2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Minnesota

[patzer]

This is the sort of 5-3 map I think would be most "reasonable", especially for a court-ordered map for instance.

All incumbents' homes are kept in their districts, but Tom Emmer's district went from Trump +2 in 2016 to Biden +6 in 2020 so would be a struggle for him to hang onto. All other incumbents should be reasonably safe albeit the 8th could be competitive with a good Dem candidate.

A Court will not make changes that radical. Also you have Hagadorn and Craig in the same district. And it's tough to tell from a map with no county lines but you may also have Emmer and Phillips in the same district.

I went based on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Minnesota

Which said Hagedorn is in Mankato and Craig in Eagan

If the locations in that article are correct, the map works.

[Minnesota Mike]

I went based on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Minnesota

Which said Hagedorn is in Mankato and Craig in Eagan

If the locations in that article are correct, the map works.

Unless Hagadorn moved legal residences since he was first elected he is from the Rochester area. Were he actually lives is in St Louis Park (Hennepin county) with his wife disgraced former GOP Chair  Jennifer Carnahan.

FWIW the biggest problem with your map, especially MN-01 (where I live), is not where the incumbents live but stretching it from the Twin Cities suburbs to the Iowa border. Would be shocked if we don't see as least change possible map.

[Thunder98 🇮🇱 🤝 🇵🇸]

Here's a messy 6D-RD Dem gerrymander. Both R seats are very safe.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/3927b8f4-28a2-456f-b587-66de2cc52548

[EastAnglianLefty]

I took a crack at drawing state legislative maps based on minimising splits of counties and of municipalities. I didn't consciously draw it with partisan goals in mind, but interestingly both the House and Senate maps came out with a mild Dem bias. I'm unsure if this reflects unconscious assumptions I was making that benefited Democrats or if at that level Minnesota's geography does genuinely benefit Democrats.

State House: https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e2ab64b-1647-4986-a3ff-ffd80cec5cbd, 73 Biden districts out of 134

State Senate: https://davesredistricting.org/join/78ca046a-8d34-4815-bbed-7695f434af4a, 35 Biden districts out of 67

[I’m not Stu]

I updated my map.

[BoiseBoy]

We will see a map proposal on November 23.

[I’m not Stu]

2020 presidential results for my map. My custom MN-05 doesn't have any municipality splits and is entirely in Hennepin County. No more three-way split of Anoka County. My MN-07 and MN-08 have no county splits. My MN-07 breaks tradition and doesn't contain any of the northernmost counties in western Minnesota, which I did to make it more compact. My MN-08 take in all the northernmost counties.

[Mr.Phips]

2020 presidential results for my map. My custom MN-05 doesn't have any municipality splits and is entirely in Hennepin County. No more three-way split of Anoka County. My MN-07 and MN-08 have no county splits. My MN-07 breaks tradition and doesn't contain any of the northernmost counties in western Minnesota, which I did to make it more compact. My MN-08 take in all the northernmost counties.

What are the MN-02 2020 presidential numbers?

[I’m not Stu]

2020 presidential results for my map. My custom MN-05 doesn't have any municipality splits and is entirely in Hennepin County. No more three-way split of Anoka County. My MN-07 and MN-08 have no county splits. My MN-07 breaks tradition and doesn't contain any of the northernmost counties in western Minnesota, which I did to make it more compact. My MN-08 take in all the northernmost counties.

What are the MN-02 2020 presidential numbers?

Biden won my MN-02 with 53.6%. Clinton won it in 2016 with 45.8%.

[patzer]

Thought I'd see how close Minnesota could be to having a VRA district.

Here's what I got- the new 6th is 42% white, 28% black, 17% Asian, 12% Hispanic, 3% Native.

So... not really a proper VRA district yet, but things are heading in a direction where one may be possible in future.

