Official 2021 Redistricting Thread

[Will Hunting]

Precinct-level data getting released today and this redistricting cycle is going to for sure be the most hostile and litigation intensive we've ever seen.

The Dems are going to get thrashed in states like NC/FL/TX that have complete GOP control, but the Dems are also gonna go medieval in states they control.

Right now NY is 19-8 and will probably be 22-4 after the Dems pass a map like the one below.

The x-factor is prob gonna be California. If the Dem state leg rigs the redistricting commission they could easily go from 42-11 to a map that's 45-7.

https://i.ibb.co/C5CJx3p/NY-22-4.jpg

[Will Hunting]

Looks like the census data is actually pretty accurate despite COVID / what Wilber Ross was doing.

1425878430399225863

[Winehole23]

the number of pickups the (R)s need to flip the House is five, correct?

[Thread]

Looks like the census data is actually pretty accurate despite COVID / what Wilber Ross was doing.

1425878430399225863

Total horseshit, Will. There is no way on God's green America that the census could have effectively and accurately been composed last year, this year, or, next year. But, gov't, in close association with Media will babysit it thru nonetheless, sanctifying the results.

[Will Hunting]

the number of pickups the (R)s need to flip the House is five, correct?
I believe so after the FL-20 special election happens.

[Will Hunting]

The Maryland Dems are always ruthless at drawing districts, so I think they carve up Harris's district so the 7-1 map becomes an 8-0 map. Something like this:

https://i.ibb.co/3Y9Qf64/MD.jpg

[Will Hunting]

Total horseshit, Will. There is no way on God's green America that the census could have effectively and accurately been composed last year, this year, or, next year. But, gov't, in close association with Media will babysit it thru nonetheless, sanctifying the results.
Your generation ran the country into the ground and now people my age aren't having kids.

Boomer greed is the reason muh white population is going down.

[Thread]

Your generation ran the country into the ground and now people my age aren't having kids.

Boomer greed is the reason muh white population is going down.

Anytime they want it they can come and get it. They won't believe what will happen next---even as it's happening.

[Will Hunting]

:lmao rural white MAGAboomers who claim California is the state with the population decline issue.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8m5TYHXsAAomvG?format=jpg&name=large

[Warlord23]

Any noteworthy trends for purple states like AZ, GA, MI, PA, WI, NV etc?

[Will Hunting]

Any noteworthy trends for purple states like AZ, GA, MI, PA, WI, NV etc?
GA is devastating for the GOP. Only 50.1% non-Hispanic white, and the % of the population in Atlanta was even higher than expected.

TX/FL appear to be an undercount of urban areas which is bad for Dems because it's their areas getting undercounted but good for Dems in the sense it gave 3 less congressional seats to states under full GOP control.

Wisconsin is mixed but kinda as expected.

AZ/NV are similar in that they have rural areas that are growing as fast as their urban areas are growing, which IMO is the reason why they haven't and won't shift left as quickly as states like Colorado/Virginia have.

This applies to multiple states, but the black belt counties in the south are just getting gutted. Congressional districts like GA-02 and NC-01 are eventually gonna lose VRA protection because of black population decline.

[Winehole23]

GA is devastating for the GOP. Only 50.1% non-Hispanic white, and the % of the population in Atlanta was even higher than expected.

TX/FL appear to be an undercount of urban areas which is bad for Dems because it's their areas getting undercounted but good for Dems in the sense it gave 3 less congressional seats to states under full GOP control.

Wisconsin is mixed but kinda as expected.

AZ/NV are similar in that they have rural areas that are growing as fast as their urban areas are growing, which IMO is the reason why they haven't and won't shift left as quickly as states like Colorado/Virginia have.

This applies to multiple states, but the black belt counties in the south are just getting gutted. Congressional districts like GA-02 and NC-01 are eventually gonna lose VRA protection because of black population decline.only because Dems are incapable of majority rule.

it's their big fault and it might be the proximate entry of the fucking full on fascism.

[Winehole23]

the Capitol riot was a nullification riot.

the example followed should have been the 1861 Congress.

members voting against certification should not have been seated without a loyalty pledge to the US government and the US Constitution, plus a disavowal of the bogus narrative that Trump won. denying ministerial certification of an election because your guy lost is bullshit.

[Winehole23]

five dozen lost election challenges put the lie to skepticism about the result.

[Will Hunting]

I'll believe it when I see it, but if the NC GOP really goes cuck mode on redistricting and doesn't look at partisan data it's probably 2 extra house seats for the Dems.

1425943190763343873

[Will Hunting]

Likely Illinois map. Cuckzinger, Davis and Mary Miller all get put in the same district.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8hMdt9WEAkxLnX?format=jpg&name=medium

[Will Hunting]

Meanwhile this or something similar is probably the Texas map. Only goes from 23-13 to 25-13 but it's built to last a whole decade.

The Dems lose the 34th but pick up an Austin Dem sink district...if the TX GOP doesn't create a sink district for Dems in Austin they risk the map collapsing the way it almost did last year.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E8oGmfSWEAUQS2w?format=png&name=900x900
https://twitter.com/TammyBaldwinner/status/1425960051068620805/photo/1

[James White!]

:lol

[Winehole23]

1430222311093846017

[Winehole23]

1435271931209650177

[Winehole23]

watching NY to see if something similar happens

1438563331959308290

[Winehole23]

1438893579674468361

[Frenchfred]

so republicans can only win elections by cheating. And they bitch and moan about the elections being stolen, how ironic

[Winehole23]

so republicans can only win elections by cheating. And they bitch and moan about the elections being stolen, how ironicevery ten years, the politicians choose the voters. and when they get elected in districts designed to be safe from one party or the other, they call it the will of the people.

[RandomGuy]

every ten years, the politicians choose the voters. and when they get elected in districts designed to be safe from one party or the other, they call it the will of the people.

I used to be opposed to Democratic states doing that.

Given the existential threat from the fascist right, who has zero qualms about doing it, I have changed my mind.

The reality is the armaggeddonish rhetoric on the right which was hyperbolic for the longest time... gave birth to an actual existential threat by making their voters more and more extreme over time.

[RandomGuy]

every ten years, the politicians choose the voters. and when they get elected in districts designed to be safe from one party or the other, they call it the will of the people.

I used to be opposed to Democratic states doing that.

Given the existential threat from the fascist right, who has zero qualms about doing it, I have changed my mind.

The reality is the armaggeddonish rhetoric on the right which was hyperbolic for the longest time... gave birth to an actual existential threat by making their voters more and more extreme over time.

[Winehole23]

I used to be opposed to Democratic states doing that.

Given the existential threat from the fascist right, who has zero qualms about doing it, I have changed my mind.

The reality is the armaggeddonish rhetoric on the right which was hyperbolic for the longest time... gave birth to an actual existential threat by making their voters more and more extreme over time.raw power politics begets more of the same

[Winehole23]

moar racial gerrymanders


1440350669035032585

[Winehole23]

1442496462588309512

[Winehole23]

look at 33

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FATH2lYVEAEY4GC?format=jpg&name=900x900

[Winehole23]

damn, i might live in an Austin based district now.

been a long time.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FATou5DVEAYT5HR?format=jpg&name=medium

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FATbUfGVEAYvCQA?format=jpg&name=large

[Adam Lambert]

look at 33

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FATH2lYVEAEY4GC?format=jpg&name=900x900

6 is just as insane. Covers all of Ellis county and then leaks up into northwest Dallas County to cover Irving.

:lmao Not even trying to hide it.

[Will Hunting]

It’s obviously a gerrymander but it actually wasn’t as bad as the redistricting nerds like me expected. This map would be 24-14 and we were expecting 25-13 or even 26-12.

so far redistricting hasn’t helped the GOP nearly as much as expected.

[Will Hunting]

Yeah the Dems should still sue the shit out of this map, but I think it’s a mediocre gerrymander. They could have made the 15th solidly Republican and they leave the door open too much for the 24th, 3rd and 23rd to flip this decade.

[Will Hunting]

damn, i might live in an Austin based district now.

been a long time.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FATou5DVEAYT5HR?format=jpg&name=medium
The primary for that seat is going to be hell. Please don’t vote for Wendy Davis, Mike Siegel is the best choice.

[Adam Lambert]

Yep, playing defense instead of offense.

1442582978526257152

[Will Hunting]

Hopefully TX-28 is blue enough for that lazy spic Cuellar to get primaried.

[Will Hunting]

Yep, playing defense instead of offense.

1442582978526257152
Still too aggressive in some areas Imo. I would have created a 4th Dem district in SA/Austin area and made it so 15/21/23/28 (tel:15/21/23/28) all get redder.

[Winehole23]

The primary for that seat is going to be hell. Please don’t vote for Wendy Davis, Mike Siegel is the best choice.
I voted for him last time, no reason not to again.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Which state legislate is in control of gerrymandering Michigan? someone please let me know... I appreciate DoK's unbiased approach to this thread btw :tu

[Millennial_Messiah]

Yeah the Dems should still sue the shit out of this map, but I think it’s a mediocre gerrymander. They could have made the 15th solidly Republican and they leave the door open too much for the 24th, 3rd and 23rd to flip this decade.

28th might flip red if 2016->2020 trends continue tbh... while a lot of CA peeps moving to affluent DFW districts like 24th, I think 24th could flip. 23rd on the other hand will not flip, it's been TRENDING red steadily every two years since the last time a Democrat won it (I believe in 2012... I grew up in the 23rd fwiw). It was won solidly by team red in 2020.

3rd is another district I've worked and lived in quite a lot... it definitely has a lot of affluent folks, lots of jobs especially tech jobs but also India Indians who don't necessarily vote Democrat despite the fact they are immigrants. 3rd will be interesting but the eastern half of it is far right country area.

[Will Hunting]

Which state legislate is in control of gerrymandering Michigan? someone please let me know... I appreciate DoK's unbiased approach to this thread btw :tu
Michigan is an independent committee.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Michigan is an independent committee.

so why don't they just draw squares instead of gerrymandering? obviously MI isn't a square state so you could group the UP as one, but making mostly reasonable shapes

I think "reasonable shapes / geographic symmetry when possible are mandatory" should be a constitutional amendment, imo

[Will Hunting]

The GA state leg released a draft map today that’s 9-5 and, assuming it passes, is a huge miss for the GOP. It makes GA-06 red by not nearly red enough to last, while in the process it also makes GA-11 a district that could flip. Probably an 8-6 GOP map by 2024 and a 7-7 map by 2028.

Also I didn’t post this when it happened, but the Indiana GOP passed up a golden opportunity to fit IN-01 and make IN an 8-1 map.

So far the GOP has been a lot more focused on shoring up incumbents than expanding its map. I still expect the Dems in IL/NY/MD to go medieval.

[Will Hunting]

so why don't they just draw squares instead of gerrymandering? obviously MI isn't a square state so you could group the UP as one, but making mostly reasonable shapes

I think "reasonable shapes / geographic symmetry when possible are mandatory" should be a constitutional amendment, imo
Because compactness/square shapes isn’t high on the MI commission’s list of factors to consider. It’s something they do consider, but stuff like race, not favoring one side over the other and keeping communities of interest together was given higher emphasis in Michigan’s redistricting amendment than compactness was.

[Will Hunting]

Imo if I were writing a redistricting law from scratch, ensuring a district is either 80+% suburban or 80+% rural would be a must. Pretty much all gerrymandering these days comes in the form of a district that’s like 60% suburban and 40% rural, with one group completely diluting the other.

[Will Hunting]

GA is devastating for the GOP. Only 50.1% non-Hispanic white, and the % of the population in Atlanta was even higher than expected.

TX/FL appear to be an undercount of urban areas which is bad for Dems because it's their areas getting undercounted but good for Dems in the sense it gave 3 less congressional seats to states under full GOP control.

Wisconsin is mixed but kinda as expected.

AZ/NV are similar in that they have rural areas that are growing as fast as their urban areas are growing, which IMO is the reason why they haven't and won't shift left as quickly as states like Colorado/Virginia have.

This applies to multiple states, but the black belt counties in the south are just getting gutted. Congressional districts like GA-02 and NC-01 are eventually gonna lose VRA protection because of black population decline.
GA-02 survives another decade. Hopefully the Dems control GA by then and can keep it intact.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Because compactness/square shapes isn’t high on the MI commission’s list of factors to consider. It’s something they do consider, but stuff like race, not favoring one side over the other and keeping communities of interest together was given higher emphasis in Michigan’s redistricting amendment than compactness was.

I guess that kinda makes sense. Race shouldn't be a consideration but keeping like minded communities together makes sense. Michigan also loses one representative this time around so it will be only 13 and not 14 here. keeping it 7-6 one side or the other most likely depending on how they draw it... The main thing would be keeping the margins high and keeping the races distant and not close.

-inner detroit district
-outer detroit/detroit inner suburbs district
-detroit outer suburbs district, going up to Flint & Saginaw
-Ann Arbor to Lansing district, possibly including Jackson
-Grand Rapids to Muskegon district
-Kalamazoo to Battle Creek district

that's 6 democrat districts, so probably the other 7 for the GOP.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Imo if I were writing a redistricting law from scratch, ensuring a district is either 80+% suburban or 80+% rural would be a must. Pretty much all gerrymandering these days comes in the form of a district that’s like 60% suburban and 40% rural, with one group completely diluting the other.

what about urban? and wealth?

[Will Hunting]

I guess that kinda makes sense. Race shouldn't be a consideration but keeping like minded communities together makes sense. Michigan also loses one representative this time around so it will be only 13 and not 14 here. keeping it 7-6 one side or the other most likely depending on how they draw it... The main thing would be keeping the margins high and keeping the races distant and not close.

-inner detroit district
-outer detroit/detroit inner suburbs district
-detroit outer suburbs district, going up to Flint & Saginaw
-Ann Arbor to Lansing district, possibly including Jackson
-Grand Rapids to Muskegon district
-Kalamazoo to Battle Creek district

that's 6 democrat districts, so probably the other 7 for the GOP.
You’re massively under counting Detroit and forgetting a Flint Saginaw district that’s likely D, but the last two districts on your list are harder than you’d think to draw just because of how the populations are laid out. Either district would be a gift for Democrats. Right now the Dems in MI have 5 Detroit area districts, 1 Lansing/outer Detroit exurb district, and 1 Flint/Saginaw district. I don’t expect that to change much.

Also whether race should or shouldn’t be a consideration federal law mandates that it is :lol. Any MI commission map that doesn’t have two majority black districts in Detroit (which actually hurts Dems because it packs their votes into 2 districts) would get thrown out in court.

[Millennial_Messiah]

You’re massively under counting Detroit and forgetting a Flint Saginaw district that’s likely D, but the last two districts on your list are harder than you’d think to draw just because of how the populations are laid out. Either district would be a gift for Democrats. Right now the Dems in MI have 5 Detroit area districts, 1 Lansing/outer Detroit exurb district, and 1 Flint/Saginaw district. I don’t expect that to change much.

Also whether race should or shouldn’t be a consideration federal law mandates that it is :lol. Any MI commission map that doesn’t have two majority black districts in Detroit (which actually hurts Dems because it packs their votes into 2 districts) would get thrown out in court.

Well they are losing one from the electoral college so that mandates that they lose one seat as well... wonder where they'll rob from.

if all of Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Muskegon, majority-black Muskegon Heights, and Battle Creek are included in red seats, that's a big win for the GOP because there are plenty of liberals around here, especially within the millennial female demographic.

