Executive Council Districts

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

[Left Wing]

This is the kind of gerrymander I assume Ohio Republicans would have drawn in 2010, (partisanship is 2008 president) They would likely have held all these seats in 2012 and it would pay off as 5, 3 and 4 voted for Trump by wide margins and 2 only voted for Hillary by about 5 points. For 2020, the Republicans might go 4-1 or they might just allow there to continue to be a 2nd D district but have it stretch from Cincinatti to Columbus.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I was wondering if there would be a Trump district here. Yep:



Green voted for Trump. By a pretty wide margin too, by 12 points. Trump probably ever carried it in 2020.

However the other four districts are all pretty solid, Red was the closest at voting for Hillary by about 11 points, and I bet Biden carried it by more than 15. So probably locked into 4D-1R.

[EastAnglianLefty]

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)

Eyeballing the numbers, it looks like you could move the Central Coast from 3 to 4 in return for a neater split of LA county. Would that work?

[Former President tack50]

Here is a map of Florida, with a result that ends up being peak Florida



https://davesredistricting.org/join/0fa6f19c-09f9-46f7-93d3-3c0b1c5d658a

As you may expect, the northern district is Safe R and the southern one in Miami is Safe D. Then there are 2 "titanium Tilt R" districts in 3 and 4 (Trump+2 and Trump+3; R+2 and R+3 respectively); which means a locked down 4-1 majority.

On paper the 5th would also be competitive at Trump+7, R+4; but this is Florida so Dems will not even get within single digits. And knowing FL Democrats, they'll find a way to lose the Miami based 1st district as well

[lfromnj]

Illinois




Higher population deviation is allowed and no counties are split besides Cook. 2 ways to split Cook. Either a north South split to allow for a black plurality district or you can just split it with Suburbs vs City as each is half and half. Will is left out of the suburban district. Overall 2 Safe D, 1 Likely D , 1 Lean R(Blue) and 1 Safe R.

[Sol]

I have sort of a different take on Vermont--the Green Mountains are a pretty big divide so I tried to approximate them (though it's hard to tell where the exact line goes).



link

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This is the kind of gerrymander I assume Ohio Republicans would have drawn in 2010, (partisanship is 2008 president) They would likely have held all these seats in 2012 and it would pay off as 5, 3 and 4 voted for Trump by wide margins and 2 only voted for Hillary by about 5 points. For 2020, the Republicans might go 4-1 or they might just allow there to continue to be a 2nd D district but have it stretch from Cincinatti to Columbus.

Rs would likely have tried to have Franklin County in a R seat in 2010. It was much less blue back then, with a old GOP tradition. Rs even flipped back a district in the area in 2010.

This is how I assume the OH GOP would have drawn the lines.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/b27d5b03-c7a8-4265-892f-c8e8feb9c1fc

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I have sort of a different take on Vermont--the Green Mountains are a pretty big divide so I tried to approximate them (though it's hard to tell where the exact line goes).



link

I like this map a lot. Nothing to complain about.

[Former President tack50]

Here goes my attempts at North Carolina

North Carolina



I really wanted to avoid splitting the various metros of the state (Winston-Salem+Greensboro / Charlotte / Raleigh); so I ended up with this monstrosity though that is a fair map. If you allow for a Winston-Salem and Greensboro split the map gets a lot cleaner, but you end up with an R gerrymander

Here are the districts:

1 (Charlotte): Trump+0, Cooper+2, R+2, Tossup
2 (West NC): Trump+33, McCrory+23, R+17, Safe R
3 (Greensboro & Winston-Salem): Clinton+6, Cooper+9, D+1, Likely D?
4 (Raleigh): Clinton+18, Cooper+20, D+7, Safe D
5 (East NC): Trump+10, McCrory+9, R+5, Safe R

[Sol]

North Carolina is really frustrating because the state naturally divides into 5 regions (ENC, WNC, and Charlotte/Triad/Triangle) but Western NC is too small, forcing you to split either Charlotte or the Triad or gobble up the rural Piedmont like you did. IMO it's better to split the Charlotte area or the Triad than gobble up the rural Piedmont, since Winston-Salem and Gastonia are both more connected to areas to the west.

Although you try to keep metros together, you did cut out Orange County of the Triangle district, which IMO it really belongs to as the third point in the metaphorical triangle.

I took a pass at drawing both possibilities, and IMO putting Winston-Salem with the mountains is definitely superior. Putting Gastonia and Iredell counties with the mountains has a domino effect of making a hideous Charlotte-Fayetteville snake that also requires splitting Fayetteville or the Charlotte suburbs or the rurals in between.



The Greensboro-Fayetteville district isn't optimal, but it isn't terrible either since the areas in between are all sort of similar.

Sorry for all the nitpicks; it's my state so I'm naturally a little obsessive.

[Sol]

I made a pass at New Hampshire's, since the current map is a cartoonish gerrymander.



Ironically this map aggressively favors Republicans though that's not the intention. 2, 3, and 4 are all Trump 2016 districts, and 5 was quite close.

Would be quite interested in feedback--I took Coos and Grafton counties west to Keene along the Connecticut River but maybe going east into the Lakes Region would be better?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

My effort at the Magnolia state.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/0b69a461-d819-4d9f-a938-167accd94007

[Former President tack50]

Here are 2 maps I just drew

Virginia



VA-01: Clinton+10, D+4
VA-02: Clinton+41, D+16
VA-03: Trump+33, R+16
VA-04: Clinton+3, EVEN
VA-05: Clinton+3, R+1

Ohio



OH-01: Trump+15, R+6
OH-02: Clinton+13, D+8
OH-03: Trump+16, R+4
OH-04: Trump+1, EVEN
OH-05: Trump+29, R+11

[BuckeyeNut]

A fair take on Ohio, which keeps COIs together.



District 1: Trump +9.7%, Brown +1.6%, Trump +5.7%
District 2: Trump +23.5%, Renacci +4.4%, Trump +24.4%
District 3: Clinton +18.5%, Brown +30.0%, Biden +17.0%
District 4: Trump +28.4%, Renacci +7.6%, Trump +30.7%
District 5: Cltinon +0.07%, Brown +13.4%, Biden +2.6%

[Sol]

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.

Actually IMO a Latino influence one would probably be required under the VRA.

Here's a fair map:


I wanted to put Austin in with the Western district but that's basically impossible without splitting the Dallas metro, so I figured this was the better option.

1, 3, and 5 are all likely D, bordering on safe, while 4 is likely R, bordering on safe. 2 is an off the charts Republican seat.