2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[SevenEleven]

Took the advice of Blairite and Oryx. I'm not happy with district 18 at all, but I think it's a little better than the one on Blairite's map. I'm also a little bothered by some of the groupings for CA-14... I'm open to making some more changes as needed.

CA-12 is plurality Asian, as is CA-17. CA-14 is majority Asian, and CA-15 is plurality Hispanic, but plurality Asian by CVAP (fairly evenly distributed between White, Asian, and Hispanic).

I can probably ditch the majority Asian district to clean up the map from a COI standpoint. I don't think any districts here are VRA protected per Gingles, as there is no demonstrated bloc voting in the bay. Asian isn't even a good grouping, as East Asians and South Asians arent a unified group at all.

Two little things: you might want to figure out a cleaner way to draw the Yuba City area and Orinda/Moraga/Lafayette definitely belong in whatever district Walnut Creek is in.

You're right; I'm crossing into Contra Costa either way.

[Idaho Conservative]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

It is a few pages back.  And a Yorba-South OC pairing is one of the few thing republicans should insist on.  Since there are so few red seats there isn't much else to fight for lol.

[Idaho Conservative]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

[Idaho Conservative]

Took the advice of Blairite and Oryx. I'm not happy with district 18 at all, but I think it's a little better than the one on Blairite's map. I'm also a little bothered by some of the groupings for CA-14... I'm open to making some more changes as needed.

CA-12 is plurality Asian, as is CA-17. CA-14 is majority Asian, and CA-15 is plurality Hispanic, but plurality Asian by CVAP (fairly evenly distributed between White, Asian, and Hispanic).

I can probably ditch the majority Asian district to clean up the map from a COI standpoint. I don't think any districts here are VRA protected per Gingles, as there is no demonstrated bloc voting in the bay. Asian isn't even a good grouping, as East Asians and South Asians arent a unified group at all.

Monterrey county doesn't need to be split wtf.

[Coastal Elitist]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

My coastal district went for Clinton by less than 600 votes. I put Fountain Valley in the Asian district. You can make Republican districts but there is no reason to pursue that over other concerns outside of partisanship.

It takes in like communities, most precincts in Fountain Valley are majority white and I wanted to avoid city splits

I don't think adding Fountain Valley would change my district much outside of making the Irvine split uglier.

Let's face it, Republicans are going to get railroaded by this commission and it's going to be glorious. The composition and function of the commission is pretty unfavorable to Republicans given the current political geography. Republicans were handed a major win last time with that bullsh**t CA-47, that won't be the case this time. Population changes have really hurt the GOP. Democrats have no reason to compromise as the Supreme Court is now Democratic. At best, Dems will allow Nunes to stay for a 45-5-2 map.

So whats your goal here?
making a truly non partisan/fair map or is to make what you think the commission will D gerrymander?

Im saying this everyone make your map's intentions clear when you draw it and the scenario it has.

My map is based on the guidelines the commission is bound to follow. It's not a gerrymander. Basically you have to account for ethnicity, income, localities, and CoIs. Partisanship and incumbency do not play a role.

The commission's map needs the support of 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans, and 3 NPPs. I suspect that a Central valley district might be given to the Republicans at the expense of Valley Hispanics to prevent a court drawn map similar to how they sucked OC Democrats into Los Angeles at the expense of the Asian community.

My point is that Republicans have no cards to play here. California has basically had two decades of GOP gerrymanders, followed by a fair map. They lost a lot of ground over the course of the fair map and population shifts basically lock them in where they are now.

lol that's the dumbest thing I've heard. R's won the popular house vote back in the 90s and didn't wind up with a majority of districts. You're map is clearly a partisan gerrymander look at how many districts you have between 50% and 55% D. You're making a map that would fail under an R wave.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

[SevenEleven]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

My coastal district went for Clinton by less than 600 votes. I put Fountain Valley in the Asian district. You can make Republican districts but there is no reason to pursue that over other concerns outside of partisanship.

