Executive Council Districts

[Sol]

Some of y'all might be aware that New Hampshire has an executive council, an odd body which is composed of 5 members elected in single-member districts. What would it be like if all states had equivalent executive councils, with 5 members?

I've been drawing a few, and I'd love to see yours too!


link
(sorry for crossing Grand Divisions)


link


link

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Man a lot of these would screw the Democrats in population distribution. Democrats would actually win more (2) in that Tennessee map than Michigan (which would likely be 4R-1D)

Edit: OK that suburban Detroit seat seems it narrowly voted Biden, just like the Nashville one....still both TN and MI being basically 3R-1D-1 swing seat makes the point.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I made one for SC that is very interesting.



This map could swing from 5-0 to 2-3. The Purple is the most democratic, but Tim Scott carried it in 2016. Yet Obama came within 6,000 votes of carrying the green. James Smith won the purple and Blue in 2018. It would introduce a whole new avenue for SC pols

[Left Wing]

Here's a Texas one I made (Partisanship is 2016), Austin and San Antonio, Houston and Dallas metro areas each get their own district, likely all three would have current Democratic representatives. The fourth district would likely have gove blue in 2018, but Republican almost every other year and especially 2020.

[Sol]

I made one for SC that is very interesting.



This map could swing from 5-0 to 2-3. The Purple is the most democratic, but Tim Scott carried it in 2016. Yet Obama came within 6,000 votes of carrying the green. James Smith won the purple and Blue in 2018. It would introduce a whole new avenue for SC pols

You presumably would need a Black influence district, and drawing one is very easy.

[Sol]

link

[Orwell]

Man a lot of these would screw the Democrats in population distribution. Democrats would actually win more (2) in that Tennessee map than Michigan (which would likely be 4R-1D)

Edit: OK that suburban Detroit seat seems it narrowly voted Biden, just like the Nashville one....still both TN and MI being basically 3R-1D-1 swing seat makes the point.

Huh? The Michigan map is pretty clearly 1-2 2 swing to me. The gop would win green and blue while the Dems would win yellow and have an advantage in red while purple looks to be a pure tossup.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Man a lot of these would screw the Democrats in population distribution. Democrats would actually win more (2) in that Tennessee map than Michigan (which would likely be 4R-1D)

Edit: OK that suburban Detroit seat seems it narrowly voted Biden, just like the Nashville one....still both TN and MI being basically 3R-1D-1 swing seat makes the point.

Huh? The Michigan map is pretty clearly 1-2 2 swing to me. The gop would win green and blue while the Dems would win yellow and have an advantage in red while purple looks to be a pure tossup.

What did Biden get in the purple?

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

I made one for SC that is very interesting.



This map could swing from 5-0 to 2-3. The Purple is the most democratic, but Tim Scott carried it in 2016. Yet Obama came within 6,000 votes of carrying the green. James Smith won the purple and Blue in 2018. It would introduce a whole new avenue for SC pols

You presumably would need a Black influence district, and drawing one is very easy.

Being that it’s a state district I’m not sure, but if such a exec council district it’d obviously be gerrymandered to have a 4/1 composition

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Man a lot of these would screw the Democrats in population distribution. Democrats would actually win more (2) in that Tennessee map than Michigan (which would likely be 4R-1D)

Edit: OK that suburban Detroit seat seems it narrowly voted Biden, just like the Nashville one....still both TN and MI being basically 3R-1D-1 swing seat makes the point.

I'm not certain that Biden won the Nashville one.  It would have been really close.  He won the four whole counties in it by about 13K votes, but Trump won Sumner County (the split one) by 36K votes.  Enough of Sumner may be taken in by the Nashville district for Trump to have won it.

Regardless, it almost certainly would have voted Republican in this hypothetical downballot race, as it easily voted for Hagerty.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Biden might've carried the blue Fargo district narrowly (Trump won it with under 50% in 2016), Trump won everything else big. Although the green was won by Heitkamp by a not exactly razor thin margin and is often more Democratic downballot so maybe a 3R-2D council isn't impossible.

If you're wondering why I split Bismarck from Burleigh County, it's basically the least bad option. The purple district without wouldn't really have anywhere to expand to make up the lost population if all of Burleigh was in red (it's only about 8k people, but that's a lot in this part of ND), it'd have to either expand into the Minot area which wouldn't be good or take McLean County (that one that extends from north to northwest of Burleigh) and have an odd jut. Adding Sioux County isn't an option, not for racial reasons (the Natives are heavily outnumbered no matter what district they're in) but because the district wouldn't really be contiguous, it's not possible to go directly from Sioux County to Emmons County just east of the Missouri River except by boat, there's no bridges. To cross a bridge you'd have to either drive and cross the Bismarck-Mandan bridges or head down into South Dakota.



...yeah I don't like this. Basically a locked in 3R-2D map. Walz did come pretty close in the red district, but only because it was so close to his old House seat.