[Will Hunting]

Well they are losing one from the electoral college so that mandates that they lose one seat as well... wonder where they'll rob from.

if all of Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, Muskegon, majority-black Muskegon Heights, and Battle Creek are included in red seats, that's a big win for the GOP because there are plenty of liberals around here, especially within the millennial female demographic.
The 4th district in rural north Mi is the one that’s likely to go away. It’s had the most population loss and the districts near it (1st and 2nd) also need to pick up population. The city of Detroit itself has lost population but the suburbs and exurbs have grown, so the Detroit MSA as a whole is unlikely to lose a seat.

Also the existing map for Michigan has all of those places in red districts.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The 4th district in rural north Mi is the one that’s likely to go away. It’s had the most population loss and the districts near it (1st and 2nd) also need to pick up population. The city of Detroit itself has lost population but the suburbs and exurbs have grown, so the Detroit MSA as a whole is unlikely to lose a seat.

Also the existing map for Michigan has all of those places in red districts.

so bottom line - ergo it will go from 7-7 to 7-6 Democrat advantage.

what's going on with Wisconsin? only 8 seats there I believe.

[Millennial_Messiah]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/ElectoralCollege2024.svg

for anyone confused, take this map and subtract two (i.e., 2 senators) when trying to figure out how many seats are in a given state. this is the most recent ecv map based on 2020 census.

[Will Hunting]

so bottom line - ergo it will go from 7-7 to 7-6 Democrat advantage.

what's going on with Wisconsin? only 8 seats there I believe.
IMO it's gonna be 6-6-1. There's gonna be at least one district in MI that's a coinflip (or close to it).

Wisconsin has shit geography for democrats. The map is unlikely to change much, but with Ron Kind retiring it probably goes from 5-3 GOP to 6-2 GOP. Only path to the Dems getting a 3rd district in WI back is Chicagoland bleeding more into SE Wisconsin so Paul Ryan's old district turns blue. Other than that, you have two deep blue population centers in WI (Madison & Milwaukee), while the rest of the state is homogeneously R+15, so a 6-2 map isn't even really a gerrymander, it's just how the state is laid out.

As I said months ago, California is going to be the redistricting x-factor. If the Dems manage to successfully hijack the "independent" commission in CA, the 42-11 map CA has now can easily become a 45-7 map (CA is also losing a district), and the Dems might even pick up seats in redistricting nationally.

[Millennial_Messiah]

IMO it's gonna be 6-6-1. There's gonna be at least one district in MI that's a coinflip (or close to it).

Wisconsin has shit geography for democrats. The map is unlikely to change much, but with Ron Kind retiring it probably goes from 5-3 GOP to 6-2 GOP. Only path to the Dems getting a 3rd district in WI back is Chicagoland bleeding more into SE Wisconsin so Paul Ryan's old district turns blue. Other than that, you have two deep blue population centers in WI (Madison & Milwaukee), while the rest of the state is homogeneously R+15, so a 6-2 map isn't even really a gerrymander, it's just how the state is laid out.

As I said months ago, California is going to be the redistricting x-factor. If the Dems manage to successfully hijack the "independent" commission in CA, the 42-11 map CA has now can easily become a 45-7 map (CA is also losing a district), and the Dems might even pick up seats in redistricting nationally.

I drove thru that area this weekend and it seemed all the way from South Milwaukee to Racine to Kenosha is essentially Chicagoland. definitely not matching my avatar which is clearly a joke.

Gotta factor other things besides just CA, NY, etc. Montana is gaining a seat... how will it be drawn? If it's cut in half east to west, Dems might have a chance in the western half which is fairly liberal imo.

If CA goes from 11 red districts to 7 that will be funny to see the R's like Nuñez and McCarthy cannibalize each other for a spot.

[Will Hunting]

I drove thru that area this weekend and it seemed all the way from South Milwaukee to Racine to Kenosha is essentially Chicagoland. definitely not matching my avatar which is clearly a joke.
Oh that area is definitely getting bluer, but it still has a lot of ancestral R votes who voted for Biden but Republican down ballot. WI-01 isn't gonna flip without those voters flipping.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Oh that area is definitely getting bluer, but it still has a lot of ancestral R votes who voted for Biden but Republican down ballot. WI-01 isn't gonna flip without those voters flipping.
that + the same thing going on in WOW counties is why Ron Johnson keeps winning and will win next year if he runs. those are also the same voters who largely voted for Trump in 16 but Biden last year.

WI-32 corridor MIL south is definitely very chicago-esque

[Will Hunting]

that + the same thing going on in WOW counties is why Ron Johnson keeps winning and will win next year if he runs. those are also the same voters who largely voted for Trump in 16 but Biden last year.

WI-32 corridor MIL south is definitely very chicago-esque
The WOW counties are still ruby red at the top of the ballot too...

Ron Johnson would get smoked if he ran again in an election year imo, he'd win next year because it's just going to be a bad year for Democrats overall.

[Will Hunting]

If CA goes from 11 red districts to 7 that will be funny to see the R's like Nuñez and McCarthy cannibalize each other for a spot.
McCarthy is safe, it's near impossible to make his district competitive or to draw him out.

Nunes could be drawn out but it would definitely be a gerrymander.

The Republicans in CA in trouble are the ones in SoCal who barely won by <5% last year.

[Millennial_Messiah]

McCarthy is safe, it's near impossible to make his district competitive or to draw him out.

Nunes could be drawn out but it would definitely be a gerrymander.

The Republicans in CA in trouble are the ones in SoCal who barely won by <5% last year.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/CA2018House.svg


Nunes is the smallish red district in the Central Valley, McCarthy is in the large red district adjacent to the right just north of the Inland Empire, just one district west of the giant red district bordering Nevada.

I feel like Nunes could be easily drawn out if they included Fresno for example

[Will Hunting]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/CA2018House.svg


Nunes is the smallish red district in the Central Valley, McCarthy is in the large red district adjacent to the right just north of the Inland Empire, just one district west of the giant red district bordering Nevada.

I feel like Nunes could be easily drawn out if they included Fresno for example
Dude I’ve literally spent hours on DRA drawing California maps :lol, Nunes isn’t as easy to draw out as one might think.

[boutons_deux]

Texas Republicans release proposal for new congressional boundaries

that bolsters GOP districts (https://link.dallasnews.com/lt.php?i=19414A20105A15A882317)

Republicans have proposed new congressional boundaries that provide protection for North Texas incumbents,

but doesn’t give the fast-growing Dallas/Fort Worth area one of two new seats earmarked for the Lone Star State.

Despite the remarkable population growth powered by minority residents in the Dallas/Fort Worth region,

Texas Republican lawmakers opted to place the new districts in the Austin and Houston areas.

The Austin-area seat would be favorable to a Democratic candidate,

while the new Houston-area district is overwhelmingly Republican.

Neither new seat would be in a minority opportunity district,

even though the vast majority of the population growth in Texas was propelled by Hispanic residents.


The proposed map is a clinic on incumbency protection. (https://link.dallasnews.com/lt.php?i=19414A20105A15A882317)

-- Dallas Morning News

"The wetbacks will not replace us!"

[Will Hunting]

This CA map would be possible if the retards in CA didn't pass an independent commission and take control away from Democrats

https://i.ibb.co/L8NF9hD/Capture.png

[Will Hunting]

This map for Maryland would be ruthless and it's actual possible. Creates the two majority black districts needed under the VRA and makes every seat Biden +19 or better :lol

https://i.ibb.co/Xp8Qrhp/MD.png

[Millennial_Messiah]

This CA map would be possible if the retards in CA didn't pass an independent commission and take control away from Democrats

https://i.ibb.co/L8NF9hD/Capture.png

why would 42 be red?

[Will Hunting]

why would 42 be red?
Would be very tough for it to be blue. The neighboring parts of 36/51 are also red. 4 is the district you could actually make tilt blue with some fuckery.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Would be very tough for it to be blue. The neighboring parts of 36/51 are also red. 4 is the district you could actually make tilt blue with some fuckery.
what exactly is 42 though? the Inland Empire? I would think it would be left of center...

[Will Hunting]

what exactly is 42 though? the Inland Empire? I would think it would be left of center...
Yes. Think Temecula area.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Yes. Think Temecula area.

I think then that it will flip at some point this decade. that area has one of the highest % of mixed race people in the entire nation, and it's not just whites and Mexicans... it's also lots of Asians and blacks. Mixed race people (or people who self-identify as mixed race) vote Democrat at a higher % even than Hispanics, blacks and Asians that are not mixed race.

Mixed race self identifiers are the most liberal of all Americans on average. And that will never change even if Mexicans and blacks continue to trend towards the right. Because being multicultural is inherently a left of center concept while being ethnocentric is inherently right of center, regardless of which race or ethnicity you actually are. The GOP absolutely secretly hates interracial marriage and procreation because of this tbh.

[boutons_deux]

Texas appears to be paying a secretive Republican political operative $120,000 annually

Adam Foltz, now on the Texas payroll, played a key role in Wisconsin's redistricting last decade

A Republican redistricting operative whose clandestine work helped drag Wisconsin into a legal morass last decade appears to now be on the payroll of the Texas Legislature

as lawmakers work to redraw maps that will determine the distribution of political power for years to come.

Foltz played a key role in a tight-lipped and questionable redrawing process that shut out Democrats and drew the condemnation of federal judges who described it as “needlessly secret,”

Foltz has not been a visible part of the committee's public facing work.

Foltz is actually on the payroll of the

Texas Legislative Council, a nonpartisan state agency :lol

that supports the Legislature in drafting and analyzing proposed legislation —

and manages the internal mapping tool lawmakers use to redraw political maps.


https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/texas/article/operative-gop-voter-supression-texas-adam-foltz-16497528.php (https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/texas/article/operative-gop-voter-supression-texas-adam-foltz-16497528.php)

[boutons_deux]

Texas' GOP-drawn redistricting maps look ripe for defeat in a court challenge

aren't just likely to face lawsuits, a top voting-rights legal scholar predicts:

they'll likely face courtroom defeats.

"Seeing the proposed plans now by the state, they'll be easy to beat,"

meant to protect seats now held by Republicans while minimizing the voting power of people of color, who are more likely to support Democrats.

While more than 60% of Texas residents are people of color,

the maps proposed so far by the Lege would give white people voting majorities in half of the state's congressional districts,

the data from the latest census shows that people of color fueled 95% of Texas’ population growth over the past decade.

https://www.sacurrent.com/sanantonio/texas-gop-drawn-redistricting-maps-look-ripe-for-defeat-in-a-court-challenge-legal-scholar-says

[boutons_deux]

PRINCETON SCIENTISTS GIVE TEXAS AN ‘F’ FOR PROPOSED DISTRICT MAPS

To arrive at the letter grade, the team judges congressional and state district lines by their partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

By geographic features, they mean how wild and squiggly the district lines are, and whether the lines split counties and fail to respect political subdivisions.

“We look at things how compact the districts are — nobody actually draws districts like this, but

the closer to a circle, the better and more ideal a district is,”

“The congressional map only has two districts that are competitive, and I will be honest with you, they’re kind of barely competitive,”

“They’re sort of right on the edge of our competitive range. So really this map is pretty clearly a partisan gerrymander.”

In a dozen of the districts, Republicans have drawn themselves an average partisan win percentage of 60 to 63 percent, making it just out of the ideal range to be a competitive seat (46.5-53.5%).

“What it tells us is that Republicans decided there’s a range that they think is a safe seat, they decided it was the 60 to 70 percent zone, and then they probably used a computer to generate as many districts as they could in that zone,” Podowitz-Thomas said.

“They don’t think those are going to flip over the next decade.”

“It’s too neat, it’s too clean, this is not hand-drawn,”

“This is somebody using a sophisticated computer to generate this map.”

“You can get a computer to generate a really nice-looking map that does terrible things in elections.”

“Now you can draw a gerrymander that’s pretty much gonna last all decade unless there are dramatic partisan shifts in the electorate.”

https://texassignal.com/princeton-scientists-give-texas-an-f-for-proposed-district-maps

[Winehole23]

Will Hunting ?

1449043754925625345

[Winehole23]

VA rolled over, but IL took off the gloves

1449045624389787648

[Will Hunting]

VA rolled over, but IL took off the gloves

1449045624389787648
Illinois is actually a crappy job. It left 3 districts unnecessarily vulnerable. Hopefully it adjusts the map.

[Will Hunting]

The California map is secretly a brilliant gerrymander. By 2024 it could very well be 48-4 or even 49-3.

[Will Hunting]

Winehole23 Millennial_Messiah a few key states have maps that we know more about.

I'll start with AZ which is probably 80-90% complete:

https://i.ibb.co/jwrzFX7/AZ.png

The 4 districts that were safe for either party (3, 4, 5, 7) stay mostly intact, with the one big exception being that Yavapai County is getting moved from AZ-04 to AZ-01, making it a Trump +8 district that only getting redder, thus making it unlikely for O'Halleran to hold it in 2022.

At the same time it also creates 3 competitive districts (2, 6, 8) but the wrinkle is that all 3 of those districts are trending blue. By 2024 this will probably be a map that's 6-3 in favor of Democrats.

As best as I can tell, the Republicans on this commission were too focused on making AZ-01 redder and the Democrats got a lot of concessions from them in exchange for it. Similar to 2010, I think the Dems won the redistricting battle in AZ.

[ChumpDumper]

Winehole23 Millennial_Messiah a few key states have maps that we know more about.

I'll start with AZ which is probably 80-90% complete:

https://i.ibb.co/jwrzFX7/AZ.png

The 4 districts that were safe for either party (3, 4, 5, 7) stay mostly intact, with the one big exception being that Yavapai County is getting moved from AZ-04 to AZ-01, making it a Trump +8 district that only getting redder, thus making it unlikely for O'Halleran to hold it in 2022.

At the same time it also creates 3 competitive districts (2, 6, 8) but the wrinkle is that all 3 of those districts are trending blue. By 2024 this will probably be a map that's 6-3 in favor of Democrats.

As best as I can tell, the Republicans on this commission were too focused on making AZ-01 redder and the Democrats got a lot of concessions from them in exchange for it. Similar to 2010, I think the Dems won the redistricting battle in AZ.

R:loln Watkins announced his run for AZ-01.

[Will Hunting]

The CA commission has released district "visualizations" that still need to be population adjusted but they give us a good idea about what's going on (all the missing districts are safe Democrat districts):

https://i.ibb.co/28GPtK9/CA.png

The Dems did a great job rigging this commission if this map holds. Biggest examples:

-Drew Nunes into a Biden +5 district (22) by taking the red parts of his district and stuffing them into McCarthy's district
-Completely gutted McClintock's district beyond any recognition
-Gave Young Kim an unwinnable Biden +17 district by moving Yorma Linda into Katie Porter's district
-Made Issa's district (50) a Biden +6 district by giving it a goofy looking arm that touches the Pacific
-Unnecessarily gave Steele's district (48) UC Irvine.

This map basically has 13 districts that are winnable for Republicans in a best case scenario for them, and virtually all of them are in areas that are rapidly trending left.

It isn't going to have instant payoff for Dems in 2022, but by 2024 I think only 4-5 Republican house reps tops will survive in CA under this map.

[Will Hunting]

R:loln Watkins announced his run for AZ-01.
There's also Wendy Rogers (a batshit crazy state senator in AZ who's a member of the O:lolthkeepers) who might run in AZ-01 as well.

That primary is going to be a clusterfuck.

