney vote was. If it's Clinton +5, it also probably doesn't matter if it was Romney +5.

Is current CA-47 Clinton +32?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Cook PVI is pretty useless. If it's Clinton +21 it doesn't matter what the Romney vote was. If it's Clinton +5, it also probably doesn't matter if it was Romney +5.

Is current CA-47 Clinton +32?

Yes.

[I’m not Stu]

Would an Asian Democrat likely be Lowenthal's successor under this map?

[Sestak]

Finished my California map:

Did you draw out Khanna lol

[SevenEleven]

Finished my California map:

Did you draw out Khanna lol

CA-17 is an abomination; there is no way it continues to exist in it's current form.

[Oryxslayer]

On to serious discussion


The California Redistricting Commission has selected the final 60 names: 20 of each pool from which the final commissioners will be selected. You can access the lists here:

Republicans
Democrats
Unaffiliated

With these fairly detailed lists, we can begin to discern the shape of the commission. The most common characteristic of everyone is their comfortable income. This is unsurprising - those most willing to participate in redistricting are stable enough to give up time to political activism.

Demographically, the ethnic distribution is what one would expect but with some exceptions. The democrats have more minorities than whites, and the opposite is true for the GOP. The biggest demographic standout is in the Indie group, which is very diverse. It also has a lot of Asians, and we know how that group has moved in the past 4 years. It leads on to potentially conclude that there are D-leaners in both the GOP group and especially in the Indie pool considering the nature of the coalitions. This however should be unsurprising given California's Trend.

The most interesting thing though are the cross-cutting geographic identities selected by the California commission. There are A LOT of Bay Area Republicans, and Los Angeles dominates the democratic pool. This has seems to have been done to temper partisan attachment to ones home region - Bay Area republicans have nothing to present for the GOP in the region, and LA democrats are surrounded by more democrats and will be more concerned with ethnic communities. The problem I am sensing though is that the playing field is not level; this is California and the California Democratic Party has more tools at their disposal. If the Republican contingency is dominated by NorCal, then they won't have the on-the-ground knowledge that would help them preserve Red opportunities in Orange and her environs. I you only have a birds eye view then you may just see a Blue OC and consider it lost.

[I’m not Stu]

Does this mean an OC district electing an Asian candidate (Garden Grove Democratic councilor) might very well happen?

[SevenEleven]

The legislature picks the first ten, then the commissioners select the next four, I believe.

The Republicans are never going to truly represent their party base here. The education levels sought do not align with your typical conservative voter.

[Oryxslayer]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Finished my California map:

Did you draw out Khanna lol

Not intentionally. I assume he'd just run in that Hayward-Fremont-Milpitas district.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

[lfromnj]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

[lfromnj]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

[lfromnj]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

So what's your solution to gerrymandering?
What do you want California to do.

[SevenEleven]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

So what's your solution to gerrymandering?
What do you want California to do.

I don't have a problem with the way California does things.

[Sestak]

For all those who use this thread, posting any ideas/requests you have for dealing with the multitude of CA threads in the 2020 master thread (linked in quote) would be appreciated.

Finally got around to getting the directory up to date. Again, if I missed something, please let me know.


Also, we probably need to do something about the mess that is the California threads. At the moment I can find at least two general "California redistricting" thread, an OC thread, an LA County thread, and a "Southern California redistricting" thread. At the minimum, I think, we don't need both CA general threads separate; for the specific ones either combine them all into a SoCal thread or get rid of the SoCal thread and split its posts between the LA and OC threads.

Will flag this to the mods shortly but would appreciate input about how people would like this organized.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

It was also noted online that there are only two selected individuals from the Monterray/Central-Coast region: one Dem, one Unaffiliated - both Hispanic. The analysis noted that one of those two will likely be selected in order to ensure that region has a voice.

Glancing over the lists it also appears there are only two selected individuals from the 'Jefferson' part of the state: one Republican from Shasta and one Unaffiliated from Humboldt. One will probably be selected. Considering that unaffiliated voter is almost certainly a 'too hippy for the Democratic Party' (given Humbolt's tradition for this sort of thing) that's probably a vote of support against a Republican plans. This is what I mean by the CA dems having an unequal amount of resources and influence because of their size, meaning that a Bay Area GOP delegation might end up outplayed.

The GOP shouldn't have an equal voice simply because they exist (barely). There's a reason Democratic candidates have been getting between 60 and 100% statewide lately. The fact that they are even allowed to participate is a larger role than they would have had without the current commission.

Pass another ballot if you want to gerrymander 52-0 California.

I don't believe in gerrymandering.

So then what are you asking for?

There is no need for crocodile tears about the plight of the poor, disadvantaged Republicans.

So what's your solution to gerrymandering?
What do you want California to do.

I don't have a problem with the way California does things.

Yep. It produces fair maps and should be the norm nationwide.

[I’m not Stu]

CA-45 has many malls. Is that important to a COI?

[Oryxslayer]

For all those who use this thread, posting any ideas/requests you have for dealing with the multitude of CA threads in the 2020 master thread (linked in quote) would be appreciated.

Finally got around to getting the directory up to date. Again, if I missed something, please let me know.


Also, we probably need to do something about the mess that is the California threads. At the moment I can find at least two general "California redistricting" thread, an OC thread, an LA County thread, and a "Southern California redistricting" thread. At the minimum, I think, we don't need both CA general threads separate; for the specific ones either combine them all into a SoCal thread or get rid of the SoCal thread and split its posts between the LA and OC threads.

Will flag this to the mods shortly but would appreciate input about how people would like this organized.

I dunno what should be done, but ERM64man should be discouraged from starting new threads (they are mostly all his) when the point of a master thread is to serve as an umbrella for all covered topics.