It takes in like communities, most precincts in Fountain Valley are majority white and I wanted to avoid city splits

I don't think adding Fountain Valley would change my district much outside of making the Irvine split uglier.

Let's face it, Republicans are going to get railroaded by this commission and it's going to be glorious. The composition and function of the commission is pretty unfavorable to Republicans given the current political geography. Republicans were handed a major win last time with that bullsh**t CA-47, that won't be the case this time. Population changes have really hurt the GOP. Democrats have no reason to compromise as the Supreme Court is now Democratic. At best, Dems will allow Nunes to stay for a 45-5-2 map.

So whats your goal here?
making a truly non partisan/fair map or is to make what you think the commission will D gerrymander?

Im saying this everyone make your map's intentions clear when you draw it and the scenario it has.

My map is based on the guidelines the commission is bound to follow. It's not a gerrymander. Basically you have to account for ethnicity, income, localities, and CoIs. Partisanship and incumbency do not play a role.

The commission's map needs the support of 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans, and 3 NPPs. I suspect that a Central valley district might be given to the Republicans at the expense of Valley Hispanics to prevent a court drawn map similar to how they sucked OC Democrats into Los Angeles at the expense of the Asian community.

My point is that Republicans have no cards to play here. California has basically had two decades of GOP gerrymanders, followed by a fair map. They lost a lot of ground over the course of the fair map and population shifts basically lock them in where they are now.

lol that's the dumbest thing I've heard. R's won the popular house vote back in the 90s and didn't wind up with a majority of districts. You're map is clearly a partisan gerrymander look at how many districts you have between 50% and 55% D. You're making a map that would fail under an R wave.

I didn't take into consideration partisanship or whether a district would "fall during an R wave". Cities, ethnic groups, COIs. I have zero problem with competitive districts as it is, and that's not the purpose of my map nor a concern of the commission. Obviously a partisan gerrymander would want a couple seats safer for Dems and fewer toss ups, but that's not the point. Thank you for admitting that finally.

Re: bolded. Obviously you have factors such as the VRA come into play. That doesn't mean the map wasn't drawn to be as Republican as possible.

[Idaho Conservative]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

We agree on 9 gop seats, but I think the 9th should be a 4th socal seat, not a 3rd in norcal.

[I’m not Stu]

Why was a lawsuit filed for 2012 CA-47? Was it because it's a racial gerrymander that dilutes Hispanic and Asian votes in Orange County?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Going back a few posts, if you have to draw OC without an OC-SD split, I'd go for something like this. It destroys the Asian opportunity district (which is nice to have but not a requirement) and splits part of Fullerton around to Irvine, but at least it doesn't have districts connecting two disparate built-up areas (for example, Oceanside and San Clemente or Yorba Lina and Corona). For the record, the South OC district is Trump+1 (so likely D) and the Irvine-Yorba Linda district is Clinton+3 (so safe D).



Edit: I could bring Huntington and Newport into the South OC seat, move Mission Viejo and Ladera Ranch into the Irvine seat, and push Yorba Linda into the Fullerton seat to restore the Asian Belt district, but I'm unconvinced Coastal OC is a stronger COI than South OC. I think in many ways, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, and Newport Beach belong together more strongly than San Clemente and Huntington Beach. It is easy to view Irvine as a sort of barrier separating South OC from the rest of the county. Thoughts?

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

[SevenEleven]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

They still don't get it. My CA-45 and CA-48 are both Clinton districts, but below the NPV average. They are R+5 by PVI. This is a seismic shift. I think they both went for McCain by 10 points. My CA-48 is actually more Republican than the current iteration and they are claiming I gerrymandered it. All the educated people really did leave the GOP.

[Idaho Conservative]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

[Idaho Conservative]

Going back a few posts, if you have to draw OC without an OC-SD split, I'd go for something like this. It destroys the Asian opportunity district (which is nice to have but not a requirement) and splits part of Fullerton around to Irvine, but at least it doesn't have districts connecting two disparate built-up areas (for example, Oceanside and San Clemente or Yorba Lina and Corona). For the record, the South OC district is Trump+1 (so likely D) and the Irvine-Yorba Linda district is Clinton+3 (so safe D).