[Will Hunting]

Finally, the lead Republican commission in Michigan (inexplicably) proposed a Biden 8-5 map. Hopefully the Dems fast track it.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBoe3JHXoAYfBar?format=png&name=small

[Millennial_Messiah]

Dems are definitely doing well so far in redistricting, better than most people expected. Is there a chance they retain the House next year? Look at the Illinois map that LTE just discussed on youtube.... they drew out 2 GOP seats.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Finally, the lead Republican commission in Michigan (inexplicably) proposed a Biden 8-5 map. Hopefully the Dems fast track it.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FBoe3JHXoAYfBar?format=png&name=small
Independent commission in Michigan, but that is definitely skewed left, since MI-04 in this case would be a completely I-96 corridor district which is full of cities, from east of Lansing to Grand Rapids. That's got to be blue. I-94 is accounted for in MI-06 and MI-07, also blue..

I TOLD you the Dems should do something about tapping into Battle Creek/Kalamazoo (MI-06 in this case) and Grand Rapids (MI-04 in the new map) and they did... the only thing they could have done better is tried to draw Muskegon/Muskegon Heights into a more favorable district, but they can't have everything I guess.

[Will Hunting]

Dems are definitely doing well so far in redistricting, better than most people expected. Is there a chance they retain the House next year? Look at the Illinois map that LTE just discussed on youtube.... they drew out 2 GOP seats.
The Illinois map is a sloppy gerrymander that leaves 3 Dem seats unnecessarily vulnerable. Hopefully they clean it up with amendments.

Unlikely the Dems keep the house next year just because the environment won’t be favorable for them, but I think in 2024 they have a >50% chance of winning it back, especially if the GOP collapse in California continues.

Also LTE is a dumbass who isn’t any more qualified to be talking about elections than you or me. The fact he’s talking about the IL map like it’s a good job proves my point.

[Will Hunting]

Independent commission in Michigan, but that is definitely skewed left, since MI-04 in this case would be a completely I-96 corridor district which is full of cities, from east of Lansing to Grand Rapids. That's got to be blue. I-94 is accounted for in MI-06 and MI-07, also blue..

I TOLD you the Dems should do something about tapping into Battle Creek/Kalamazoo (MI-06 in this case) and Grand Rapids (MI-04 in the new map) and they did... the only thing they could have done better is tried to draw Muskegon/Muskegon Heights into a more favorable district, but they can't have everything I guess.
It’s an independent commission but one of the GOP commissioners is a dumbass who submitted this map…it splits Lansing into 3 different districts :lol

[Will Hunting]

Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032) ?

1449043754925625345
FYI Winehole23 I doubt this map ends up getting passed because of how much public outrage there’s been to it, but in the end we’ll probably just get a 6-5 Virginia map when it could have been 8-3 if the Virginia Dems didn’t idiotically disarm themselves.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The Illinois map is a sloppy gerrymander that leaves 3 Dem seats unnecessarily vulnerable. Hopefully they clean it up with amendments.

Unlikely the Dems keep the house next year just because the environment won’t be favorable for them, but I think in 2024 they have a >50% chance of winning it back, especially if the GOP collapse in California continues.

Also LTE is a dumbass who isn’t any more qualified to be talking about elections than you or me. The fact he’s talking about the IL map like it’s a good job proves my point.

But I thought that's what both parties are trying to prevent? Too much turnover each 2 years. Shoring up incumbents and eliminating or at least greatly reducing "swing" seats, that goes both for red and blue seats.

[Will Hunting]

But I thought that's what both parties are trying to prevent? Too much turnover each 2 years. Shoring up incumbents and eliminating or at least greatly reducing "swing" seats, that goes both for red and blue seats.
That’s correct but the CA map is basically drawn to look like a fair map for 2022 but completely collapse for Republicans in 2024. Arizona is another state where 2024 has the potential to go from a 4-5 map to a 6-3 map.

there’s also several key states (PA, WI and less likely OH) where there’s gonna be court drawn maps that have swing districts. 2010 was a fluke in the sense that control of redistricting was so one sided that the GOP basically eliminated swing districts for 2012, this year I think it’s going to be more balanced (it already has been).

[Millennial_Messiah]

That’s correct but the CA map is basically drawn to look like a fair map for 2022 but completely collapse for Republicans in 2024. Arizona is another state where 2024 has the potential to go from a 4-5 map to a 6-3 map.

there’s also several key states (PA, WI and less likely OH) where there’s gonna be court drawn maps that have swing districts. 2010 was a fluke in the sense that control of redistricting was so one sided that the GOP basically eliminated swing districts for 2012, this year I think it’s going to be more balanced (it already has been).

I saw on LTE that the Ohio map the Democrats there drew but it got thrown out for obvious reasons.

[Will Hunting]

I saw on LTE that the Ohio map the Democrats there drew but it got thrown out for obvious reasons.
It was stupid for the Dems to propose a Dem friendly map. They should have proposed like a 5-10 map that was still R favored but wouldn’t be as R favored as the map the Republicans are gonna draw. That would actually put the Ohio GOP in a bind.

Stop watching LTE that guy is a joke :lol

[Millennial_Messiah]

It was stupid for the Dems to propose a Dem friendly map. They should have proposed like a 5-10 map that was still R favored but wouldn’t be as R favored as the map the Republicans are gonna draw. That would actually put the Ohio GOP in a bind.

Stop watching LTE that guy is a joke :lol

I always thought he was a fair and moderate democrat but recently it seems he's shifted to the right in the past couple months. He now believes that NH and GA will be re-taken by the GOP, but makes no sense because I don't think Herschel Walker has a snowball's chance in hell to beat out Warnock. With NH it is different, it all depends on if Sununu decides to run for senator, if he does he will win, if not the GOP will lose. I also don't know why he has PA staying red with Toomey retiring and nobody yet running there on the GOP side.

[Will Hunting]

Iowa likely passing a map similar to what they have now.

Wisconsin state leg has proposed a map that Evers will for sure veto, while Evers himself has proposed a map that isn't great for Dems either, Wisconsin's voter concentration in Madison/Milwaukee with ruby red suburbs is just shit geography that basically locks the Dems out of a majority in either state leg chamber absent a massive demographic shift.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Iowa likely passing a map similar to what they have now.

Wisconsin state leg has proposed a map that Evers will for sure veto, while Evers himself has proposed a map that isn't great for Dems either, Wisconsin's voter concentration in Madison/Milwaukee with ruby red suburbs is just shit geography that basically locks the Dems out of a majority in either state leg chamber absent a massive demographic shift.
Menominee county is extremely blue too but it's small. But yeah, Wisconsin's demography seems a lot more like Missouri than any other state to me imo. 2 solid blue cities surrounded by nothing but red. I wouldn't be surprised if Wisconsin goes the route of Iowa and becomes a lean red state on the presidential level, too... soon.

I don't see a state like PA going the same way... because Philly's collar suburbs are very populated and have gotten quite blue. Dems are very lucky that has happened.

[Winehole23]

NC went to Trump 49.9%. Reportedly, the GOP might get 70%+ of the congressional delegation.

1455686039461404676

[Millennial_Messiah]

NC went to Trump 49.9%. Reportedly, the GOP might get 70%+ of the congressional delegation.

1455686039461404676
That backfires on the GOP in 6 years. Those pink/salmon districts could go blue in a blue wave year. 2026 is shaping up to be a blue wave year IMO, assuming the Dems lose the WH and Senate by 2024.

[Will Hunting]

NC went to Trump 49.9%. Reportedly, the GOP might get 70%+ of the congressional delegation.

1455686039461404676
Pretty risky map. The 4th circuit is Dem leaning and is where a VRA lawsuit would probably end up.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Florida GOP released a map that favors the Dems and creates a lot of highly competitive seats. Definitely a major shocker.

NC countered Illinois by releasing a map that draws out a Democrat completely and creates another R+ possible seat, but right now the Dems have the house majority and have netted about even in the redistricting process so far. At this rate there aren't that many big states left to draw out (D) seats, so the Dems might actually retain the House in 2022 even in the event of a "red tide" year. :wow

[Winehole23]

It's a shame Dems are afraid to exercise majority rule, their opponents aren't.

1460324288230268939

[Winehole23]

Gerrymandering in four states including GA could very well throw the House of Representatives to (R)s next year.

Which isn't to say it couldn't be much worse than that.

1460432287246520320

[Millennial_Messiah]

MICHIGAN MAP OFFICIAL!!! Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/


On the surface it looks like the Dems might have picked up a seat in redistricting and losing a representative... but nope. They cleverly drew out both of the Impeachment reps (Meijer into a Dem district = a narrow plot of land including both all of Grand Rapids metro and all of Muskegon metro = D+3; and Upton into a district with a much more popular pro-Trump incumbent) and gave the Republicans an advantage in districts including both Flint and Lansing. Likely 8-5 or at worst 7-6 GOP majority in Michigan coming, with a Democrat taking MI-03 and both Meijer and Upton OUSTED!!! Yay.....

[Will Hunting]

MICHIGAN MAP OFFICIAL!!! Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/


On the surface it looks like the Dems might have picked up a seat in redistricting and losing a representative... but nope. They cleverly drew out both of the Impeachment reps (Meijer into a Dem district = a narrow plot of land including both all of Grand Rapids metro and all of Muskegon metro = D+3; and Upton into a district with a much more popular pro-Trump incumbent) and gave the Republicans an advantage in districts including both Flint and Lansing. Likely 8-5 or at worst 7-6 GOP majority in Michigan coming, with a Democrat taking MI-03 and both Meijer and Upton OUSTED!!! Yay.....
The fivethirtyeight rating system is fucked, and Kildee (Flint) is a regular over performer in Flint, as is Slotkin in Lansing. Both of those districts are shown by 538 as lean R districts even though Biden won both of them.

[Will Hunting]

Also seems likely the Ohio and North Carolina Supreme Court both overturn the GOP drawn maps. Unclear if the courts will instruct the state leg to redraw the maps themselves or if we’ll have court drawn maps.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The fivethirtyeight rating system is fucked, and Kildee (Flint) is a regular over performer in Flint, as is Slotkin in Lansing. Both of those districts are shown by 538 as lean R districts even though Biden won both of them.

They are definitely trending red (not Flint city proper or central/ East Lansing where MSU is, but the rest of the districts) however and 2022 has red wave written all over it. Even beyond that, MI will be a lean red state and that will be a solid 8-5 R map, maybe 7-6 R in a blue wave year or 9-4 R in a red wave year.

What I don't get is Georgia, why they think they're still a red state when they're not. They're going to be full on Virginia part deux in ten years or less.

Drawing RINO Meijer into a narrow stretch of land that encompasses all of Grand Rapids and all of Muskegon/Muskegon Heights (basically I-96 West MI corridor) and very sparsely populated area in between, is just fantastic. :lol

[Will Hunting]

They are definitely trending red (not Flint city proper or central/ East Lansing where MSU is, but the rest of the districts) however and 2022 has red wave written all over it. Even beyond that, MI will be a lean red state and that will be a solid 8-5 R map, maybe 7-6 R in a blue wave year or 9-4 R in a red wave year.

What I don't get is Georgia, why they think they're still a red state when they're not. They're going to be full on Virginia part deux in ten years or less.

Drawing RINO Meijer into a narrow stretch of land that encompasses all of Grand Rapids and all of Muskegon/Muskegon Heights (basically I-96 West MI corridor) and very sparsely populated area in between, is just fantastic. :lol
:lmao "Michigan will be lean red"

Michigan's fastest growing areas (the Detroit suburbs) are trending left, while its areas that are trending red are losing the most population (rural areas).

1475932093255405571

The existing Michigan map was an 8-6 Trump map and now it's a 7-6 Biden map. They would gain 1.6 seats in a neutral environment; even if they lose seats next year because it's a red wave year that doesn't change the fact the map got better for them.

[Will Hunting]

FYI Winehole23 (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14613) I doubt this map ends up getting passed because of how much public outrage there’s been to it, but in the end we’ll probably just get a 6-5 Virginia map when it could have been 8-3 if the Virginia Dems didn’t idiotically disarm themselves.
As I predicted.

Likely 6-5 map next year with Luria's seat swinging back to the Dems in 2024 so it's 7-4 again.

Still really fucking annoying that the Dems threw away both an 8-3 congressional map and the opportunity to rig a permanent majority in the VA state leg.

[Millennial_Messiah]

:lmao "Michigan will be lean red"

Michigan's fastest growing areas (the Detroit suburbs) are trending left, while its areas that are trending red are losing the most population (rural areas).

1475932093255405571

The existing Michigan map was an 8-6 Trump map and now it's a 7-6 Biden map. They would gain 1.6 seats in a neutral environment; even if they lose seats next year because it's a red wave year that doesn't change the fact the map got better for them.

We'll see. My prediction is that MI will be to the right of both WI and PA in 2024. Michiganders outside of Detroit are very pro gun and pro freedom. Wisconsinites... don't really care. Except they care about football.

Whitmer is going to lose re-election THIS YEAR and you're going to be proven wrong. WE ALL HATE HER.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Need more updates on this subject.

[Will Hunting]

Need more updates on this subject.
A lot of updates, most of them are good for Democrats.

The national environment in 2022 makes it so the Democrats are going to have a very tough time holding the house no matter what this year, but unlike 10 years ago when the Democrats couldn't win the house back in 2012 because of how rigged the maps were, I think house control in 2024 is virtually a toss-up or even lean D because of how redistricting is shaping up. As the rate we're going, there will actually be more Biden-won districts than we did before.

New York - The Republicans on the redistricting committee are cutting off their nose to spite their face. The Dems on the committee submitted an extremely weak gerrymander and if the Republicans simply voted for it the NY state leg would need a supermajority to overrule it and draw its own map; since the committee hasn't been able to agree on a bipartisan map, I'm pretty sure the NY state leg's ability to draw its own map becomes a lot easier. If the state leg is drawing the map, expect an absolutely ruthless gerrymander. The fact Max Rose has already announced his candidacy for NY-11, a district he'll only compete in if it gets carved up from where it is now, tells me that Hochul is planning to go medieval.

North Carolina / Ohio - These are easily the two most ruthless GOP drawn maps so far, but in each case there's either a Dem state SC majority (NC) or an anti-gerrymandering state SC majority (only 3 out of 7 justices in Ohio are Dems, but the chief justice is the swing vote and is very anti-gerrymandering). Both maps are currently being challenged and the oral argument that took place in Ohio was pretty clear that at a minimum they'll need to redraw the Cincinnati area to create another safe D seat. The North Carolina map that passed was 10 R - 4 D, with one D district being very tenuous. IMO the end result we'll get in NC is a 9 R - 5 D map, with the slim possibility of 8 R - 5 D - 1 toss-up seat.

Missouri - There was a lot of talk about Cleaver's Kansas City district possibly getting cracked but that won't happen. The proposed map is still 6-2 Republican Democrat, and it even has potential to be 5-3 later in the decade if the St. Louis suburbs trend a little more blue.

Kentucky - There was talk they would crack Louisville and go for a 6-0 map, especially with Yarmuth retiring, but that's also not happening. The map keeps Louisville together and will stay 5-1, but it does crack the existing 6th congressional district that's competitive for Dems in a wave year by splintering Frankfurt from Lexington.

Tennessee - They haven't released maps yet, but the Tennessee GOP is taking the gloves off. Nashville is going to get cracked, and probably into 3 or 4 different districts, Jim Cooper is basically fucked.

Alabama / Louisiana - There's going to be (or there already are) lawsuits over whether a 2nd majority/plurality black district should be created in each state, but they're unlikely to succeed. AL and LA are under the 11th and 5th circuit, respectively, and those are the 2 most partisan conservative circuits in the country.

Mississippi - There was a chance the Mississippi state leg would get cute and draw a majority black district that was only lean Democrat and could turn red this decade but that's not happening; they kept Bennie Thompson's district mostly intact and it's safe D.