[Stuart98]

Going by 2018 senate, it's 4R 1S. By 2016 president, it's 3R 1D 1S.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Almost certainly a 3D-2R map, although the blue district might've narrowly voted Biden and with the way it's trending this could end up as a 3D-1S-1R map. Although Republicans tend to do better downballot there than Trump. The red district would be kind of close, but it's at best a fool's gold district for the Democrats.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Democrats could actually win all five of these under the right circumstances, Obama did. And if the election was held in 2018, they probably would. But in 2016 or 2020, Republicans would win both Upstate seats, so this is basically a 3D-2S map.

[Former President tack50]

I did not like Falterinarc's Texas map, so here is my counterproposal. I did not intend for it, but it ends up as a (risky) Dem gerrymander, which is interesting given most maps here end up as heavily R favoured due to how the population distribution works.

The DFW district has a very small county split in Denton (worth 20k people) but I considered that to be the lesser evil over county integrity.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/85f5853a-b588-420b-b0ad-64de241831e4



District 1 (Houston) is Clinton+5, R+1, McCain+3
District 2 (Dallas-Fort Worth) is Clinton+5, R+2, McCain+2
District 3 (Austin-San Antonio-Gulf of Mexico) is Clinton+6, R+1, Obama+1

Districts 4 and 5 should be safe R. District 4 was within single digits in 2016 (Trump+9), but Hispanic trends probably bring it back to safe R.

Back in the day this would have been a 2R-3S map; though I guess nowadays it is a proper 3D-2R map. Of course Republicans would never draw that.

[Former President tack50]

I decided to draw one of the states with the worst geographies for Dems (Wisconsin). The result is exactly as you expect, a completely unbreakable 3R-2D map



https://davesredistricting.org/join/30e9101a-fa16-4d60-b4c9-90314c21b3ce

I also drew a version of this map without county splits, though that one looks a bit worse. The general distribution of districts is the same though, as well as their partisanship.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't really like how this turned out although I don't see how it can really be improved. The green district despite how it looks is really a Boise metro district, based around most of Canyon County (basically exurbs except the cities of Caldwell and Nampa are way bigger than typical exurbs even in larger metros, together they have about half the population of Boise proper), and some Boise suburbs in Ada County. The rural counties are just kind of tacked on because there's nowhere else to put them and I'm not sure if it's even a truly contiguous district since Idaho has a lot of weird highway paths around the mountains and might require crossing into Montana to get there. The red district is also of dubious contiguity and is really just a leftovers district even if it has a logical shape. The Boise proper based district (purple) voted for Hillary very narrowly (by like half a point), but with a huge third party vote and Biden improved massively in the area and by my estimate probably won it by about three points...and Jordan won it by double digits. So that's probably more or less a safe D seat, at least as close as it gets in Idaho. The rest are obviously super-safe R, and shockingly consistent, Little received within a two point range in all of them, from 63.61% to 65.87%, Trump in 2016 had a much wider range of about 7 points but that's also with high third party support and Mormons voting McMullin. Biden no doubt did better in all but no idea how much.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Amazingly enough, this could potentially elect a 3D-2R delegation, although it's a bit of a longshot. Let me go down each district one by one:

Blue: This district voted for Trump in 2016, but it was pretty close (less than 2 point margin) with a huge third party vote. Seeing as how Biden ran about 6 points ahead of Hillary and Trump only ran about a point ahead of his 2016 numbers, safe to say Biden won it and Begich won it by 5 points in the 2018 Gubernatorial election. That probably makes this a pretty solidly D seat unless there's a third party spoiler.

Green: Yeah it's hard to see. It's a small dot on the map that includes downtown Anchorage. Hillary won it by 2 points, Biden probably won it by about 7, the same margin Begich did. So this seat is pretty close to safe D.

Purple: Basically suburban/exurban Anchorage and includes Sarah Palin's home. The most Safe R seat on the map. Dunleavy won it by over 30 points, and I bet Trump did too even in 2020, Hillary didn't even break 30% here.

Red: Safe R as well, basically a Fairbanks/military seat plus the rest of the MatSu Valley. It's about two points to the left of Purple, and thus still Safe R.

Yellow: And here is the interesting seat that decides it all. In 2016 Trump won it by over 11 points...but failed to break 50%, even if just barely (48.96%) with a huge third party vote. This seat is almost 40% Alaskan Native, by far the largest amount. And in 2018....Begich just won it by a hair, by 0.2%. Without more detailed swing info I can't tell how it voted in 2020, it's possible Biden still lost it by as much as 8 points though. This is at worst a Lean R seat, but its sheer quirkiness and probably willingness to not vote based on blind partisanship in a race like this means that it could very well give the Democrats the third seat. Or perhaps even a Republican who caucuses with the Democrats and gives them the majority.