Edit: I could bring Huntington and Newport into the South OC seat, move Mission Viejo and Ladera Ranch into the Irvine seat, and push Yorba Linda into the Fullerton seat to restore the Asian Belt district, but I'm unconvinced Coastal OC is a stronger COI than South OC. I think in many ways, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, and Newport Beach belong together more strongly than San Clemente and Huntington Beach. It is easy to view Irvine as a sort of barrier separating South OC from the rest of the county. Thoughts?

Clinton+3 is safe D?

[S019]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

From a quick glance, that map has a bunch of municipality splits, which really is not ideal at all

[Coastal Elitist]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

Um Rouda could easily lose the district he has right now so that's not true. The one I made is even stronger R than that one and voted for Trump. The San Diego and Riverside ones are even more solid.

[SevenEleven]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

Um Rouda could easily lose the district he has right now so that's not true. The one I made is even stronger R than that one and voted for Trump. The San Diego and Riverside ones are even more solid.

Where is your map?

And no, Rouda is not losing to a Republican in the near future. He is a perfect fit and the GOP is freefalling.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Going back a few posts, if you have to draw OC without an OC-SD split, I'd go for something like this. It destroys the Asian opportunity district (which is nice to have but not a requirement) and splits part of Fullerton around to Irvine, but at least it doesn't have districts connecting two disparate built-up areas (for example, Oceanside and San Clemente or Yorba Lina and Corona). For the record, the South OC district is Trump+1 (so likely D) and the Irvine-Yorba Linda district is Clinton+3 (so safe D).



Edit: I could bring Huntington and Newport into the South OC seat, move Mission Viejo and Ladera Ranch into the Irvine seat, and push Yorba Linda into the Fullerton seat to restore the Asian Belt district, but I'm unconvinced Coastal OC is a stronger COI than South OC. I think in many ways, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa Margarita, Mission Viejo, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Niguel, and Newport Beach belong together more strongly than San Clemente and Huntington Beach. It is easy to view Irvine as a sort of barrier separating South OC from the rest of the county. Thoughts?

Clinton+3 is safe D?

In this district? Oh yeah. Over the past 4 years, there are at least 50,000 new residents in South and East Irvine voting 70-30 Dem. Some of the fastest growing areas of CA are in south and east Orange County and the new homes are all filled with young, diverse families. This is Collin County level development and political change. Take a look at a satellite map of everything from Tustin down to San Clemente.

[Coastal Elitist]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

I posted a previous one way earlier in this thread, but I'm working on a new one.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

Um Rouda could easily lose the district he has right now so that's not true. The one I made is even stronger R than that one and voted for Trump. The San Diego and Riverside ones are even more solid.

Where is your map?

And no, Rouda is not losing to a Republican in the near future. He is a perfect fit and the GOP is freefalling.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

Thanks. I really don't see how your Northern Sacramento Valley seats can be considered fair. For starters, Mono and Inyo have to stay together, by law. Nevada County obviously belongs in your Tahoe district and Colusa County in your Far North CA district, although shifting that won't change partisanship. I stand by what I said on West Sac and it isn't like Ami Bera is going to lose that CA-05 district anyway. Stanislaus and San Joaquin are where things really get messy. If you move Tracy in with an East Bay district, you can keep Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, and Modesto completely intact and cut down on some awkward county splits. Fresno should not be split three ways and Merced shouldn't be split two.

Your Bay Area map is actually pretty clean, although I prefer to keep the 680 corridor intact rather than chopping it up and connecting it to the inner East Bay.

Finally, DO NOT CROSS THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, EVER. It won't even change your partisanship much. Just don't do it. I'm not even going to touch LA, which is unnecessarily convoluted for seemingly no reason.

[SevenEleven]

You can definitely make an R district in Orange County by taking in mostly coastal OC towns and it makes sense to do this. Avoiding city splits I took in Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, San Juan Capistrano, San Clemente and Aliso Viejo. It also packs in whites and is 55R-45D. Then you can have a Riverside district and a San Diego district. So you can definitely get 3 fair R districts in Socal.