Wisconsin - If the state supreme court accepts Evers' "minimal change" map, it's about as good as the Dems could hope for; if the state SC accepts the maps the state leg passed, a 6-2 congressional delegation in WI is pretty much locked in.

Florida - This one I'm most confused by. The Florida State Senate released a map that creates 16 Trump districts vs. 12 Biden districts, when it could easily have drawn a 19-9 map or even a 20-8 map. The funniest part is that in 2016, this map would have actually produced MORE Hillary-won districts than Trump-won districts.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIYneGgWQAA8wFC?format=jpg&name=medium

[Will Hunting]

If the Dems didn't moronically disarm themselves by creating commissions in VA, CO, WA & CA, I think the GOP would have been agreeable to a federal ban on gerrymandering because of how many seats we would have picked up. It's probably ~10 more house seats we would gain if we could draw partisan maps in those states. Even though the CA commission is rigged with Democrats, the map is still a lot more mild than what a partisan state leg map looks like.

Even in Maryland, the selfish boomer Dems screwed us. Steny Hoyer threw a hissyfit over his district getting slightly more red on a map that drew Andy Harris out and if not for him the MD Dems could have drawn an 8-0 map where every district was Biden +19 or better.

[Millennial_Messiah]

If the Dems didn't moronically disarm themselves by creating commissions in VA, CO, WA & CA, I think the GOP would have been agreeable to a federal ban on gerrymandering because of how many seats we would have picked up. It's probably ~10 more house seats we would gain if we could draw partisan maps in those states. Even though the CA commission is rigged with Democrats, the map is still a lot more mild than what a partisan state leg map looks like.

Even in Maryland, the selfish boomer Dems screwed us. Steny Hoyer threw a hissyfit over his district getting slightly more red on a map that drew Andy Harris out and if not for him the MD Dems could have drawn an 8-0 map where every district was Biden +19 or better.

7-1 is plenty fair in Maryland. In fact, 6-2 would be fair... that map is already gerrymandered in favor of the Democrats.
Just like with Kentucky... not cracking Louisville three ways to create a fully GOP House there... a state with no representation that isn't like an 80-20 majority state like Vermont is bad faith partisan politics.

Illinois is bad... and it's not going to get overturned. The V.R.A. is definitely a blue-partisan trump card that the red team doesn't have an equivalent to in court. Remember IL still has about 40 percent of the population that is reliably GOP and the new map is 14-3 Democrat.

I mean look at a state like Massachusetts. If states like Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have to have at least 1 blue district by way of the VRA forcing a majority black district then shouldn't a state like MA have a majority rural district (it's a pretty fair counterpart to the VRA, since farmers/agriculture should be protected as well if urban blacks are a protected class) instead of having 9-0 all safe dark blue districts in a state that consistently votes at least 30% republican? It's pretty bad for the rural peeps to have zero chance at representation in a state where they are 30-35 percent of the population.

Ohio and NC are bad... drawing out at least one if not more Dems in each state. But they may get overturned. Especially NC, which has a high black population and a rich black heritage.

Missouri almost went for Obama in 2008... it's not trending blue. It is trending red like IA and WI. The western STL suburbs are white and not particularly liberal; it's the eastern STL IL suburbs that are more diverse and more liberal. 6-2 GOP makes sense. Now if they crack KC then it's gerrymandering.

As for IA it looks okay for Dems right now but pretty soon it will be 4-0 like Arkansas. Wisconsin 6-2 doesn't represent the population % but then again it's one of the few states that is like that without gerrymandering. All the blue majority counties are pretty much in Milwaukee and Madison. You can't draw a 3rd lean D district without gerrymandering, drawing a "cheese strip" between Milwaukee and Madison some how.

Cracking Nashville TN isn't the worst thing. Nashville is still a city but it's one of the whiter and more conservative ones in the south and in the country with a rich right-wing history. They will not crack Memphis because that's black majority and D + 53. It's not like Nashville is black majority. TN is a ruby red state. IL getting 2 more Dems (drawing out multiple GOP leaning seats) with no contest or courts should be countered some how.

Florida ones seem fair for now. It wouldn't be fair to draw a 19-9 or 20-8 GOP map. The state isn't red enough. 16 to 12 is an appropriate representation of the population.

[Will Hunting]

7-1 is plenty fair in Maryland. In fact, 6-2 would be fair... that map is already gerrymandered in favor of the Democrats.
Just like with Kentucky... not cracking Louisville three ways to create a fully GOP House there... a state with no representation that isn't like an 80-20 majority state like Vermont is bad faith partisan politics.

Illinois is bad... and it's not going to get overturned. The V.R.A. is definitely a blue-partisan trump card that the red team doesn't have an equivalent to in court.

Ohio and NC are bad... drawing out at least one if not more Dems in each state. But they may get overturned. Especially NC, which has a high black population and a rich black heritage.

Missouri almost went for Obama in 2008... it's not trending blue. It is trending red like IA and WI. The western STL suburbs are white and not particularly liberal; it's the eastern STL IL suburbs that are more diverse and more liberal. 6-2 GOP makes sense. Now if they crack KC then it's gerrymandering.

As for IA it looks okay for Dems right now but pretty soon it will be 4-0 like Arkansas. Wisconsin 6-2 doesn't represent the population % but then again it's one of the few states that is like that without gerrymandering. All the blue majority counties are pretty much in Milwaukee and Madison. You can't draw a 3rd lean D district without gerrymandering, drawing a "cheese strip" between Milwaukee and Madison some how.

Cracking Nashville TN isn't the worst thing. Nashville is still a city but it's one of the more conservative ones in the country with a rich GOP history. They will not crack Memphis because that's black majority and D + 53. It's not like Nashville is black majority. TN is a ruby red state. IL getting 2 more Dems with no contest or courts should be countered some how. Remember IL still has about 40 percent of the population that is reliably GOP and the new map is 14-3 Democrat.

Florida ones seem fair for now. It wouldn't be fair to draw a 19-9 or 20-8 GOP map. The state isn't red enough. 16 to 12 is an appropriate representation of the population.
I'm not saying the map in Maryland isn't gerrymandered, it definitely is, I'm just saying it could be gerrymandered more to help Democrats. There's no reason to play fair or leave meat on the bone when the GOP isn't going to do the same.

The Illinois, California and New York maps could all be more Dem-favored without the VRA. The VRA definitely helps Dems in southern states and other GOP controlled states, but it restricts the kind of maps Dems can draw in their own states.

Iowa won't be 4-0. The state as a whole is trending red, but the Des Moines area is trending blue. Axne is also an overperformer.

Cracking Nashville is definitely gerrymandering. Davidson County has 716k people and each congressional district in TN will have around 768k; there's no reason to crack Davison county other than wanting to give the GOP another seat. It's also a Biden +25% county; muh rich GOP history doesn't change the fact that taking a Biden +25% county and unnecessarily cracking it into 4 different districts is gerrymandering.

No one's saying Illinois isn't gerrymandered but it's intellectually dishonest to pretend that TN is only being gerrymandered to "counter" IL. If the GOP only gerrymandered to counter when Democrats do it, then they'd actually be pushing for a federal ban on gerrymandering rather than obstructing it.

Literally all of these states:
TX: If MSA / communities of interest aren't cracked, a fair map would have 1 blue El Paso districts, 5 blue DFW districts, 5 blue Houston area districts, 2 blue SA districts, 2 blue Austin area districts and 2 blue RGV seats. 17 seats (and that's conservative really, the Republican geography in TX is horrible because of how concentrated their votes are in rural areas) vs. the 13 seats in the map they drew.
AL: A fair map would have 2 majority or plurality black districts, not 1.
LA: A fair map would have 2 majority or plurality black districts, not 1.
GA: A fair map would be 7-7, the map they passed is 9-5 R.
NC: A fair map would be 7-7 or at least 8-6 R since the Dem geography there isn't great, but it definitely shouldn't be 10-4.
OH: Fair map would be 1 safe D Cincinnati district, 2 safe/likely D Columbus area districts, 1 lean D Akron/Kent/Youngstown district, 2 safe/likely D Cleveland area districts, and a tossup Toledo district; 6.5 Dem seats total. The map they passed has 2 Dem seats and 2 competitive seats.
OK: Oklahoma County's population is within 1% of what each congressional district's population in Oklahoma is; there's no logical reason to crack it the way the state leg did. It's perfectly set up to be its own competitive congressional district.
UT: A fair map would be 3-1 with the SLC area having a Biden district; instead they cracked SLC 4 different ways.
SC: A fair map would have at least 2 blue districts. Arguably 2 Dem seats and a competitive seat, but at least 2 Dem seats.
AR: There's no way to draw a blue district, but a fair map would have a competitive toss-up district.

[Will Hunting]

I mean look at a state like Massachusetts. If states like Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama have to have at least 1 blue district by way of the VRA forcing a majority black district then shouldn't a state like MA have a majority rural district (it's a pretty fair counterpart to the VRA, since farmers/agriculture should be protected as well if urban blacks are a protected class) instead of having 9-0 all safe dark blue districts in a state that consistently votes at least 30% republican? It's pretty bad for the rural peeps to have zero chance at representation in a state where they are 30-35 percent of the population.

Not sure why you think there's this bastion of rural Republican voters in Mass, but it's virtually impossible to draw a Trump district there. It's an incredibly homogeneous state. this district which pretty much selects the most Republican precincts across the state is only Trump +9 and it's obviously not feasible; there's no way to create an R leaning district in MA without some fuckery.

https://i.ibb.co/rcb9FdR/MA-Map.png

Meanwhile, there's plenty of ways to draw black districts in the south that don't look ridiculous. This would be 2 majority black districts in Louisiana:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIhUgUIXEAIVg4P?format=jpg&name=large

[Millennial_Messiah]

Not sure why you think there's this bastion of rural Republican voters in Mass, but it's virtually impossible to draw a Trump district there. It's an incredibly homogeneous state. this district which pretty much selects the most Republican precincts across the state is only Trump +9 and it's obviously not feasible; there's no way to create an R leaning district in MA without some fuckery.

https://i.ibb.co/rcb9FdR/MA-Map.png

Meanwhile, there's plenty of ways to draw black districts in the south that don't look ridiculous. This would be 2 majority black districts in Louisiana:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FIhUgUIXEAIVg4P?format=jpg&name=large

Where do you get those tools from? Is it freeware? I'd like to play and fiddle around with all that.

[Will Hunting]

Where do you get those tools from? Is it freeware? I'd like to play and fiddle around with all that.
Yep it's totally free, you just need to create an account.

https://davesredistricting.org/

[Millennial_Messiah]

Not sure why you think there's this bastion of rural Republican voters in Mass, but it's virtually impossible to draw a Trump district there. It's an incredibly homogeneous state. this district which pretty much selects the most Republican precincts across the state is only Trump +9 and it's obviously not feasible; there's no way to create an R leaning district in MA without some fuckery.

That "fuckery" is an example of how gerrymandering can actually be a good thing in order to get more fair representation. Wisconsin is another example. Even with the rightward shift, the state should be 5-3 GOP and not 6-2.


Yep it's totally free, you just need to create an account.

https://davesredistricting.org/

Thank you. :toast

[Will Hunting]

That "fuckery" is an example of how gerrymandering can actually be a good thing in order to get more fair representation. Wisconsin is another example. Even with the rightward shift, the state should be 5-3 GOP and not 6-2.
There's a balance in terms of how far you should be going to create partisan fairness at the expense of sensible maps that keep communities with common interests together / don't look ridiculous. Do your best to draw a Trump-won district in MA, the only way you can do it is with a completely non-sensible map. Make sure you select "President 2020" as your data set for MA, if you select the composite data set it'll show a much redder map than what MA actually has because it overweighs the governor elections.

[Millennial_Messiah]

There's a balance in terms of how far you should be going to create partisan fairness at the expense of sensible maps that keep communities with common interests together / don't look ridiculous. Do your best to draw a Trump-won district in MA, the only way you can do it is with a completely non-sensible map. Make sure you select "President 2020" as your data set for MA, if you select the composite data set it'll show a much redder map than what MA actually has because it overweighs the governor elections.
Will do. Yeah the governor elections in those type of states really don't indicate partisanship of the state per se. You look at states like Louisiana which consistantly have a Dem governor.

Yeah, Charlie Baker is a RINO because he has to be. I don't get why he's retiring, though. He was popular there. Just like the dude in Vermont, oh I forget his name. I could google it but I'm too lazy. Similar situation. Massachusetts is the number 1 state in the country, possibly in the world, for education and is full of very intelligent human beings, so they vote policy over party, hence why guys like Baker and Scott Brown had a chance. Heck Mitt Romney was governor there for awhile, even though he's a twit.

[Will Hunting]

Will do. Yeah the governor elections in those type of states really don't indicate partisanship of the state per se. You look at states like Louisiana which consistantly have a Dem governor.

Yeah, Charlie Baker is a RINO because he has to be. I don't get why he's retiring, though. He was popular there. Just like the dude in Vermont, oh I forget his name. I could google it but I'm too lazy. Similar situation. Massachusetts is the number 1 state in the country, possibly in the world, for education and is full of very intelligent human beings, so they vote policy over party, hence why guys like Baker and Scott Brown had a chance. Heck Mitt Romney was governor there for awhile, even though he's a twit.
You're thinking of Phil Scott in VT who definitely is a RINO. Baker isn't really a RINO, he's just a socially liberal Rockefeller Republican who gets elected to serve as a check and balance on the ultra liberal state leg.

I've heard he's retiring because he's tired of dealing with the MA GOP retards who want to primary him with a Trump-style candidate who'd lose by 30 in a general. The MA GOP is really stupid.

[Will Hunting]

So far the Michigan commission has done the best job in terms of creating a fair map. It has 4 safe D seats, 4 safe R seats, and 5 ultra-competitive seats that are up for grabs every 2 years. It doesn't have any of the 57% to 42% type of districts Where 40+% of the population has no shot at representation.

[Millennial_Messiah]

So far the Michigan commission has done the best job in terms of creating a fair map. It has 4 safe D seats, 4 safe R seats, and 5 ultra-competitive seats that are up for grabs every 2 years. It doesn't have any of the 57% to 42% type of districts Where 40+% of the population has no shot at representation.
I have it 6-4-3 in favor of the GOP. Flint, Lansing, and GR-Muskegon district go to whoever is having a wave year.

MI will likely be 8-5 or even 9-4 GOP in 2022/24, but has the potential to have a Democrat majority in future years.

Source

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/




(https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/)
You're thinking of Phil Scott in VT who definitely is a RINO. Baker isn't really a RINO, he's just a socially liberal Rockefeller Republican who gets elected to serve as a check and balance on the ultra liberal state leg.

I've heard he's retiring because he's tired of dealing with the MA GOP retards who want to primary him with a Trump-style candidate who'd lose by 30 in a general. The MA GOP is really stupid.
Indeed that is a very dumb strategy in MA. In a rust belt or corn belt or southern state, yeah. In MA? Hell naw.

[Will Hunting]

I have it 6-4-3 in favor of the GOP. Flint, Lansing, and GR-Muskegon district go to whoever is having a wave year.

MI will likely be 8-5 or even 9-4 GOP in 2022/24, but has the potential to have a Democrat majority in future years.

Source

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/michigan/

The 538 partisan splits are bullshit.

- Meijer possibly survives 2022 but no chance he survives in 2024 in a Biden +9 district (that's why 538's ratings are dumb, they have a blue-trending Biden +9 district rated as only D+3).
- The Lansing district has a great incumbent who overperforms and it's slowly trending bluer.
- The Flint district also has a great incumbent but it's definitely trending red long term
- The Kalamazoo district isn't going blue in 2022 but it shifted left 6 points from 2016 to 2020.
- Hard to tell with the Macomb County district where it's going long term, but right now it's more or less a toss-up.

