2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Minnesota

[lfromnj]

Your map has 3 Clinton districts and 4 Trump ones. That just isn't going to go ahead. I am confident that there will be 4 Twin Cities districts that are all Clinton+10 or better.

[/b]

.....



Wut

You honestly think a Dem trifecta would draw anything but? The urban cores will be split four ways and the three rural districts will be packed. Any 4R-3D map is an obvious nonstarter.

It's not a D trifecta though

I thought it was basically a lock to become one in 2020, or do I have that off?

No its not a lock.
Ds are very heavily favored to pick up one district so its 33D 34 R but then after that theres a bunch of competitive districts including many D held seats in Trump areas including one double digit Trump exurban seat which is going to be a very tough hold. The median district is Trump +3.2 btw.

[lfromnj]

The easiest pairing in the Metro
is one Minneapolis +inner ring suburbs
One outer ring Hennepin+Almost all of Anoka
Ramsey+Washington is also a district
and Dakota+Scott+Carver and a bit South including rice.
Probably not the best from a COI perspective though.

[lfromnj]

Again theres no "fair" 7 district map that gives 4 Clinton +10 districts. You will have a district based in inner ring Minneapolis which will me a mega sink of around 70% Clinton
Then the Ramsey County district will be almost 60% Clinton and also a sink. The remaining territory in the metro isn't enough to create 2 Clinton +10 districts. The fact of the matter is that Democrats are geographically packed in Minneapolis and St paul and once those 2 districts are taken care of there is no way to reasonably draw any more Safe D seats.
This is just as fair as a fair 39 district Texas map having
like 21 beto districts
3 in the RGV
1 El paso
2 SA
3 Austin
6 Houston+fort/bend
6 DFW.

[lfromnj]

Or you can just start cutting the cities:



MN-01: Trump+16
MN-02: Trump+30
MN-03: Trump+16
MN-04: Clinton+13
MN-05: Clinton+25
MN-06: Clinton+15
MN-07: Clinton+17

Are you saying for a D gerrymander or a court map. Unsure about a D gerrymander trichopping Minneapolis but I wouldn't be shocked.
A court map would never chop the cities like that. The fact of the matter is that any court map has to accept that Ds are much more packed into those 2 cities than rural Rs are packed.

I wonder if Omar also loses in a Clinton +17 district in a R wave year. I don't think so but I could see it. She probably needs Clinton +20.

[lfromnj]

Or you can just start cutting the cities:



MN-01: Trump+16
MN-02: Trump+30
MN-03: Trump+16
MN-04: Clinton+13
MN-05: Clinton+25
MN-06: Clinton+15
MN-07: Clinton+17

Are you saying for a D gerrymander or a court map. Unsure about a D gerrymander trichopping Minneapolis but I wouldn't be shocked.
A court map would never chop the cities like that. The fact of the matter is that any court map has to accept that Ds are much more packed into those 2 cities than rural Rs are packed.

Dem gerry, of course. I expect something like this if Dems flip the senate. Otherwise, it'll probably be my 3 non-Twin Cities districts, Minneapolis+Bloomington, rest of Hennepin+Anoka, Ramsey+Washington, and a Southern suburban district.

Try to check incumbents residencies if you can. Your yellow district would either pit Phillips vs Omar or Omar would have to run in the brown district in a slightly competitive district for her.

[lfromnj]

Or you can just start cutting the cities:

snip

MN-01: Trump+16
MN-02: Trump+30
MN-03: Trump+16
MN-04: Clinton+13
MN-05: Clinton+25
MN-06: Clinton+15
MN-07: Clinton+17

Are you saying for a D gerrymander or a court map. Unsure about a D gerrymander trichopping Minneapolis but I wouldn't be shocked.
A court map would never chop the cities like that. The fact of the matter is that any court map has to accept that Ds are much more packed into those 2 cities than rural Rs are packed.

Dem gerry, of course. I expect something like this if Dems flip the senate. Otherwise, it'll probably be my 3 non-Twin Cities districts, Minneapolis+Bloomington, rest of Hennepin+Anoka, Ramsey+Washington, and a Southern suburban district.