[I’m not Stu]

2018 gubernatorial results.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1461807672198676485

State Senate -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/55999e5e-5536-4923-bcab-0d404427e277

State House -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/99956a7e-14f7-4469-997b-3c485281a37f

[Minnesota Mike]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1461807672198676485

State Senate -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/55999e5e-5536-4923-bcab-0d404427e277

State House -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/99956a7e-14f7-4469-997b-3c485281a37f

Thanks for putting them on DRA. I really should learn how to do that myself but I'm an old fart who never learned a lot of this computer stuff

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1461807672198676485

State Senate -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/55999e5e-5536-4923-bcab-0d404427e277

State House -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/99956a7e-14f7-4469-997b-3c485281a37f

Thanks for putting them on DRA. I really should learn how to do that myself but I'm an old fart who never learned a lot of this computer stuff

It's actually really easy if you have the shapefile in a zip folder,  load the blank respective map you need (Minnesota State Senate for example) go to the gear icon in the top right, scroll to the bottom where it says "color map from file" and hit browse and select the shapefile zip folder, then wait for it to process.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Thought I'd see how close Minnesota could be to having a VRA district.

Here's what I got- the new 6th is 42% white, 28% black, 17% Asian, 12% Hispanic, 3% Native.

So... not really a proper VRA district yet, but things are heading in a direction where one may be possible in future.

That's not what a "VRA district" is. The VRA does not require that majority non-white districts be drawn or making those outlandish gerrymandered maps just to have them, and in fact this wasn't even done until after the 1990 Census.

What the VRA states is that if an area has a notable population of a certain protected minority community, then that community must be able to elect the preferred candidate of the community. (This does not necessarily mean "Black/Hispanic person.") Basically chopping up such an area to gerrymandered is not permitted unlike how the current Texas map chopping up the white part of Austin is. Since obviously every district covered by this area elects a Democrat, the preferred candidate of the minority communities, there is no VRA violation nor will there be any in the future barring any out of nowhere and very notable voting realignments.

(As for why those districts started being drawn in the 90s, it was because back then the South was full of districts that were like 30-40% black that mostly elected white conservative Democrats, which was legal under the VRA. But then the Republicans realized that if they could get most of the black voters into only one district and made the surrounding remaining districts only like 10-20% black they'd actually have a chance at winning them...so they under the table set up a bit of an astroturf campaign to draw black majority districts when possible under the guise of electing a black Representative. This was unfortunately then supported by some black leaders and in most of those states a Republican+black legislator coalition passed such maps, and the plan was mostly successful. [Just look at Georgia for the textbook example.] Today however it's kind of moot, the old districts would mostly just elect Republicans now and the Republicans would be fine with them.)

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

FWIW the panel that will do the redistricting has already been set up although they officially won't have any power until February, and has already done a "listening tour" of sorts. The five judge panel (four women interestingly) consists of two Pawlenty appointees, two Dayton appointees and one Ventura appointee. However one of those Pawlenty appointees (who is also the chair of the panel) is not particularly conservative, and he approached such appointees in an almost entirely non-partisan way and instead things like going based the recommendation of the local Bar Association. So I don't expect a rather R-friendly panel. However it definitely won't be a partisan D panel either, meaning it's unlikely any type of gerrymander will happen but it's definitely not a stretch to see Craig shored up.

I'm far more interested in the legislative maps, since with the population shift and bleeding of rural areas it could potentially be UGLY for the Republicans and I could see a scenario where they fail to take the House or even hold the Senate even during an R wave. Like the Democrats would gain enough seats alone just by population shift and Outstate losing seats, not to mention things like the now de facto gerrymander giving the Republicans two Senate seats from Rochester is no longer feasible even if the panel wanted to keep it as such.

[I’m not Stu]

2018 Senate results for my map.

[politicallefty]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/c2a634a8-d0a9-44c5-b889-c93e39d8a818

Proportionality: 100/100 (partisan bias 48/100)
Competitiveness: 20/100
Compactness: 62/100
Splitting: 64/100

This map splits seven counties, including Hennepin (which must be split due to size).