[boutons_deux]

It's a shame Dems are afraid to exercise majority rule

The Dems OBVIOUSLY do NOT control the Senate with only 48 Senators

Hilarious to see people say "Dems will lose Senate control in 2022 election". Dems no NOT have control to lose

Plus, there are Dem Senators who would vote against raising taxes but are silently happy to let Manchin/Sinema do it for them.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The 538 partisan splits are bullshit.

- Meijer possibly survives 2022 but no chance he survives in 2024 in a Biden +9 district (that's why 538's ratings are dumb, they have a blue-trending Biden +9 district rated as only D+3).
- The Lansing district has a great incumbent who overperforms and it's slowly trending bluer.
- The Flint district also has a great incumbent but it's definitely trending red long term
- The Kalamazoo district isn't going blue in 2022 but it shifted left 6 points from 2016 to 2020.
- Hard to tell with the Macomb County district where it's going long term, but right now it's more or less a toss-up.

I don't agree with you. I've lived in that area for over a year... you haven't. Meijer is one of those guys. Really, just one of those names. Maybe the biggest and most popular name and significance to the state and especially to that specific area. In terms of supermarkets, everyone there goes to Meijer and the Meijer name is practically a religion in GR & Muskegon. Democrat, conservative, doesn't matter. There's no Krogers or really any other competition besides Walmart and Aldi in that area (unlike say Detroit which has more competition)... everyone and their dog goes to Meijer. It doesn't matter if Meijer ran as a (D) or an (R) or an (I) or anything else, he'd win by double digits. Let's not forget that he also voted to impeach Trump, so he'll win a lot of moderate (D) voters. Most of Michigan, especially those who vote (D) more often than not outside of Detroit city proper, are independent swing voters who vote with the wind more so than anything, I can tell you. All except the far right and far left will vote for Meijer. He's pretty liberal on stuff like weed and Trump but he's conservative economically. I think that appeals pretty well to Grand Rapids and Muskegon, aside from the fact that he's the heir to the throne of the great Frederik Meijer, a legend in GR-Muskegon. It doesn't matter if it's D+3 or D+9, the junior Meijer will win by double digits. But if Trump succeeds in primarying him out, then yes the GOP will most likely lose that district.

The Lansing district I wouldn't say is trending bluer, it's pretty steady... perhaps the incumbent is good but I don't see a scenario in which they survive such a swing district in a 2022 red wave situation. Same for the Flint district. The SW Michigan district you mentioned is pretty ruby red aside from Kalamazoo itself and the small African American town of Benton Harbor which has suffered similar lead pipe water issues in recent years as Flint. It will likely primary-out Upton (who also voted to impeach Trump- --if he doesn't outright retire) and will elect a pro-Trump Republican there.

Macomb County has been steadily GOP over the years except for electing Obama twice, and is trending right not left.

I see it 6-4-3 red team with a likely 9-4 in 2022, 8-5 or 9-4 in 2024, and potentially 7-6 or 8-5 in favor of the Dems in 2026 if Biden loses in 2024.


The Dems OBVIOUSLY do NOT control the Senate with only 48 Senators

Hilarious to see people say "Dems will lose Senate control in 2022 election". Dems no NOT have control to lose

Plus, there are Dem Senators who would vote against raising taxes but are silently happy to let Manchin/Sinema do it for them.
I don't think so. Name names?

[Will Hunting]

Chris Coomer and Mark Warner neutered a lot of the common sense tax increases Biden wanted independent of Sinema and Manchin (who to his credit actually wanted the tax increases).

[Winehole23]

Back to the drawing board in OH

1481360822391742469

[Will Hunting]

Back to the drawing board in OH

1481360822391742469

Those are just the state leg maps but Maureen O'Connor is undoubtedly gonna rule the same way on the congressional maps.

Ohio's law is weird because it forbids the court from drawing state leg districts but allows it to draw the congressional districts, so the real question at this point is whether O'Connor will kick the congressional maps back down to the state leg or if the OHSC will just draw the map itself.

IMO Chabot is definitely fucked either way - they're gonna have to uncrack Hamilton County and give Dems a safe D seat in Cincinnati, the question is whether O'Connor also makes them any district in Northeast Ohio.

[Will Hunting]

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/01/14/redistricting-ohio-supreme-court-decision-congressional-map-gerrymandering/9119566002/

Ohio Supreme Court nukes the congressional map....state leg has 30 days to redraw and submit for approval.

If the maps they redraw get struck again, I'm pretty sure the procedure is that the committee gets to hijack the process and draw maps without state leg input.

[Millennial_Messiah]

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/2022/01/14/redistricting-ohio-supreme-court-decision-congressional-map-gerrymandering/9119566002/

Ohio Supreme Court nukes the congressional map....state leg has 30 days to redraw and submit for approval.

If the maps they redraw get struck again, I'm pretty sure the procedure is that the committee gets to hijack the process and draw maps without state leg input.
But the committee is also strongly GOP though. The only branch that is slightly leftward is the Ohio supreme court which has a couple centrist GOPers including the chief justice who provided the swing vote which nuked the map.

I'll say the Dems might get a 3rd solid seat, they'll draw a blue district from Akron/Southern Cleveland area to Toledo, in exchange for pretty much everything else being safe R.

[Will Hunting]

But the committee is also strongly GOP though. The only branch that is slightly leftward is the Ohio supreme court which has a couple centrist GOPers including the chief justice who provided the swing vote which nuked the map.

I'll say the Dems might get a 3rd solid seat, they'll draw a blue district from Akron/Southern Cleveland area to Toledo, in exchange for pretty much everything else being safe R.
If the Dems only get 1 seat it wouldn't be that, it'd be Cincinnati. Chabot is toast.

If the committee drew an unfair map, the court would just nuke it again. Maureen O'Connor is basically a partisan Dem on redistricting issues.

[Millennial_Messiah]

If the Dems only get 1 seat it wouldn't be that, it'd be Cincinnati. Chabot is toast.

If the committee drew an unfair map, the court would just nuke it again. Maureen O'Connor is basically a partisan Dem on redistricting issues.
It's a shame there isn't a counterpart the other way in Illinois. A fair map would be something like 11-6 or 10-7 there. 14-3 with no court litigation is horse shit.

But it makes sense to leave Chabot and the other incumbents alone and try to save either one of the Democrat incumbents, Tim Ryan or Marcy Kaptur before drawing someone out.

[Will Hunting]

It's a shame there isn't a counterpart the other way in Illinois. A fair map would be something like 11-6 or 10-7 there. 14-3 with no court litigation is horse shit.

But it makes sense to leave Chabot and the other incumbents alone and try to save either one of the Democrat incumbents, Tim Ryan or Marcy Kaptur before drawing someone out.
No it doesn't. Tim Ryan is running for senate, he's done either way and saving his district would require massively carving up the northeast OH districts.

Kaptur is a big overperformer and just needs minor alterations made to her district to have a good chance at surviving. You can easily get that + nuking Chabot done given the court.

The real shame is that the GOP is obstructing a federal ban on redistricting. That would ensure Ohio, Illinois and every other state got fair maps.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The real shame is that the GOP is obstructing a federal ban on redistricting. That would ensure Ohio, Illinois and every other state got fair maps.

If you draw maps like Michigan in every state, get ready for 70%-30% and-up majorities in both directions in blue and red wave years. That's enough to pass new constitutional amendments without resistance... partially dependent on the Senate... forget HR- bills. Constitutional. Amendments.

[Will Hunting]

If you draw maps like Michigan in every state, get ready for 70%-30% and-up majorities in both directions in blue and red wave years. That's enough to pass new constitutional amendments without resistance... partially dependent on the Senate... forget HR- bills. Constitutional. Amendments.
That's not true regarding what it would create but :lmao no that's not enough to pass new constitutional amendments even if it led to 70% splits.

Constitutional amendments require 38 states (75%) to ratify them...that's 38 state legislatures and 38 governors. It also requires 2/3rds of the senate.

Do you know how government works?

[Will Hunting]

Also this is the commission map that gets adopted if the Rs can't agree on a map that the court approves.

:lmao thinking that the commission was going to rig the map for Rs

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FJGM0y1X0AMZ_OK?format=jpg&name=large

[Will Hunting]

Dem supreme court majority in NC is getting ready to nuke the NC gerrymander too

There were a few states where redistricting has gone well for Rs, but overall it's been terrible for them.

1482070015448952835

[Millennial_Messiah]

^7 districts out of 15 is a crazy pipe dream for Democrats.


That's literally best possibly drawn map for the Democrats.

[Will Hunting]

^7 districts out of 15 is a crazy pipe dream for Democrats.


That's literally best possibly drawn map for the Democrats.
Ohio is 45% Dem 55% Republican, 7/15 is 46.6%.

Call it a pipedream all you want but it's the closest there is to a proportional map.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Ohio is 45% Dem 55% Republican, 7/15 is 46.6%.

Call it a pipedream all you want but it's the closest there is to a proportional map.

Okay, now give me proportional maps in CA, IL and NY and we'll give you proportional maps in OH, NC and FL.

[Millennial_Messiah]

At the end of the day I think they'll draw a 11-4 map that passes the court system. 2 for Cleveland/Akron area, 1 for Columbus and 1 for Cincinnati and everything else solid red. But all of the districts being solid for both parties. Dayton and Toledo aren't big enough to justify having democrat districts and not being cracked.

Since they couldn't pull a reverse Illinois in Ohio, their next best option is to pull a Texas.

[Will Hunting]

Okay, now give me proportional maps in CA, IL and NY and we'll give you proportional maps in OH, NC and FL.

We're gonna get proportional maps in OH, NC and FL regardless :lol

Sucks getting a taste of your own gerrymandering medicine :lol

[Will Hunting]

At the end of the day I think they'll draw a 11-4 map that passes the court system. 2 for Cleveland/Akron area, 1 for Columbus and 1 for Cincinnati and everything else solid red. But all of the districts being solid for both parties. Dayton and Toledo aren't big enough to justify having democrat districts and not being cracked.

Since they couldn't pull a reverse Ohio, their next best option is to pull a Texas.
You think that after initially leaving Toledo and Dayton alone the Ohio GOP is going to crack both of them after being scolded by the OHSC?

Good luck with that :lol

[Millennial_Messiah]

You think that after initially leaving Toledo and Dayton alone the Ohio GOP is going to crack both of them after being scolded by the OHSC?

Good luck with that :lol
It's going to be a bit of a compromise. Dems rightfully upset at having Cleveland and Cincinnati cracked, two urban and large black population centers. They get those solid and crack the smaller cities that don't have a big enough population to justify not being cracked.

[Will Hunting]

It's going to be a bit of a compromise. Dems rightfully upset at having Cleveland and Cincinnati cracked, two urban and large black population centers. They get those solid and crack the smaller cities that don't have a big enough population to justify not being cracked.
You just said that independent commissions in every state would lead to the house of representatives being able to pass constitutional amendments on its own.

You don't know how anything worse :lol

[Millennial_Messiah]

You just said that independent commissions in every state would lead to the house of representatives being able to pass constitutional amendments on its own.

You don't know how anything worse :lol

I did mention the senate issue and I didn't remember about the 75% of the states rule. yeah, that wouldn't happen, there will never not be 13 safe GOP or Dem controlled states.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Dem supreme court majority in NC is getting ready to nuke the NC gerrymander too

There were a few states where redistricting has gone well for Rs, but overall it's been terrible for them.

1482070015448952835

Yeah I don't know what they were thinking in NC with the Dems having the state supreme court majority. They literally drew out 2 Dems from an already right leaning map, what did they think was going to happen?

The Florida GOP could use these as ammo to go aggressive in Florida... GOP likes retribution and they're still pissed over Illinois and a couple others so they will absolutely crack Nashville for instance in Tennessee. The GOP did pick up one seat in Arizona. But overall it has been a net loss so far if they don't get OH or NC through.

[Will Hunting]

Yeah I don't know what they were thinking in NC with the Dems having the state supreme court majority. They literally drew out 2 Dems from an already right leaning map, what did they think was going to happen?
The Chief Justice has a lot of control over when cases are heard and they were hoping he'd be able to delay it until after 2022, but they didn't realize that the rules always allow a majority overrule the chief justice on that stuff, and the 4 Dems on the NC supreme court are ruthless partisan hacks who are fully prepared to use every procedural tool imaginable to gut the GOP maps before 2022.

[Will Hunting]

The Florida GOP could use these as ammo to go aggressive in Florida... GOP likes retribution and they're still pissed over Illinois and a couple others so they will absolutely crack Nashville for instance in Tennessee. The GOP did pick up one seat in Arizona. But overall it has been a net loss so far if they don't get OH or NC through.
The GOP pickup in AZ likely gets canceled out in '24 because Schweikert won't survive past that year in a Biden district.

Tennessee already released their map and yeah Nashville is cracked but it's not the ruthless gerrymander I was expecting. Cooper's district only becomes Trump +9.

The Florida state senate already approved its map out of committee. Your only hope there is a DeSantis veto but there'd prob be enough votes to override him if it's a GOP approved fair map.

[Will Hunting]

If Tony Evers can somehow convince Hagedorn to accept his least change maps in WI, that'll be another underrated W.

[Millennial_Messiah]

If Tony Evers can somehow convince Hagedorn to accept his least change maps in WI, that'll be another underrated W.

Apart from a blue wave year it would be 6-2 in WI either way.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The GOP pickup in AZ likely gets canceled out in '24 because Schweikert won't survive past that year in a Biden district.

Tennessee already released their map and yeah Nashville is cracked but it's not the ruthless gerrymander I was expecting. Cooper's district only becomes Trump +9..
I don't see AZ / outer Phoenix as some next-Atlanta sort of unsalveagable place for the GOP. Unlike Georgia I think AZ can become Republican long term by continuing to increase their proportion of Hispanic vote.

Tennessee Democrats are saying they'll sue the map... "we'll see you in court". I don't know if they have the guns in court that states like NC and OH have to overturn it, though.

[Will Hunting]

I don't see AZ / outer Phoenix as some next-Atlanta sort of unsalveagable place for the GOP. Unlike Georgia I think AZ can become Republican long term by continuing to increase their proportion of Hispanic vote.

Tennessee Democrats are saying they'll sue the map... "we'll see you in court". I don't know if they have the guns in court that states like NC and OH have to overturn it, though.
There's absolutely no avenue for the TN Dems to do anything. Nashville isn't black enough for a VRA lawsuit and the TN State constitution doesn't have any rules about a partisan fairness. Maybe they'll sue but it'll be a waste of money.

Schweikert's district picked up a lot of Phoenix itself, it's now a district Biden won and while it won't shift as radically as Georgia will, it not going to get any redder.

[Ef-man]

Ohio's state Supreme Court has struck down the state's new congressional map as a Republican gerrymander that violates the state constitution.

[Millennial_Messiah]

There's absolutely no avenue for the TN Dems to do anything. Nashville isn't black enough for a VRA lawsuit and the TN State constitution doesn't have any rules about a partisan fairness. Maybe they'll sue but it'll be a waste of money.