I posted a previous one way earlier in this thread, but I'm working on a new one.

There is no post-2018 scenario where that coastal district votes republican. Cut your losses and try and make sure your North San Diego and South Riverside districts don't flip as well.

Um Rouda could easily lose the district he has right now so that's not true. The one I made is even stronger R than that one and voted for Trump. The San Diego and Riverside ones are even more solid.

Where is your map?

And no, Rouda is not losing to a Republican in the near future. He is a perfect fit and the GOP is freefalling.

I found it and all I gotta say is that for your new map you should do some research into the VRA and the CRC guidelines. Maps need to be legal and ideally, challenge proof. For example, in the Central Valley, if they pair Bakersfield and Fresno again I am going straight to MALDEF and saying bring it on. I made two Hispanic districts in the South valley without touching Fresno.

Partisanship DOES NOT matter. Ethnicity, locality, and COIs do. Period.

[SevenEleven]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

Thanks. I really don't see how your Northern Sacramento Valley seats can be considered fair. For starters, Mono and Inyo have to stay together, by law. Nevada County obviously belongs in your Tahoe district and Colusa County in your Far North CA district, although shifting that won't change partisanship. I stand by what I said on West Sac and it isn't like Ami Bera is going to lose that CA-05 district anyway. Stanislaus and San Joaquin are where things really get messy. If you move Tracy in with an East Bay district, you can keep Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, and Modesto completely intact and cut down on some awkward county splits. Fresno should not be split three ways and Merced shouldn't be split two.

Your Bay Area map is actually pretty clean, although I prefer to keep the 680 corridor intact rather than chopping it up and connecting it to the inner East Bay.

Finally, DO NOT CROSS THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, EVER. It won't even change your partisanship much. Just don't do it. I'm not even going to touch LA, which is unnecessarily convoluted for seemingly no reason.

His Bay Area map is clean because there are no Republican areas to gerrymander.

[Idaho Conservative]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

Thanks. I really don't see how your Northern Sacramento Valley seats can be considered fair. For starters, Mono and Inyo have to stay together, by law. Nevada County obviously belongs in your Tahoe district and Colusa County in your Far North CA district, although shifting that won't change partisanship. I stand by what I said on West Sac and it isn't like Ami Bera is going to lose that CA-05 district anyway. Stanislaus and San Joaquin are where things really get messy. If you move Tracy in with an East Bay district, you can keep Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, and Modesto completely intact and cut down on some awkward county splits. Fresno should not be split three ways and Merced shouldn't be split two.

Your Bay Area map is actually pretty clean, although I prefer to keep the 680 corridor intact rather than chopping it up and connecting it to the inner East Bay.

Finally, DO NOT CROSS THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, EVER. It won't even change your partisanship much. Just don't do it. I'm not even going to touch LA, which is unnecessarily convoluted for seemingly no reason.

His Bay Area map is clean because there are no Republican areas to gerrymander.

Most of my districts are clean.  unlike yours.

[Idaho Conservative]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

Thanks. I really don't see how your Northern Sacramento Valley seats can be considered fair. For starters, Mono and Inyo have to stay together, by law. Nevada County obviously belongs in your Tahoe district and Colusa County in your Far North CA district, although shifting that won't change partisanship. I stand by what I said on West Sac and it isn't like Ami Bera is going to lose that CA-05 district anyway. Stanislaus and San Joaquin are where things really get messy. If you move Tracy in with an East Bay district, you can keep Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, and Modesto completely intact and cut down on some awkward county splits. Fresno should not be split three ways and Merced shouldn't be split two.

Your Bay Area map is actually pretty clean, although I prefer to keep the 680 corridor intact rather than chopping it up and connecting it to the inner East Bay.

Finally, DO NOT CROSS THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, EVER. It won't even change your partisanship much. Just don't do it. I'm not even going to touch LA, which is unnecessarily convoluted for seemingly no reason.