[Former President tack50]

I decided to do 2 west coast states:

California

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b46c1d73-d40e-4d52-8caa-422d8867383e



All districts are safe D nowadays, although back in the day this would have been a very competitive map or possibly even an R gerrymander; just look at the PVIs:

District 1: Clinton+12, D+2
District 2: Clinton+56, D+26
District 3: Clinton+16, D+5
District 4: Clinton+54, D+25
District 5: Clinton+12, D+4

Washington

https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e9f0120-eba2-4b60-889f-eaaf5ed8bda4



This should be a clear 3D-1S-1R map

District 1: Trump+17, R+10
District 2: Clinton+16, D+7
District 3: Clinton+58, D+26
District 4: Clinton+2, D+1
District 5: Clinton+14, D+6

[Former President tack50]

And here go 2 more random states

West Virginia

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b002609e-7507-4653-ae76-b1a40e6a36a5



Needless to say, all 5 districts are Safe R now, though Obama came within single digits in districts 2 and 4; with the latter probably being the best shot for a Dem pickup.


New Mexico

https://davesredistricting.org/join/afaf63be-9646-45dc-b7c6-9a3b7a2f97f7



A very Dem favourable map, with essencially 3 Safe D districts, 1 Lean D district and 1 Safe R district

[Del Tachi]

Mississippi

MS had five districts until 2003, so I tried following their general alignment (adjusting for the population changes since then) and arrived at something like this:



MS-01:  R+20, 25% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-02:  D+7; 54% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-03:  R+14, 33% Black CVAP
MS-04:  R+23, 21% Black CVAP
MS-05:  D+2, 52% Black CVAP

So this is most likely a 3-2 map most years and it has two performing Black VRA seats (not as strong as the current MS-02, but just as strong as GA-02).  Things I don't like on this map are the tri-chop of Hinds County (although that isn't without precedent) and the unfortunate placement of Oxford in the Delta-based district.  

An alternate map:



MS-01:  R+18, 26% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-02:  D+18, 68% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-03:  R+10, 37% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-04:  R+21, 22% Black 2018 CVAP
MS-05:  R+16, 33% Black 2018 CVAP

This is an alternate map the MS-GOP may be willing to go for.  It packs Jackson in with the Delta-based district to get a 4-1 GOP delegation.  I suspect this would be a likely map if the VRA wasn't in effect for executive council districts.   You could get a bit more creative to make MS-03 safer for the GOP, but it would require cracking the strong COIs in at least one of the other Republican-leaning districts.  

[Hope For A New Era]

Here's a Missouri map.



1: Central St. Louis (Safe D)
2: Outer St. Louis, Missouri Rheinland, Leadbelt (Safe R)
3. The "culturally Southern" part of the state, plus one odd county to make the population work (Safe R)
4: The ugly leftovers district (Safe R)
5: Kansas City + St. Joseph (the swing district, Clinton +1.31 in 2016)

It's pretty difficult to make a Missouri map without splitting either Kansas City or St. Louis, it turns out.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Hillary carried 3 of the districts, and Trump only won the red by 3 points and less than 50%. Northam actually carried red by a hair with 0.63%. Actually not only did Biden almost certainly win red, he probably won it by a larger margin than Northam. So this is effectively a 3D-1S-1R map, although with the way things are going moving toward 4D-1R. I wouldn't expect the purple seat to be exactly Safe D based only on how things look on the map, but Hillary won it by 8 points and the populated area swung to Biden so...

[Coastal Elitist]

I decided to do 2 west coast states:

California

https://davesredistricting.org/join/b46c1d73-d40e-4d52-8caa-422d8867383e



All districts are safe D nowadays, although back in the day this would have been a very competitive map or possibly even an R gerrymander; just look at the PVIs:

District 1: Clinton+12, D+2
District 2: Clinton+56, D+26
District 3: Clinton+16, D+5
District 4: Clinton+54, D+25
District 5: Clinton+12, D+4

Washington

https://davesredistricting.org/join/0e9f0120-eba2-4b60-889f-eaaf5ed8bda4



This should be a clear 3D-1S-1R map

District 1: Trump+17, R+10
District 2: Clinton+16, D+7
District 3: Clinton+58, D+26
District 4: Clinton+2, D+1
District 5: Clinton+14, D+6

Your California one is bad. The nine-county bay area should make up 1 district and the central coast should not be connected to the inland empire. Really the geography is hard on this one if you want to make districts that all have the same population. Here is what I did. I'm not 100% pleased with it either but it's difficult to make a good map with how the population is distributed.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/e36fb868-efac-4715-b50f-86f3fd394789

District 1: Clinton+3, R+1 (Northern California + Central Valley)
District 2: Clinton+56, D+26 (San Francisco Bay Area)
District 3: Clinton +47, D+21 (Central Coast + Los Angeles)
District 4: Clinton +30, D+13 (Imperial Valley: Los Angeles + San Bernardino + Imperial + Riverside)
District 5: Clinton+11, D+1 (Orange, San Diego and parts of Riverside)

[Sol]

Hillary carried 3 of the districts, and Trump only won the red by 3 points and less than 50%. Northam actually carried red by a hair with 0.63%. Actually not only did Biden almost certainly win red, he probably won it by a larger margin than Northam. So this is effectively a 3D-1S-1R map, although with the way things are going moving toward 4D-1R. I wouldn't expect the purple seat to be exactly Safe D based only on how things look on the map, but Hillary won it by 8 points and the populated area swung to Biden so...

I'd maybe switch Charlottesville to the Blue district--that's a better CoI imo.