Schweikert's district picked up a lot of Phoenix itself, it's now a district Biden won and while it won't shift as radically as Georgia will, it not going to get any redder.
I'm not so sure about that. If and when the national Hispanic vote gets to 45% GOP - 55% Dem, potentially even by 2024 at this rate, AZ goes back to the Lean R category and Maricopa becomes a toss up county... possibly Tilt R or Tilt D depending on national environment. Also, the senior citizen vote will inevitably go back to pre-covid percentages in favor of the GOP when covid is over, so that will move the state a bit back to say, 2016 political lean. It will never be safe for one side for the other and in a blue wave year the Dems absolutely could win statewide elections, they did so in 1996... but it's not going to be blue in a normal-environment year like Georgia will.

North Carolina... who knows. There's positive momentum on both sides in that state. They keep electing Roy Cooper even while voting Lean R with senate and POTUS on the same ticket. Weird state. A lot of conservatives moving there from Georgia and the Northeast colder states. A lot of young educated liberals moving there especially to Raleigh-Durham-RTP area for jobs, though covid put a dent on that because most of those jobs can be worked from home. Who knows...?

[Will Hunting]

I'm not so sure about that. If and when the national Hispanic vote gets to 45% GOP - 55% Dem, potentially even by 2024 at this rate, AZ goes back to the Lean R category and Maricopa becomes a toss up county... possibly Tilt R or Tilt D depending on national environment. Also, the senior citizen vote will inevitably go back to pre-covid percentages in favor of the GOP when covid is over, so that will move the state a bit back to say, 2016 political lean. It will never be safe for one side for the other and in a blue wave year the Dems absolutely could win statewide elections, they did so in 1996... but it's not going to be blue in a normal-environment year like Georgia will.

North Carolina... who knows. There's positive momentum on both sides in that state. They keep electing Roy Cooper even while voting Lean R with senate and POTUS on the same ticket. Weird state. A lot of conservatives moving there from Georgia and the Northeast colder states. A lot of young educated liberals moving there especially to Raleigh-Durham-RTP area for jobs, though covid put a dent on that because most of those jobs can be worked from home. Who knows...?
North Carolina I agree, each party has positive momentum but I think it's going to stay at least tilt red for the foreseeable. Unlike in GA where Democrats have already bottomed out with rural whites, there's still plenty of room for Dems to fall with NC rural whites.

Arizona Hispanics didn't shift anywhere near as much as national Hispanics did in 2020; the barely shifted at all and that's unlikely to change. The Arizona Dems are much better with Hispanics than the Florida or Texas Dems, and the Arizona GOP has poisoned the well with an entire generation of Hispanics because of Jan Brewer/Joe Arpaio. The Hispanic population in AZ is younger, more progressive and much more urbanized than the TX Hispanics are.

Schweikert's district is also only 14% Hispanic and the Hispanics in it are a lot more educated than the working class Hispanics in South Phoenix. Even if I'm wrong about the Hispanic shift in AZ, it's not really going to impact Schweikert's district, or come close to cancelling out how quickly the educated white population in that district is trending left. It went from R+28 in 2012 to R+4.4% in 2020; you're dreaming if you think that district has a prayer of trending red any time soon; it's sprinting left.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)

you should be happy, Alabama GOP court just vetoed the 6-1 map they've always had and are demanding a 5-2 map, even though the 6-1 is VRA compliant.

yes the math adds up, but by the same logic, IL should be 10-7 (D), NY should be 16-10 (D), and CA should be 35-17 (D). MA should be 7-2 (D). But that will never happen because the court system is stacked against the GOP.

[Will Hunting]

Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)

you should be happy, Alabama GOP court just vetoed the 6-1 map they've always had and are demanding a 5-2 map, even though the 6-1 is VRA compliant.

yes the math adds up, but by the same logic, IL should be 10-7 (D), NY should be 16-10 (D), and CA should be 35-17 (D). MA should be 7-2 (D). But that will never happen because the court system is stacked against the GOP.
It's a GOP Court but this happened because ol' Doug Jones refused to turn in his pink slip on Trump's top picks for the Alabama district court so Trump had to nominate more moderate judges for AL :lol

I also say there's almost no chance this ruling gets upheld by SCOTUS, so at least way until the appeal gets heard to start complaining.

Also by all means show me how a map gets drawn in CA with 17 Trump districts or MA with 2 Trump districts :lol

[Will Hunting]

Also 26% of AL's population is black, and 2/7 is 28%. Like it or not, this is the correct ruling. There's a sufficiently compact amount of black population in AL to draw two majority black VAP districts

https://i.ibb.co/s2J05VH/AL.png

[RandomGuy]

If and when the national Hispanic vote gets to 45% GOP - 55% Dem, potentially even by 2024 at this rate

One of your main flaws intellectually is confirmation bias. You seize a little too much on too little at times, and miss wider pictures.

Right wing propaganda here in this country demonizes Hispanics. I can provide dozens of examples with a very short search.

Can you explain how the party of rich white men is going to overcome that?

The radical right has stopped even pretending not to be racist, yet you think this will somehow raise the fascist evangelical protestant party's appeal among the catholic people they are bigoted against?

[Will Hunting]

Also in great news, the Hochulmander is coming!

It's already been leaked that Malliotakis's district is getting murked; she'll be in a district that's Biden +10 similar to the one shown below.

Expect a 23-3 or a 22-4 map.

If you're mad that the Dems are finally fighting fire with fire, by all means, call your GOP congressman and ask them to support a federal gerrymandering ban.

https://i.ibb.co/BT45Tdg/NY-11.png

[DMC]

One of your main flaws intellectually is confirmation bias. You seize a little too much on too little at times, and miss wider pictures.

Right wing propaganda here in this country demonizes Hispanics. I can provide dozens of examples with a very short search.

Can you explain how the party of rich white men is going to overcome that?

The radical right has stopped even pretending not to be racist, yet you think this will somehow raise the fascist evangelical protestant party's appeal among the catholic people they are bigoted against?
You can't even make this shit up.

[RandomGuy]

You can't even make this shit up.

(shrugs) only you would have an issue with the fact that the fascist party consists of white men, and is run by rich white men for their benefit.


hurr dee durr, Republicans aren't white


https://images.dailykos.com/images/502413/story_image/GettyImages-912431314.jpg?1517417448

[Millennial_Messiah]

It's a GOP Court but this happened because ol' Doug Jones refused to turn in his pink slip on Trump's top picks for the Alabama district court so Trump had to nominate more moderate judges for AL :lol

I also say there's almost no chance this ruling gets upheld by SCOTUS, so at least way until the appeal gets heard to start complaining.

Also by all means show me how a map gets drawn in CA with 17 Trump districts or MA with 2 Trump districts :lol
I think current partisan lean with the 538 map is more accurate than just going by 2020 Biden vs Trump numbers. In Nov. 2020 Biden's polled approval rating was averaged around 55% and Trump's was around 41%. Now Biden's is at 40.2% and Trump's is at 42.4%. The generic national ballot has shifted eight points rightward since the general election, from D+4 to R+4 in the time since.

As far as the SCOTUS goes, there's about a 50/50 chance they don't take up the Alabama case. If they do the 6-1 map will survive, if they don't the GOP will have to draw up some sort of 5-1-1 or 5-2 (worst case scenario) map.

It is crazy to think that all of that was caused by Trump stupidly appointing Jeff Sessions from his senate seat to AG where he was incompetent. Equally stupid for the GOP to nominate an alleged pedophile to replace him.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Also in great news, the Hochulmander is coming!

It's already been leaked that Malliotakis's district is getting murked; she'll be in a district that's Biden +10 similar to the one shown below.

Expect a 23-3 or a 22-4 map.

If you're mad that the Dems are finally fighting fire with fire, by all means, call your GOP congressman and ask them to support a federal gerrymandering ban.



I'm not mad that the Dems are fighting fire with fire in IL/NY as much as that they're doing dirty double standards by fighting fire with fire in their states but fighting fire with ice water in the GOP states, (OH/NC/GA and possibly Florida if the DeSantis map gets proposed).

[Will Hunting]

I'm not mad that the Dems are fighting fire with fire in IL/NY as much as that they're doing dirty double standards by fighting fire with fire in their states but fighting fire with ice water in the GOP states, (OH/NC/GA and possibly Florida if the DeSantis map gets proposed).
You realize the GOP is also suing over the maps in Dem controlled states, right?

[Will Hunting]

I think current partisan lean with the 538 map is more accurate than just going by 2020 Biden vs Trump numbers. In Nov. 2020 Biden's polled approval rating was averaged around 55% and Trump's was around 41%. Now Biden's is at 40.2% and Trump's is at 42.4%. The generic national ballot has shifted eight points rightward since the general election, from D+4 to R+4 in the time since.

As far as the SCOTUS goes, there's about a 50/50 chance they don't take up the Alabama case. If they do the 6-1 map will survive, if they don't the GOP will have to draw up some sort of 5-1-1 or 5-2 (worst case scenario) map.

It is crazy to think that all of that was caused by Trump stupidly appointing Jeff Sessions from his senate seat to AG where he was incompetent. Equally stupid for the GOP to nominate an alleged pedophile to replace him.
If the lower court ruling holds it would be solid 5-2. The court basically said there needs to be two majority black AL districts and AL isn't like Mississippi where you can draw a majority black swing district because of how Republican the white population is; any majority black district in AL would be safe D.

[spurraider21]

It's a GOP Court but this happened because ol' Doug Jones refused to turn in his pink slip on Trump's top picks for the Alabama district court so Trump had to nominate more moderate judges for AL :lol

I also say there's almost no chance this ruling gets upheld by SCOTUS, so at least way until the appeal gets heard to start complaining.

Also by all means show me how a map gets drawn in CA with 17 Trump districts or MA with 2 Trump districts :lol
iirc there were situations where mitch said fuck the pink slip and confirmed judges anyway from other states

[Millennial_Messiah]

You realize the GOP is also suing over the maps in Dem controlled states, right?

Not Illinois. They will sue in NY. I don't know if there's much to do in CA, because, like you've said in the past, a majority of the right-leaning population lives within blue areas in California, and while they are moving out to other states in droves, none of those trends help the GOP in California.

[DMC]

(shrugs) only you would have an issue with the fact that the fascist party consists of white men, and is run by rich white men for their benefit.

"Identity politics!"

"Fucking white men!"

[HemisfairArena]

One of your main flaws intellectually is confirmation bias. You seize a little too much on too little at times, and miss wider pictures.

Right wing propaganda here in this country demonizes Hispanics. I can provide dozens of examples with a very short search.

Can you explain how the party of rich white men is going to overcome that?

The radical right has stopped even pretending not to be racist, yet you think this will somehow raise the fascist evangelical protestant party's appeal among the catholic people they are bigoted against?

Same way your democrat party gets the black population to vote for them...we're gonna lie to them. When Hillary Clinton can call black people super predators and yet they still vote democrat or Biden says Obama is articulate and clean like he was shocked a black men could be that. I assume its easy to dupe minorities.

[Will Hunting]

iirc there were situations where mitch said fuck the pink slip and confirmed judges anyway from other states
That was for circuit court appointments; kept it in place for the district courts which is where this case was heard.

[Will Hunting]

Not Illinois. They will sue in NY. I don't know if there's much to do in CA, because, like you've said in the past, a majority of the right-leaning population lives within blue areas in California, and while they are moving out to other states in droves, none of those trends help the GOP in California.
Theyre going to sue in NY and they’re already suing in OR and MD.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Theyre going to sue in NY and they’re already suing in OR and MD.

Maryland is a bad gerrymander since it's definitely plausible to draw 2 GOP seats, especially since the western panhandle is very right-leaning and represented by a Democrat currently. Oregon... not so sure what they want? Eastern Oregon to be cracked in half and to have 2 seats? New York definitely has the land (unlike, as you've said before, Massachusetts) to have at least 7 or 8 solid red seats.

California and Illinois won't change because CA was drawn by an independent commission and already approved and in IL you have Pritzker who carefully made sure the map was compliant with the state and federal laws before approving. Even though cracking Chicago in ten directions is retarded, splits up communities and is a nasty gerrymander objectively speaking.

Just wondering something about CA...... is it possible to draw a #Blue52 52-0 map there?

[RandomGuy]

[uninteresting strawman #28,467,561]

:sleep

[Will Hunting]

Maryland is a bad gerrymander since it's definitely plausible to draw 2 GOP seats, especially since the western panhandle is very right-leaning and represented by a Democrat currently. Oregon... not so sure what they want? Eastern Oregon to be cracked in half and to have 2 seats? New York definitely has the land (unlike, as you've said before, Massachusetts) to have at least 7 or 8 solid red seats.

California and Illinois won't change because CA was drawn by an independent commission and already approved and in IL you have Pritzker who carefully made sure the map was compliant with the state and federal laws before approving. Even though cracking Chicago in ten directions is retarded, splits up communities and is a nasty gerrymander objectively speaking.

Just wondering something about CA...... is it possible to draw a #Blue52 52-0 map there?
A 52-0 map in CA would violate the VRA and I'm pretty sure the state level redistricting requirements. You'd have to snake a lot of LA County into the Inland areas. That's the thing about the VRA, it makes it so red states can't run wild, but it also stops blue states from cracking minority areas to create more D+15 seats.

Oregon is 100% a Dem gerrymander. It's a 5-1 map in a state that's 42% Republican.

Illinois won't have a lawsuit because there aren't any constitutional requirements about redistricting in IL other than 1 person 1 vote. Gerrymandering in IL is literally legal the same way it is in TX. NY, MD and OR have baseline requirements around compactness, contiguity & partisan fairness. They're vague requirements that a Dem leaning court would mostly ignore except when there's extreme gerrymandering, which is largely why NY didn't draw a 23-3 map.

[Will Hunting]

The Hochulmander has been released!

Pretty ruthless 22-4 map that draws out 4 of 8 GOP seats and strengthens several Democrats who were in trouble this year.

There's a greater than 0% chance the NY Court of Appeals strikes this map down as a gerrymander but it's pretty slim. The NY constitutional requirements are very vague and this map isn't the "extreme" 23-3 gerrymander that the DCCC wanted.

https://i.ibb.co/0f90fqL/NY.png

https://i.ibb.co/mhXRwKb/NYC.png

[Will Hunting]

Damn, potentially another W for Dems if the liberal PA supreme court hijacks the redistricting process.

1488225577140203528

[Will Hunting]

Most pivotal issues that remain with redistricting:

- Does the NY map pass & survive the inevitable court challenge?
- Does the PA Supreme Court go full partisan and adopt the DNC Plaintiff's proposed map?
- Does Florida pass the state senate's 16-12 map or do they make it more partisan?
- How do the Ohio/North Carolina lawsuits get resolved?
- Does SCOTUS uphold the ruling requiring a 2nd majority black seat in AL, and do VRA lawsuits in LA and SC?

If most of these things get resolved in favor of Democrats, the redistricting cycle for 2020 was a massive success, at least at the congressional level.

[Millennial_Messiah]

A 52-0 map in CA would violate the VRA and I'm pretty sure the state level redistricting requirements. You'd have to snake a lot of LA County into the Inland areas. That's the thing about the VRA, it makes it so red states can't run wild, but it also stops blue states from cracking minority areas to create more D+15 seats.

Oregon is 100% a Dem gerrymander. It's a 5-1 map in a state that's 42% Republican.

Illinois won't have a lawsuit because there aren't any constitutional requirements about redistricting in IL other than 1 person 1 vote. Gerrymandering in IL is literally legal the same way it is in TX. NY, MD and OR have baseline requirements around compactness, contiguity & partisan fairness. They're vague requirements that a Dem leaning court would mostly ignore except when there's extreme gerrymandering, which is largely why NY didn't draw a 23-3 map.
The bolded is exactly what Pritzker did with Chicago and Illinois. Cracked minority areas multiple ways in order to get that unprecedented 15-3 map, at least 12 of which are D+>=15 seats.

