Who Goes Down in AL?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 05, 2024, 10:48:20 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Who Goes Down in AL?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which Republican representative from AL will be placed in a blue seat and presumably go down in 2022?
#1
Carl
 
#2
Moore
 
#3
Rogers
 
#4
Aderholt
 
#5
Brooks
 
#6
Palmer
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 13

Author Topic: Who Goes Down in AL?  (Read 900 times)
Schiff for Senate
CentristRepublican
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,350
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 25, 2022, 02:33:05 PM »

5-2 is probably going to happen, but which incumbent GOP representative goes down as a result? I say Palmer, because his district includes parts of the Birmingham and suburbs that would very possibly get placed in the new blue district.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,823
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2022, 02:37:56 PM »

None?  I think this ruling is still more likely to be overturned than not.  The 2 Trump judges joining the opinion does mean the plaintiffs could have like a 1-in-3 chance?
Logged
If my soul was made of stone
discovolante
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,244
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.13, S: -5.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2022, 03:31:31 PM »

Carl and Palmer are the only ones who live somewhere that would be useful to either district, depending on whether the proposed tendril to Mobile is rejected by a higher court or not. Palmer could actually be double-bunked with another Republican instead, since his part of metro Birmingham is white, affluent, and in the unhappy medium of being too white but not Republican enough to ensure that Democratic primaries would reflect the district's demographics.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,623


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2022, 03:32:27 PM »

What do you mean probably going to happen. Explain the SCOTUS vote break down. Almost every redistricting case has atleast been heard by SCOTUS last decade and I don't see why they wouldn't take this up.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,823
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 25, 2022, 03:35:09 PM »

What do you mean probably going to happen. Explain the SCOTUS vote break down. Almost every redistricting case has atleast been heard by SCOTUS last decade and I don't see why they wouldn't take this up.

Well, if the plaintiffs got 2 Trump district judges, they could conceivably get Roberts and Kavanaugh.
Logged
ProgressiveModerate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,022


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 25, 2022, 03:40:59 PM »

What do you mean probably going to happen. Explain the SCOTUS vote break down. Almost every redistricting case has atleast been heard by SCOTUS last decade and I don't see why they wouldn't take this up.

Well, if the plaintiffs got 2 Trump district judges, they could conceivably get Roberts and Kavanaugh.

Except the questions being asked in both cases are different.

The 3 judge panel heard the case as to whether a 2nd black district could be drawn within reason; the plaintiffs successfully proved the answer was yes.


The Supreme Court isn’t going to be looking at this through the lens of if that 50% district is possible, but rather clarifying their interpretation of the VRA to see if it warrants it, or if the law is obsolete all together. I def think it’s a ruling that could go either way.
Logged
patzer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,064
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 25, 2022, 05:34:19 PM »

Brooks, because awkward as it may be to eliminate the 5th, they won’t want a primary fight between two incumbents if they can help it.
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,667
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2022, 07:23:43 AM »

If SCOTUS upholds this ruling, then I’d say Barry Moore.  He always struck me as a weak-ish incumbent and Carl is likely far better connected (which matters in an incumbent vs. incumbent primary).  Carl’s old territory in the white parts of Mobile County and especially the whole of Baldwin County are higher turnout and (and probably more likely to give “their incumbent” huge primary margins) than Moore’s old territory. 
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2022, 04:18:09 AM »

What do you mean probably going to happen. Explain the SCOTUS vote break down. Almost every redistricting case has atleast been heard by SCOTUS last decade and I don't see why they wouldn't take this up.
Because the challenge was based on the VRA, and not the Constitution the appeal is through the 11th Circuit and then conceivably on to the SCOTUS. This could conceivably take years, though the state of Alabama has appealed to both the 11th Circuit and the SCOTUS (the appeal to the SCOTUS appears to be less formal at this point). They may be objecting to the federal court giving the legislature two weeks to draw new maps.

There are also cases that included constitutional challenges that are/were being heard by three-judge courts. Such cases, if appealed, automatically go to the SCOTUS, which must rule on the appeal (they don't have to hear the case, they could issue a per curium affirmation. I suppose they could overturn a decision without a hearing, but I'd guess that is unlikely).