MN-01: Trump+7.2, Trump+11.8, Walz+4.4
MN-02: Biden+9.4, Clinton+0.6, Walz+7.5
MN-03: Biden+21.0, Clinton+11.5, Walz+15.1
MN-04: Biden+35.5, Clinton+29.5, Walz+34.3
MN-05: Biden+60.9, Clinton+52.9, Walz+57.0
MN-06: Trump+19.5, Trump+25.4, Johnson+15.2
MN-07: Trump+31.3, Trump+32.2, Johnson+18.3
MN-08: Trump+14.0, Trump+15.3, Johnson+1.6

I still think my map from the previous page is the best map that is not a gerrymander. It's largely a minimal change map that cleans up some of the issues from the current map. For the most part, the current map really is mostly fair and makes a lot of sense. I think the map I made is even better based on the new population data.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Democrats need to demand a 5-3 map or a  4-2-2 at worst. There's no a reason a +8 biden state should have a split delegation.

[Mr.Phips]

Democrats need to demand a 5-3 map or a  4-2-2 at worst. There's no a reason a +8 biden state should have a split delegation.

I think the best the can home for is a map that shores up Craig to give them four basically safe seats.

[patzer]

Democrats need to demand a 5-3 map or a  4-2-2 at worst. There's no a reason a +8 biden state should have a split delegation.

I think the best the can home for is a map that shores up Craig to give them four basically safe seats.

Probably the best feasible map is one where the 8th stretches across the north to include Moorhead, and the 1st gets a bit more competitive whilst the 2nd is shored up.

You’d end up with four safe D, two safe R, and two tilt R (the first and eighth). The 1st and 8th would continue to slowly drift away from the Dems but they could still have a shot.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's possible to draw a 5-3 map if you draw a district that hugs the Wisconsin border and connects Duluth to parts of the metro (and possibly even Rochester), but the redistricting panel is not going to draw such a map.

[Oryxslayer]

It's possible to draw a 5-3 map if you draw a district that hugs the Wisconsin border and connects Duluth to parts of the metro (and possibly even Rochester), but the redistricting panel is not going to draw such a map.

You can alternatively cut the current MN-03 in two and add Rochester + the remainder of Anoka to the the current metro muti-district grouping. Obviously one of the five would be competitive but that's what happens when you can't slice the cities. Not losing a congressional seat doesn't change the fact that the 3 outlying districts need to gain pop - over 100K. The 4 inner will shrink, which could make room for a fifth. Here's a quickly whipped up variant that favors the Ds.



But I doubt we'll get any drastic changes like this and probably just more of the same.

[I’m not Stu]

Twin Cities on my map.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's possible to draw a 5-3 map if you draw a district that hugs the Wisconsin border and connects Duluth to parts of the metro (and possibly even Rochester), but the redistricting panel is not going to draw such a map.

You can alternatively cut the current MN-03 in two and add Rochester + the remainder of Ankona to the the current metro grouping. Obviously one of the five would be competitive but that's what happens when you can't slice the cities. Not losing a congressional seat doesn't change the fact that the 3 outlying districts need to gain pop - over 100K. The 4 inner will shrink, which could make room for a fifth. Here's a quickly whipped up variant that favors the Ds.



But I doubt we'll get any drastic changes like this and probably just more of the same.

If you mean Anoka by "Ankona" that's already in metro-based districts, but not the second (and it's nowhere near there.)

I don't think that map is particularly great for the DFL, the teal district might've voted for Biden but it wouldn't hold in any even mildly R-leaning year and that's not even a particularly safe district for Craig since it also threw in a bunch of Republican rural counties as well and cut out some of the more Democratic areas in Dakota County. The best way for a solid 5-3 is add Rochester to the 2nd as you did, add Mankato to the 3rd, and allow some other very D suburbs in it to be shifted elsewhere, and then create a Duluth to Washington/Ramsey counties district with some pretty Democratic inner suburbs while putting more Republican ones in the 4th and drowning them with St. Paul. But no way an independent panel is going to draw that, especially since they seem to pride themselves on mostly non-partisan maps and that's what everyone in their "listening tour" is begging for.