Try to check incumbents residencies if you can. Your yellow district would either pit Phillips vs Omar or Omar would have to run in the brown district in a slightly competitive district for her.

I honestly thought they might like to screw Omar out of a district. I can adjust that, but do you know exactly where in Minneapolis she lives?

Omar is actually the most establishment one of the squad locally atleast.(Pressley is more establishment at a national level but the establishment in MA was more split about her)
She had full support of the establishment in 2018. Im sure she could move to avoid  a primary with  Dean Phillips but she wouldn't be that happy in a Clinton +17 district.

Sadly I don't know exactly where she lives in the city.

[lfromnj]

They should but the only Democrats with real balls left is Mike Madigan and maybe Maryland Democrats.

[lfromnj]

Well the Rs still control the state senate- with 7 seats I guess just make MN02 about the same with some court map while 8 seats means they could just go 4-4.

[lfromnj]

Why are we assuming Minnesota is going to keep seven congressional districts after the 2020 census?   

We said 7 or 8 I think it keeps 8.

[lfromnj]

Anyway its going to the courts most likely so a least change map with 8 districts would probably just make MN02 a bare Clinton district .



 A Surprisingly interesting configuration can be made with 7 districts by putting the twin cities together. However IIRC St.Paul has a pretty strong desire to be in its own district so this is merely an excerise into curiosity. This move moves MN03 to the left  moderately to Clinton +18 but moves MN04 very much to the right at Clinton +2.

MN02 stays mostly the same as the current map at Trump +2.5 .

Slightly R favorable but not incredibly so compared to one that keeps the cities separate because keeping one mega D "pack" with both cities does free up some inner ring suburbs of both districts.

[lfromnj]

Yeah, folks without Minnesota ties do like putting the Cities together, but that would never, ever happen (and I appreciate you acknowledging that it wouldn't!) unless Republicans got a trifecta and really felt like flexing their muscles. Keeping Minneapolis and St. Paul separate is sacrosanct.

Well again its really not the best map for the GOP. I made it with non partisan intent but at the same time IMO its like splitting Bucks in PA right? Anyway was just an interesting fact that keeping the cities together wouldn't be a bad idea even in a fair map if it wasn't for local/parochial factors as it fits pretty neatly.

[lfromnj]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manomin_County,_Minnesota

By the way  if anyone is wondering here is some history about Anoka county that creates the divide between that super inner ring suburban part and then the exurban/rural portion of the county.

[lfromnj]

Hmong population in the twin cities is estimated at about 60,000, which is about 8% of a single congressional district’s population. I don’t think that their ability to elect the candidate of their choice would stand up as a rationale in court.

Who said it was a legal requirement?

Why should suburbs be placed in inner city dominated districts?

The argument made against a Twin Cities districts is "we don't like it" and we remember when Minneapolis had its own district.

But then you are conflict with the reality that you are chopping up suburbs to a greater extent to keep Minneapolis and St.Paul apart.

What's gained by crossing county borders needlessly to put them together?  Are people in inner cities sub-human or something?

Hennepin must be split. Are you aware of that?

Ramsey does not.   Hennepin is much better paired with Anoka, which it almost perfectly forms two districts worth of population.

I really don't know why you always post smug comments like this.

I mean in the scenario where you combine the cities, the rest of Hennepin is exactly 1 district assuming you start from there, and the rest of Ramsey +Anoka+ Washington is also 1 district + a few thousand.

The main reason not to draw it in a purely non partisan map is because local community demands do form what constitutes a COI. Considering how long the separate district tradition has held up I think its reasonable to keep the 2 cities separate but overall combining them works pretty well . If I didn't know Minnesota politics I would probably combine them.

 Red just has to take a 120k more from either Wright or Rice and Goodhue. And obviously the court is highly unlikely to draw it due to tradition/city demands/ the fact it could slightly hurt the DFL but I am just mentioning it as a fun exercise.


Anyway here is a more DFL friendly version of keeping the cities together. Blue is Clinton +10 and the other are barely Clinton +1.