Why do Mono and Inyo have to be together?  Also maybe you're right about Tracy being with the bay.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Remember that list I posted a few pages back? Well, i'm going to add to it, since I forgot something. Legal COI priority goes:

- Local lines (counties, cities, neighborhoods)
- Ethnicity, Rage and it's correlating statistics
- Recognized cultural groupings of the previous two groups
- Partisan interests and competitiveness

In fact, the GOP is in a tight place when it comes to the ethnicity category. Since the state likes to maximize racial opportunity, GOP whites often end up as those unintentionally tossed in the minority districts to prevent packing. Thanks to the commission defining COIs as including living standards and income groups, this unintentionally (I believe..) legalizes and encourages the creation and preservation of white packs to facilitate more minority access. Those white packs are most likely to GOP packs.

White packs could benefit the GOP now.  1 in eastern SD, Inland/South OC, SW Riverside, and rural/edurban san bernardino.  Also 3 white packs in the central valley to then draw 3 minority electorate seats (3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump).  

You aren't getting that Inland/South OC district unless you do something ridiculous like connecting Yorba Linda to San Clemente. Also, any republican SD district will be in North County, not East County. Where is your third valley seat coming from? Your districts should be something like white Bakersfield (GOP), Latino Bakersfield (Dem), Fresno (Dem), Clovis/Visalia/Foothills (GOP), Merced (Dem), and Modesto (Dem).

Yorba to San Clemente isn't any more ridiculous than the current map which puts SD suburbs with OC and Temecula.  Plus it's only fair.  OC deserves at leas 1 GOP seat.  My 3rd valley GOP  district takes part of Harder's district and puts it with the mountains, and then pairs minority stanislaus areas with Stockton to create a 3rd minority seat in the valley.  3-3 is fair, the valley voted Trump overall.

Pairing San Diego suburbs with San Clemente or Temecula isn't ideal, but it's literally unavoidable because San Diego doesn't have the population for a perfect four congressional districts. It's quite easy, on the other hand, to avoid pairing cities at literal opposite ends of Orange County, and OC deserving a GOP district isn't valid redistricting rationale.

Can you show me a map of what you did with Harder's district?

This is his map😂


He is literally only here to troll just like the Virginia thread

Ergh. That's bad. Regarding the Central Valley specifically, putting Mono County, Elk Grove, and parts of Stockton/Modesto/Merced in one district is....wrong. I'd really like to look at that with a map underlay to see what is happening in San Joaquin/Stanislaus Counties but the general groupings north of Fresno are weird AF.

Elk Grove is in Sacramento county.

It's very hard to tell where certain suburbs are on your map without transparency reduced, your map overlay turned on, and your county lines turned on. If you'd post a new screenshot with all of this, it would be much appreciated.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/14c07950-05ff-4f60-92d9-61d9f07870c0

Thanks. I really don't see how your Northern Sacramento Valley seats can be considered fair. For starters, Mono and Inyo have to stay together, by law. Nevada County obviously belongs in your Tahoe district and Colusa County in your Far North CA district, although shifting that won't change partisanship. I stand by what I said on West Sac and it isn't like Ami Bera is going to lose that CA-05 district anyway. Stanislaus and San Joaquin are where things really get messy. If you move Tracy in with an East Bay district, you can keep Stockton, Lathrop, Manteca, and Modesto completely intact and cut down on some awkward county splits. Fresno should not be split three ways and Merced shouldn't be split two.

Your Bay Area map is actually pretty clean, although I prefer to keep the 680 corridor intact rather than chopping it up and connecting it to the inner East Bay.

Finally, DO NOT CROSS THE SAN GABRIEL MOUNTAINS, EVER. It won't even change your partisanship much. Just don't do it. I'm not even going to touch LA, which is unnecessarily convoluted for seemingly no reason.

Why do Mono and Inyo have to be together?  Also maybe you're right about Tracy being with the bay.

The only year-round road connections to Mono are to Inyo and into the state of Nevada.