What is your suggestion for Oregon? 6-2? I don't know if having 3 GOP districts is really feasible without gerrymandering like crazy.

Maryland makes sense to have 2 GOP districts for sure, one including the full western panhandle and not gerrymandering and the one in the eastern panhandle. That's a slam dunk.

New York should have at least 7 GOP districts. Western and Upstate NY is ...yeah. Without the NYC metro area it's literally a red state.

[Will Hunting]

The bolded is exactly what Pritzker did with Chicago and Illinois. Cracked minority areas multiple ways in order to get that unprecedented 15-3 map, at least 12 of which are D+>=15 seats.

What is your suggestion for Oregon? 6-2? I don't know if having 3 GOP districts is really feasible without gerrymandering like crazy.

Maryland makes sense to have 2 GOP districts for sure, one including the full western panhandle and not gerrymandering and the one in the eastern panhandle. That's a slam dunk.

New York should have at least 7 GOP districts. Western and Upstate NY is ...yeah. Without the NYC metro area it's literally a red state.
That's just not true about Illinois. The 6th district is only Biden +8 when it could have been Biden +15 if not for the VRA requirement that IL-01 and IL-02 need to be majority or near-majority black. IL not only kept it's 3 black VRA districts together but it added a 2nd Hispanic VRA district (plurality, not majority) which also weakened the 6th and the 11th districts.

Don't get me wrong, it was an aggressive gerrymander, but the VRA made it so the 6th and 11th districts are winnable by Republicans when they otherwise wouldn't have been. Chicagoland wasn't even the most aggressive part of the Dem gerrymander, it was creating a 13th district that goes all the way from East St. Louis to Champaigne & a 17th district that goes from Bloomington to Rockford while picking up the bluest driftless area precincts.

A fair Oregon map would be 4-2. The 5-1 map is clearly drawn to overrepresent the Portland area; look at how OR-5 pulls from the southern Multnomah County precincts to dilute the rest of the district:

https://i.ibb.co/tL9b9YC/OF-05.png

Yes, a fair MD map would be 6-2 and a fair NYC map would be 19-7 or even 18-8, but a fair Texas map would be 17-18 Biden won districts as well as several Trump won districts that were by much smaller margins and have the chance of flipping this decade; instead it only has 13 Biden won districts and only 2 more that Trump won by less than 12%.

[Millennial_Messiah]

That's just not true about Illinois. The 6th district is only Biden +8 when it could have been Biden +15 if not for the VRA requirement that IL-01 and IL-02 need to be majority or near-majority black. IL not only kept it's 3 black VRA districts together but it added a 2nd Hispanic VRA district (plurality, not majority) which also weakened the 6th and the 11th districts.

Don't get me wrong, it was an aggressive gerrymander, but the VRA made it so the 6th and 11th districts are winnable by Republicans when they otherwise wouldn't have been. Chicagoland wasn't even the most aggressive part of the Dem gerrymander, it was creating a 13th district that goes all the way from East St. Louis to Champaigne & a 17th district that goes from Bloomington to Rockford while picking up the bluest driftless area precincts.

A fair Oregon map would be 4-2. The 5-1 map is clearly drawn to overrepresent the Portland area; look at how OR-5 pulls from the southern Multnomah County precincts to dilute the rest of the district:

https://i.ibb.co/tL9b9YC/OF-05.png

Yes, a fair MD map would be 6-2 and a fair NYC map would be 19-7 or even 18-8, but a fair Texas map would be 17-18 Biden won districts as well as several Trump won districts that were by much smaller margins and have the chance of flipping this decade; instead it only has 13 Biden won districts and only 2 more that Trump won by less than 12%.
So basically in IL, the GOP has the chance to pick off a near majority in 2022, making it look like a dummymander temporarily... they might retain them or most of them in 2024 and then lose them back in 2026 for instance. Who knows, the whole driftless area is trending red. But Chicagoland is still trending blue.

Thing about Texas is it's there to counteract the inevitable in New York and the GOP was counting on Ohio to roughly level off Illinois but the court struck it down. I actually think the GOP in 2022 could flip not only TX-15 but also TX-28 and even TX-34. Yes those were Biden won districts but strongly trending red compared to the rest of the state and even the rest of the USA.

[Millennial_Messiah]

You're right about Oregon. It's not blue enough and they will likely draw a 4-2 map. Alabama's a bit different and it won't hold up in SCOTUS if it makes it there; you're talking about actually drawing out an (R) incumbent in a year where the state didn't lose a seat and no retirements. Maryland, who knows... it just doesn't make sense to represent the far-right wing western panhandle with a (D). Of course the center part is full of (D) metros.

The one thing you can say about Texas as opposed to New York is the Texas gerrymander team didn't draw out (D) incumbents like the Democrat gerrymander team in NY is doing to (R) incumbents there. If the democrats in the Valley lose it's because the area is shifting red, not because the blue team is getting drawn out.

[Will Hunting]

So basically in IL, the GOP has the chance to pick off a near majority in 2022, making it look like a dummymander temporarily... they might retain them or most of them in 2024 and then lose them back in 2026 for instance. Who knows, the whole driftless area is trending red. But Chicagoland is still trending blue.

Thing about Texas is it's there to counteract the inevitable in New York and the GOP was counting on Ohio to roughly level off Illinois but the court struck it down. I actually think the GOP in 2022 could flip not only TX-15 but also TX-28 and even TX-34. Yes those were Biden won districts but strongly trending red compared to the rest of the state and even the rest of the USA.
The notion that they only gerrymandered Texas to counteract NY is the dumbest redistricting take I've heard this cycle. They were going to gerrymander Texas even if NY had an independent commission in place. If what you were saying was accurate, why did the GOP also gerrymander Texas in 2010 when the NY map was fairly Court-drawn?

The Dems have proposed a federal ban on gerrymandering the GOP is filibustering it, not the other way around. We have the moral high ground on this until the GOP supports a federal gerrymandering ban; until then we're not going to unilaterally disarm and let the GOP get a huge house advantage because their states are gerrymandered and ours aren't.

Idk what your math is on Illinois but no the GOP doesn't have the chance at a majority, it's a 14-3 map and only 3 of the 14 districts are winnable for Republicans. Best case scenario for the GOP in IL is an 11 D - 6 R, but 2 of the 3 winnable districts for the GOP are trending blue so that's unlikely.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The notion that they only gerrymandered Texas to counteract NY is the dumbest redistricting take I've heard this cycle. They were going to gerrymander Texas even if NY had an independent commission in place. If what you were saying was accurate, why did the GOP also gerrymander Texas in 2010 when the NY map was fairly Court-drawn?

The Dems have proposed a federal ban on gerrymandering the GOP is filibustering it, not the other way around. We have the moral high ground on this until the GOP supports a federal gerrymandering ban; until then we're not going to unilaterally disarm and let the GOP get a huge house advantage because their states are gerrymandered and ours aren't.

Idk what your math is on Illinois but no the GOP doesn't have the chance at a majority, it's a 14-3 map and only 3 of the 14 districts are winnable for Republicans. Best case scenario for the GOP in IL is an 11 D - 6 R, but 2 of the 3 winnable districts for the GOP are trending blue so that's unlikely.

The GOP can win that snakey one that covers East St Louis, Springfield and a lot of rural land, and they can win that one that skirts the Driftless area.

As for federal ban on gerrymandering... how exactly would that work? All 50 states (sans the states with only 3 ECV/ 1 seat) with an independent commission? Even with independent commissions you don't get a Michigan map in most states, look at Arizona, it's pro red, and California, it's pro blue.

[Will Hunting]

You're right about Oregon. It's not blue enough and they will likely draw a 4-2 map. Alabama's a bit different and it won't hold up in SCOTUS if it makes it there; you're talking about actually drawing out an (R) incumbent in a year where the state didn't lose a seat and no retirements. Maryland, who knows... it just doesn't make sense to represent the far-right wing western panhandle with a (D). Of course the center part is full of (D) metros.

The one thing you can say about Texas as opposed to New York is the Texas gerrymander team didn't draw out (D) incumbents like the Democrat gerrymander team in NY is doing to (R) incumbents there. If the democrats in the Valley lose it's because the area is shifting red, not because the blue team is getting drawn out.
They've already drawn a 5-1 map in Oregon and the Oregon GOP sued over it.

Your argument on Alabama and MD is inconsistent. The Western panhandle was already gerrymandered in 2010; making it a red district would draw out an incumbent the same way a 5-2 map would in Alabama. If drawing out an incumbent is fine for MD in a year when it kept the same number of seats, then it would theoretically be fine for Alabama as well.

The Texas map didn't draw out incumbents because it wouldn't have made sense; the geography for Republicans in Texas is terrible so they were focused on protecting their incumbents over anything else. The fact they started out with a map that was already more gerrymandered than the NY map was doesn't magically make their map less of a gerrymander than the NY map is. That's a fundamentally flawed way of comparing the two.

[Will Hunting]

The GOP can win that snakey one that covers East St Louis, Springfield and a lot of rural land, and they can win that one that skirts the Driftless area.

As for federal ban on gerrymandering... how exactly would that work? All 50 states (sans the states with only 3 ECV/ 1 seat) with an independent commission? Even with independent commissions you don't get a Michigan map in most states, look at Arizona, it's pro red, and California, it's pro blue.
Congress mandating independent commissions would potentially be unconstitutional, but right now the problem is that federal courts have no jurisdiction over partisan gerrymandering disputes (just VRA ones, not purely partisan ones). The Freedom to Vote Act doesn't have commissions but it has a gerrymandering ban and it sets forth a procedure for which any private citizen can sue his/her own state over unfair maps. There would still inevitably be some gerrymandering but it would be scaled back in a big way.

As it stands, states like IL/TX with state constitutions that don't ban gerrymandering literally have legalized gerrymandering, a federal ban creates an actual remedy for those states, while it creates a more robust remedy for states like NY/OH/NC that have bare bones language in their constitutions about gerrymandering that make it so the state supreme court basically decides based off whichever party has a majority.

Also the East Stl. district is a Biden +12 district that trended left from 2016 to 2020. The driftless area district is definitely winnable for the GOP, the East St. Louis district would be winnable for the GOP in 2026 at the absolute earliest, and only if it's a huge waive year for Republicans.

[Will Hunting]

Oral argument in the North Carolina lawsuit was held today and it went terribly for the GOP.

I'd say there's an 80% chance that the NC Supreme Court orders the maps to be redrawn.

[Winehole23]

Damn, potentially another W for Dems if the liberal PA supreme court hijacks the redistricting process.

1488225577140203528you probably already knew this, but they hijacked it

1488963752938586126

[Will Hunting]

you probably already knew this, but they hijacked it

1488963752938586126
I expect a 6 D - 6 R - 5 Competitive map in PA, with 3 of the 5 districts being lean Biden and 2 of the 5 being lean Trump.

More importantly, this probably also means that PA will have fair state leg maps for the first time in decades. If the Dems ever won full control in PA, they could do stuff like pass early voting and same day registration.

[Winehole23]

1489324233541013508

[Winehole23]

NC Supreme Court strikes down GOP gerrymander, ruling hasn't yet been posted

[Will Hunting]

NC Supreme Court strikes down GOP gerrymander, ruling hasn't yet been posted
Ruling it out.

Dem majority went complete sicko mode; ruled that the maps need to be proportional. If that actually sticks it means we go from a 10-3-1 map to an 8-5-1 map or even a 7-5-2 map.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Ruling it out.

Dem majority went complete sicko mode; ruled that the maps need to be proportional. If that actually sticks it means we go from a 10-3-1 map to an 8-5-1 map or even a 7-5-2 map.
and yet 538 Redistricting HQ site is showing NC original gerrymander map as "Approved" status.

[Isitjustme?]

1489764823365681153

[Thread]

1489764823365681153

Your side owned gerrymandering till Trump made President. I mean it was always there for us, but our RINO's wanted nary to do with it till Trump. Now we're in there as well scroungin' around in the mud and do-do vying for a foot hold wherever we can find one, or, crook one, just-like-your-side.

[Isitjustme?]

Your side owned gerrymandering till Trump made President. I mean it was always there for us, but our RINO's wanted nary to do with it till Trump. Now we're in there as well scroungin' around in the mud and do-do vying for a foot hold wherever we can find one, or, crook one, just-like-your-side.

This is the biggest line of horse shit of all time. Gerrymandering has existed for centuries in the US. I understand your guy didn't accomplish much other than a tax cut into generic right wing judges any Republican could have appointed so you want to fluff up his resume a bit, but this is pathetic

[Thread]

This is the biggest line of horse shit of all time. Gerrymandering has existed for centuries in the US. I understand your guy didn't accomplish much other than a tax cut into generic right wing judges any Republican could have appointed so you want to fluff up his resume a bit, but this is pathetic

That's what I said first. Me.

Our side just never fought for our side, we left that for you fellows, until President Trump held our RINO's feet to the fire. Said RINO's will revert back to your dummies as soon as President Trump is neutralized by hook, or, by crook. Until then we're gonna be in there gerrymandering our asses off, just like you guys.

You can dish it.
You just can't take it.

[Will Hunting]

This is the biggest line of horse shit of all time. Gerrymandering has existed for centuries in the US. I understand your guy didn't accomplish much other than a tax cut into generic right wing judges any Republican could have appointed so you want to fluff up his resume a bit, but this is pathetic
What Republicans refuse to acknowledge is that prior to 2010, gerrymandering was very disorganized and localized, it was largely done to protect incumbents more than to tilt the balance of power towards one party, and there wasn’t technology that made it so you could gerrymander with complete precision.

Project REDMAP in 2010 and 2011 was a national, coordinated effort by the GOP to gerrymander liberals into as few districts as possible and make it so the congressional map was insanely tilted to the right. It was also done using technology that wasn’t available in any prior cycle that made gerrymandering more effective. In essence, it raised the stakes on gerrymandering in ways Democrats never did in years when they controlled most of the state legislatures.

The Republicans pretending it was Democrats who created a gerrymandering arms race are, as usual, not acting in good faith.

[Will Hunting]

and yet 538 Redistricting HQ site is showing NC original gerrymander map as "Approved" status.
It was approved by the state leg.

now it’s been overturned by the state Supreme Court.

keep coping though.

[Thread]

What Republicans refuse to acknowledge is that prior to 2010, gerrymandering was very disorganized and localized, it was largely done to protect incumbents more than to tilt the balance of power towards one party, and there wasn’t technology that made it so you could gerrymander with complete precision.

Project REDMAP in 2010 and 2011 was a national, coordinated effort by the GOP to gerrymander liberals into as few districts as possible and make it so the congressional map was insanely tilted to the right. It was also done using technology that wasn’t available in any prior cycle that made gerrymandering more effective. In essence, it raised the stakes on gerrymandering in ways Democrats never did in years when they controlled most of the state legislatures.

The Republicans pretending it was Democrats who created a gerrymandering arms race are, as usual, not acting in good faith.

Nonsense. When your side ran it/gerrymandering it was a respected institution, a higher calling,,,as you had the whole GD thing to yourselves...you side was there for your side and our side/RINO's were there for your side. Then Trump busted Clinton and we got wise,,,Trump made the RINO's either cut and run, OR, carve up the maps to aid and abet our side. That was it...CNN/MSM now took the new tact of casting gerrymandering down with the sodomites, it's now akin to sex trafficking.

Just wait though, once President Trump is disposed of (once and for all) that exact same CNN/MSM will once and again prop gerrymandering up as the aforementioned respected institution, a higher calling as you kick our brains in again with it.

"...and now you know...the rest of the story."