If for example I was in head of a Minnesota commission my opinion would be to generally keep the cities separate at first but then ask local community leaders in the inner ring suburbs of St. Paul/Minneapolis such as  Edina and ask if they desire to be placed in separate districts. If both the suburbs/cities are fine with the separate district for each city then obviously that would be the go to plan. However if the cities are still adamant about being separate but the suburbs would want to push the cities together then one would have to make a tougher decision.

[lfromnj]

Yeah, folks without Minnesota ties do like putting the Cities together, but that would never, ever happen (and I appreciate you acknowledging that it wouldn't!) unless Republicans got a trifecta and really felt like flexing their muscles. Keeping Minneapolis and St. Paul separate is sacrosanct.

Why do you want to crack the Hmong population?

That's not what cracking is.  Also, it is tradition in MN each city gets its own district, I don't see that changing.  Neither party would have a reason to do that.  It would upset Twin Cities residents, the Dem base in the state, and make suburban seats bluer, which would upset Republicans.

It doesn't really hurt the GOP, overall makes one Likely/Safe D seat a tossup/Lean D which isn't bad for them but its not an extreme move either.

[lfromnj]

Here's scenario that I'm not sure has been discussed yet: what if Minnesota keeps their 8th seat? Given all the weirdness with doing the count due to COVID-19, some of the Trump fears with minority responses, and the fact Minnesota's response rate was the best nationwide, I think the possibility is greater than zero.

Incumbency protection and even a court map naturally does that . Fairly boring overall.

[lfromnj]

   If someone is so worried about the Minority community being split just make a Minneapolis district that that takes in Brooklyn Park and give Edina to MN03.  That creates just as non white a district as a Minneapolis/St.Paul combination.
   Anyway so far there hasn't been any serious demands by any major group for a combined district including the suburban towns. If they start complaining about Minneapolis/St.Paul being "split apart" into 2 districts then yes one should consider placing them together. However until then the most obvious choice is just keep them separate. Tradition absolutely forms a part of a culture which forms what determines what is a community of interest.

However I do agree that Brittain is getting too annoyed about "minorities" being packed when in reality its just packing white liberals into one super D district.

[lfromnj]

Anyway if anybody was looking to make one seat as non white as possible this is what one could do without combining the cities.Still its 72.9% white by CVAP. A twin cities district would only be 69.4%. 

[lfromnj]

Just why are the usual suspects of mapping nerds more obsessed by Minnesota than any other state this cycle? Inquiring minds want to know!

Well, it's losing a seat and the prospect of a Minneapolis-St. Paul district is a fun opportunity for partisan trolling.

Plus I think there's something to the fact that drawing Minnesota is easy--the population distribution divides pretty cleanly so it's not challenging to make good districts, unlike, say, NC or OH.

I don't see how Jim  is being partisan here. He drew 4 Clinton seats in the area for his final map.

[lfromnj]

Aside from what the final population numbers might be, this seems to be the most Dem friendly division of the Twin Cities metro pie. I am a bit surprised it has not been put up yet.  



Now all that is needed is to reverse engineer the COI argument. Well that prong of Anoka used to be or should have been in Hennepin, it is right next door to Minneapolis, and taking in the rest of Anoka just fills out the missing population, and BRTD has relatives in Coon Rapids to boot. The fact that Jimrtex would hate it is proof positive, because there is 100% correlation between what he wants and what is wrong. When was the last time he was even in a place known as full of nice people? We know it is never because he does not like spending time with nice people. That is why he lives in Texas come to think of it.

Moderators, absolutely nothing in the above paragraph is true. I admit that now. So it cannot be infracted because I just denounced it. Thank you.

Honestly, this looks like the most likely outcome to me (or at least something like it).  It's certainly D-leaning, but not so unreasonable that a solidly Democratic-leaning court like the MN SC would have any qualms about choosing it. 

I mean, it certainly makes far more sense than any map combining the Twin Cities (which is both a non-starter for anything other than an aggressive Republican gerrymander and with all due respect to those who disagree, honestly makes no sense from a COI perspective).  Combining the Twin Cities would make sense if you had Republican trifecta or a hyper-partisan Republican State Supreme Court.  However, we have a relatively partisan Democratic State Supreme Court (which was not the case last time). 