The three cases one before a single judge, and two before a three-judge panel were heard  in a joint hearing before 43 lawyers. The three-judge panels include the single district judge, and affirmed the decision on statutory grounds - I suppose the constitutional challenges will be held for now.

The district court in their denial of a stay said that their decision was fact-based. That might make it hard for an appeal.

Are those appendages up into Jefferson County and down into Mobile tentacles or merely arms?

Are Mobile and Jefferson counties unnecessarily divided, and was it done on a racial basis? What are the racial breakdowns of the white areas and black areas of the two counties. What about Tuscaloosa? Is it really necessary to divide two adjacent counties?
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,103
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2022, 11:22:12 AM »

I would think SCOTUS would be hard pressed not to take a Gingles case rather soon. They could either overturn Gingles as no longer necessary, or modify it, or leave it alone but provide more clarity as to what a compact district is under Gingles. Both my opinion if I were on SCOTUS, and prediction, is that issue is decided by SCOTUS, is that there are indeed two compact Gingles CD's in AL, but not in LA.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2022, 10:01:02 PM »

I would think SCOTUS would be hard pressed not to take a Gingles case rather soon. They could either overturn Gingles as no longer necessary, or modify it, or leave it alone but provide more clarity as to what a compact district is under Gingles. Both my opinion if I were on SCOTUS, and prediction, is that issue is decided by SCOTUS, is that there are indeed two compact Gingles CD's in AL, but not in LA.
Alabama should draw a map with whole counties.

Incidentally, did you know Sean Trende was one of the special masters for the Virginia Congressional district map? A really quite nice map, IMO.
Logged
TheElectoralBoobyPrize
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,539


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2022, 09:27:50 AM »

Brooks, because awkward as it may be to eliminate the 5th, they won’t want a primary fight between two incumbents if they can help it.

Well first of all, they're not eliminating a district..they're ceding one to the Democrats (if the court ruling stands). Second, while I admit I'm no redistricting expert, I'm not sure how you make this (I'm in the 5th) a D district as the black population isn't that high.
Logged
Greedo punched first
ERM64man
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2022, 09:34:48 AM »

Write-in. Terri Sewell.

Logged
patzer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,064
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2022, 09:52:49 AM »

Brooks, because awkward as it may be to eliminate the 5th, they won’t want a primary fight between two incumbents if they can help it.

Well first of all, they're not eliminating a district..they're ceding one to the Democrats (if the court ruling stands). Second, while I admit I'm no redistricting expert, I'm not sure how you make this (I'm in the 5th) a D district as the black population isn't that high.
I drew two such maps in the main Alabama thread. One is compact but has VRA districts of only Biden+15 and Biden+11; the other has more complex boundaries but has two iron-safe Dem seats (Biden+27 and Biden+25).

.

In both of those maps I expanded the existing 3rd, 4th, and 6th districts northwards to absorb the territory of the current 5th, and recreated the 5th in the black belt. In both of these maps, all incumbents stay living in their seats.
Logged
TheElectoralBoobyPrize
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,539


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2022, 10:05:07 AM »

Brooks, because awkward as it may be to eliminate the 5th, they won’t want a primary fight between two incumbents if they can help it.

Well first of all, they're not eliminating a district..they're ceding one to the Democrats (if the court ruling stands). Second, while I admit I'm no redistricting expert, I'm not sure how you make this (I'm in the 5th) a D district as the black population isn't that high.
I drew two such maps in the main Alabama thread. One is compact but has VRA districts of only Biden+15 and Biden+11; the other has more complex boundaries but has two iron-safe Dem seats (Biden+27 and Biden+25).

.

In both of those maps I expanded the existing 3rd, 4th, and 6th districts northwards to absorb the territory of the current 5th, and recreated the 5th in the black belt. In both of these maps, all incumbents stay living in their seats.

Okay I see what you're doing now....having the 5th district cover a completely different area and having me be in the 3rd or 4th district...gotcha.
Logged
Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom
theflyingmongoose
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,336
Norway


Political Matrix
E: 3.41, S: -1.29

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2022, 03:05:24 PM »

Write-in. Terri Sewell.



Wow ERM, lol
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 13 queries.