Why do believe that the Minnesota Supreme Court will be making the decision, and not assign it to a 5-judge panel as was done in 2001 and 2011? Why do you believe that the 5-judge panel in 2011 was biased? After all, the head of the panel Wilhelmina Wright was subsequently appointed by Mark Dayton to the Minnesota Supreme Court and by Barack Obama to a federal district judgeship.

The current map doesn’t combine the Twin Cities the way your hyper-partisan Republican gerrymander proposal does, for one thing.  Also, the MN SC is significantly more Democratic than it was during the past redistricting cycle.  Nothing but a panel made up of the most hyper-partisan of Republican hacks would even seriously consider a map that combines the Twin Cities; that map was simply wishcasting on your part.

I mean his map is stupid but its hardly a hyper-republican proposal. In the end he even drew it with 4 Clinton districts.

[lfromnj]

For curiosity's sake who would win a Minneapolis/ST paul district?

Normally I would say the Minneapolis candidate but I think Omar would underperform just enough on her side to lose to Betty Mccollum.

[lfromnj]

If the Court draws the map, it will almost certainly be a least change map, with the changes focused on reducing or eliminating existing county splits where they exist. I revised slightly my least change map above to more closely hew to that metric. The net partisan changes are close to nill.

From what I understand although in outstate County splits were minimal, there were some "unneccesary" splits for community/ to reduce township splits. Anoka is a good example and its a good example in Anoka county which really is a county which should atleast be split between the old Menomin county where some of the original Minneapolis suburbs came originally.

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/kevinfeatherly/status/1410354644862357511

2 TPaw, 1 Ventura,2  Dayton.

[lfromnj]

If Minnesota had lost a congressional seat as it almost did, which party likely would have lost the seat?

A fair map would be 4D-3R, but most compact configurations ended up at 4R-3D from my playing around so hard to say.

Mostly 3-1-3? . Don't see how you get 4 Trump districts that easily. I mean its possible but most should have a 4th Biden district albeit narrowly.

[lfromnj]

Can anyone explain why no proposals have something like this for MN04? Seems like the area in North Dakota even has townships called West and South St Paul.  Obviously this slightly hurts Democrats as the townships in this area are more Dem than areas in Washington but it certainly seems like a decent district to draw just like one draws West Sacramento with Sacramento? Is the river that major of a dividing line? St paul itself actually crosses the river anyway. It seems like a decent dividing line although most maps now still have to cross the river in a serious way because MN02 can't go down south to take rural counties as MN01 has to grab those.

I guess at the very least one could call this a serious GOP proposal instead of the lol map from above.

[lfromnj]

Can anyone explain why no proposals have something like this for MN04? Seems like the area in North Dakota even has townships called West and South St Paul.  Obviously this slightly hurts Democrats as the townships in this area are more Dem than areas in Washington but it certainly seems like a decent district to draw just like one draws West Sacramento with Sacramento? Is the river that major of a dividing line? St paul itself actually crosses the river anyway. It seems like a decent dividing line although most maps now still have to cross the river in a serious way because MN02 can't go down south to take rural counties as MN01 has to grab those.

I guess at the very least one could call this a serious GOP proposal instead of the lol map from above.

Haven’t tried it myself, but taking those towns out of MN-2 would take a lot of shifting around the metro to work it out, or it’d make it a likely Republican seat when it really should be nothing less then lean D. You can make a decent enough democrat seat, but its honestly easier to just keep Dakota in tact and keep the fourth with it’s part of Washington

I mean the rearrangement would just be trading Washington and north Dakota,FWIW currently Anoka is triple split in a manner that is still logical. I am not specifically arguing for this as I need to know more info about this area, but I note this seems like a fairly reasonable district and an actually serious GOP proposal should do this to limit the leftward shift MN02 would have. It isn't happening as the court will simply do a least change and there isn't anything awful about the current map(In fact its one of the best in the nation) . It certainly wouldn't change the district much, just merely make a Likely D district Lean D instead.