[Will Hunting]

Nonsense. When your side ran it/gerrymandering it was a respected institution, a higher calling,,,as you had the whole GD thing to yourselves...you side was there for your side and our side/RINO's were there for your side. Then Trump busted Clinton and we got wise,,,Trump made the RINO's either cut and run, OR, carve up the maps to aid and abet our side. That was it...CNN/MSM now took the new tact of casting gerrymandering down with the sodomites, it's now akin to sex trafficking.

Just wait though, once President Trump is disposed of (once and for all) that exact same CNN/MSM will once and again prop gerrymandering up as the aforementioned respected institution, a higher calling as you kick our brains in again with it.

"...and now you know...the rest of the story."
You're just making stuff up. Trump beat Clinton in 2016; project REDMAP occurred in 2010-2011 and it was a GOP operation to gerrymander in ways Democrats never had before. The GOP didn't start gerrymandering with Trump; that's incoherent non-sense.

No one ever said gerrymandering was a "respected institution", it just didn't get news coverage prior to 2010 because 1) it was never done at the coordinated, precise levels the GOP did it in 2010, and 2) prior to the Roberts Court, SCOTUS had acted as a check against gerrymandering and found that it violated the equal protection clause.

If you're going to reply to this, please do so with facts, not incoherent MAGAboomer mumbo jumbo.

[Will Hunting]

In case there's any doubt.

The GOP taking gerrymandering to a level Democrats never had before started 5+ years before the emergence of Trump.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP

[Thread]

You're just making stuff up. Trump beat Clinton in 2016; project REDMAP occurred in 2010-2011 and it was a GOP operation to gerrymander in ways Democrats never had before. The GOP didn't start gerrymandering with Trump; that's incoherent non-sense.

No one ever said gerrymandering was a "respected institution", it just didn't get news coverage prior to 2010 because 1) it was never done at the coordinated, precise levels the GOP did it in 2010, and 2) prior to the Roberts Court, SCOTUS had acted as a check against gerrymandering and found that it violated the equal protection clause.

If you're going to reply to this, please do so with facts, not incoherent MAGAboomer mumbo jumbo.

I'll agree to disagree. I stated my case and I stand by it.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Every state should get a Michigan or Colorado esque map. Ditching the stupid VRA completely and creating indepedent commisions using the Michigan map and its principles as staré decisis would go a long way.

And no, ditching the VRA in such a case wouldn't necessarily just hurt the Democrats. It would still create a safe blue seat in safe red states in say, the Mississippi Delta. The point is to keep like communities together, not so much by race but by location etc.

[Will Hunting]

Every state should get a Michigan or Colorado esque map. Ditching the stupid VRA completely and creating indepedent commisions using the Michigan map and its principles as staré decisis would go a long way.

And no, ditching the VRA in such a case wouldn't necessarily just hurt the Democrats. It would still create a safe blue seat in safe red states in say, the Mississippi Delta. The point is to keep like communities together, not so much by race but by location etc.
This would be far and away the best solution and I agree about the VRA. It shouldn't just be race based, redistricting should primarily be communities-of-interest based. That would inherently factor in race, but it would also factor in stuff like making sure the Russian immigrant/Orthodox Jewish communities in South Brooklyn get fair representation.

The Michigan commission did the best job of giving the most weight to communities of interest while also weighing partisan fairness but not to the point of ridiculousness where it created monstrosity districts.

Unfortunately a federal commission mandate would be unconstitutional; congress would need to be more creative. What I would do is mandate the creation of a Michigan-like commission in each state to create maps WITHOUT seizing power from the state legislatures but also giving private citizens a right to sue to the extent that the state legislatures adopt maps that are different from the commission maps. That way you're not technically violating the constitutional rule that state legislatures are the bodies that draw and pass the maps; you're just hamstringing their ability to run wild.

[Will Hunting]

I'll agree to disagree. I stated my case and I stand by it.
If anything, the GOP has gotten worse at gerrymandering since Trump. They've lost control of the state supreme court in MI, PA, NC and OH, the WI supreme court is also less partisan, and the judges he appointed in Alabama ruled in favor of giving the Dems another seat.

The pre-Trump 2010 GOP is exponentially better at gerrymandering than the post-Trump 2020 GOP is.

[Will Hunting]

So Alabama starts drawing its new map today, and SCOTUS still hasn't issued an order on its stay request.

We should be expect a hostile 5-4 decision if it's taking this long. IMO Clarence Thomas sides with the libs (he's been friendly on VRA redistricting cases before), with Gorsuch or Kavanaugh as the deciding vote.

[Winehole23]

If anything, the GOP has gotten worse at gerrymandering since Trump. They've lost control of the state supreme court in MI, PA, NC and OH, the WI supreme court is also less partisan, and the judges he appointed in Alabama ruled in favor of giving the Dems another seat.

The pre-Trump 2010 GOP is exponentially better at gerrymandering than the post-Trump 2020 GOP is.

Texas's 2003 midstream redistricting says hi.

[Will Hunting]

Texas's 2003 midstream redistricting says hi.
Ah yeah forgot about that. If I recall, they somehow got SCOTEX to rule that since the 2000 map was drawn via Federal Court order, the 2003 redistricting didn't count as a mid-decade redraw since the state leg never drew it in the first place.

Total bullshit :lol

[Millennial_Messiah]

Texas's 2003 midstream redistricting says hi.

isn't that what caused the Texas Dems to all protest by going to Ardmore Oklahoma and having a party there thus shutting down the texas legislature?



This would be far and away the best solution and I agree about the VRA. It shouldn't just be race based, redistricting should primarily be communities-of-interest based. That would inherently factor in race, but it would also factor in stuff like making sure the Russian immigrant/Orthodox Jewish communities in South Brooklyn get fair representation.

The Michigan commission did the best job of giving the most weight to communities of interest while also weighing partisan fairness but not to the point of ridiculousness where it created monstrosity districts.

Unfortunately a federal commission mandate would be unconstitutional; congress would need to be more creative. What I would do is mandate the creation of a Michigan-like commission in each state to create maps WITHOUT seizing power from the state legislatures but also giving private citizens a right to sue to the extent that the state legislatures adopt maps that are different from the commission maps. That way you're not technically violating the constitutional rule that state legislatures are the bodies that draw and pass the maps; you're just hamstringing their ability to run wild.
I just like the Michigan map because nowhere important is cracked at all and every reasonably large/important city or suburban area gets to be the centerpiece of a district. Obviously the UP isn't populous enough for a whole district so it gets lumped in with rural north MI all the way down to the Traverse City area.

The nature of these competitive seats means the incumbents, outside of the inner Detroit districts and a couple ruby red ones up north, actually have to try hard to win re-election and bust their ass instead of sitting on their ass and getting it handed to them like Pelosi or pick any member of the Squad or pick any member of any R + 30 type district.

I live part time in the new MI-03 district and Meijer is a popular name there. I think the fact that he's a centrist will go a long way there. There's a decent amount of Trumpers that might try, and fail, to primary him out, and it will be Meijer against a Dem and both the vast majority of the Trumpers and a decent amount of Dems will remember where they get their groceries and drugs and vote and re-elect Meijer. The Meijer name is extremely popular in Grand Rapids/Muskegon. D+3 or D+9 be damned, Meijer wins re-election. Frederik Meijer is a god there (it's a fairly atheistic, stoner, Dutch-heavy population compared to the rest of the USA) and Peter Meijer is his grandson.

[Will Hunting]

I just like the Michigan map because nowhere important is cracked at all and every reasonably large/important city or suburban area gets to be the centerpiece of a district. Obviously the UP isn't populous enough for a whole district so it gets lumped in with rural north MI all the way down to the Traverse City area.

The nature of these competitive seats means the incumbents, outside of the inner Detroit districts and a couple ruby red ones up north, actually have to try hard to win re-election and bust their ass instead of sitting on their ass and getting it handed to them like Pelosi or pick any member of the Squad or pick any member of any R + 30 type district.

I live part time in the new MI-03 district and Meijer is a popular name there. I think the fact that he's a centrist will go a long way there. There's a decent amount of Trumpers that might try, and fail, to primary him out, and it will be Meijer against a Dem and both the vast majority of the Trumpers and a decent amount of Dems will remember where they get their groceries and drugs and vote and re-elect Meijer. The Meijer name is extremely popular in Grand Rapids/Muskegon. D+3 or D+9 be damned, Meijer wins re-election. Frederik Meijer is a god there (it's a fairly atheistic, stoner, Dutch-heavy population compared to the rest of the USA) and Peter Meijer is his grandson.
It's not just you, all the experts are also saying that Michigan drew the best and most fair map this cycle. The worst districts in terms of fair representation are the +-10 to 15% districts because they're not competitive but 40+% of their voters are still from the minority party, and Michigan didn't draw any of those. It drew 4 safe districts for each side and 5 districts that either side can win depending on the environment.

I think Meijer wins in '22 unless some MAGA idiot primaries him, beyond that it's a question of how the district trends. It trended hard left from '16 to '20, if that continues then the Meijer name is only worth so much in a year that's favorable to Dems.

Long term I think...
- the Flint/Bay City district trends right and the Dems lose it when Kildee retires
- the Lansing district trends left. If Slotkin holds that seat in '22 despite it being an R year, then she's got it for the rest of the decade
- the Macomb County district is a wildcard. Obama won Macomb, the Trump walloped Hillary there, then it trended left in '20. Idk how it trends long term, it seems different from the other Detroit suburbs that have consistently trended left
- the Kalamazoo district could be competitive with someone other than Upton, but he's entrenched enough such that he's not losing

[Millennial_Messiah]

It's not just you, all the experts are also saying that Michigan drew the best and most fair map this cycle. The worst districts in terms of fair representation are the +-10 to 15% districts because they're not competitive but 40+% of their voters are still from the minority party, and Michigan didn't draw any of those. It drew 4 safe districts for each side and 5 districts that either side can win depending on the environment.

I think Meijer wins in '22 unless some MAGA idiot primaries him, beyond that it's a question of how the district trends. It trended hard left from '16 to '20, if that continues then the Meijer name is only worth so much in a year that's favorable to Dems.

Long term I think...
- the Flint/Bay City district trends right and the Dems lose it when Kildee retires
- the Lansing district trends left. If Slotkin holds that seat in '22 despite it being an R year, then she's got it for the rest of the decade
- the Macomb County district is a wildcard. Obama won Macomb, the Trump walloped Hillary there, then it trended left in '20. Idk how it trends long term, it seems different from the other Detroit suburbs that have consistently trended left
- the Kalamazoo district could be competitive with someone other than Upton, but he's entrenched enough such that he's not losing
Huizenga is winning that primary in the district south of MI-03, over Upton. Macomb is going to be a lean to likely R seat. I see the Flint/Bay City district going red in 2022 and beyond regardless of who's incumbent. You may be right about the Lansing district. As for MI-03. I agree primarying Meijer would be stupid. People aren't really for the most part hard right or hard left in Grand Rapids and Muskegon. They like to enjoy the outdoors, smoke pot, and shoot guns. Amsterdam esque culture. Not particularly religious people although there are a few churches they are I would say significantly lower religious than the rest of the USA. They are quite family oriented there and it's not a particularly woke culture there. It's got a WOW-Wisconsin vibe and they turned away from Trump in 2020 because it's Trump but they might flip back hard for a different candidate like Desantis. Don't forget. 70-80% of those that voted for Biden, or didn't vote for Trump in any case, in MI-03 got the majority of their groceries and drugs at Meijer and live by the name. We'll see.

[Will Hunting]

Huizenga is winning that primary in the district south of MI-03, over Upton. Macomb is going to be a lean to likely R seat. I see the Flint/Bay City district going red in 2022 and beyond regardless of who's incumbent. You may be right about the Lansing district. As for MI-03. I agree primarying Meijer would be stupid. People aren't really for the most part hard right or hard left in Grand Rapids and Muskegon. They like to enjoy the outdoors, smoke pot, and shoot guns. Amsterdam esque culture. Not particularly religious people although there are a few churches they are I would say significantly lower religious than the rest of the USA. They are quite family oriented there and it's not a particularly woke culture there. It's got a WOW-Wisconsin vibe and they turned away from Trump in 2020 because it's Trump but they might flip back hard for a different candidate like Desantis. Don't forget. 70-80% of those that voted for Biden, or didn't vote for Trump in any case, in MI-03 got the majority of their groceries and drugs at Meijer and live by the name. We'll see.
Kildee ran 10 points ahead of Biden in 2020 and won it by 13%. It only got 2% redder in redistricting, so it's basically a Kildee +11% district. It would take a massive wave election to knock him out, the biggest issue being it'd require massive turnout from the WWC voters in his district that are very unlikely unless Trump is on the ballot.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Kildee ran 10 points ahead of Biden in 2020 and won it by 13%. It only got 2% redder in redistricting, so it's basically a Kildee +11% district. It would take a massive wave election to knock him out, the biggest issue being it'd require massive turnout from the WWC voters in his district that are very unlikely unless Trump is on the ballot.

polarization is going to knock out a bunch of people on both sides that are "popular incumbents". contra example, Larry Hogan assuming he runs for Senate in MD, he will lose. The only exception is if they're a complete DINO/RINO like a Phil Scott in Vermont situation. The WWC voters across Michigan will absolutely turn out in 2022 because Whitmer is on the ballot and she is their bitter enemy. And she will lose, likely by a "lean" margin.

[Will Hunting]

polarization is going to knock out a bunch of people on both sides that are "popular incumbents". contra example, Larry Hogan assuming he runs for Senate in MD, he will lose. The only exception is if they're a complete DINO/RINO like a Phil Scott in Vermont situation. The WWC voters across Michigan will absolutely turn out in 2022 because Whitmer is on the ballot and she is their bitter enemy. And she will lose, likely by a "lean" margin.
Yeah Larry Hogan is a stupid comparison. No shit he'd lose, he'd be running in a Biden +30 state, and governors never get the cross ballot support when they run for senate. Kildee is running for the same position he already won in, and midterm elections are almost always less polarized than presidential elections.

Kildee won the district by 35% the last time the Republicans had a wave election (2014); it hasn't shifted right THAT much since then.

[Thread]

If anything, the GOP has gotten worse at gerrymandering since Trump. They've lost control of the state supreme court in MI, PA, NC and OH, the WI supreme court is also less partisan, and the judges he appointed in Alabama ruled in favor of giving the Dems another seat.

The pre-Trump 2010 GOP is exponentially better at gerrymandering than the post-Trump 2020 GOP is.

...yes, plagued by RINO's. Sure, your side loves that arrangement, Will. That is played off well on MSM/CNN...to keep non RINO's sated while our house is burning. Before Trump nobody saw how the sausage, aka gerrymandering was made. MSM/CNN just published the results in a low tone to keep everybody in their respective lane. Trump gets in there, blows the whistle on the RINO's and now it's shit storm across the spectrum. Good. Excellent. It was either gonna be the shit storm it is now, or, the same old shit with our RINO's complicit to our ruination. One or the other, no other choice. So, we're better off this way. The curtain has been drawn aside and everybody is exposed, at least till our gov't, your side &&& our RINO's neutralize President Trump.

[Will Hunting]

...yes, plagued by RINO's. Sure, your side loves that arrangement, Will. That is played off well on MSM/CNN...to keep non RINO's sated while our house is burning. Before Trump nobody saw how the sausage, aka gerrymandering was made. MSM/CNN just published the results in a low tone to keep everybody in their respective lane. Trump gets in there, blows the whistle on the RINO's and now it's shit storm across the spectrum. Good. Excellent. It was either gonna be the shit storm it is now, or, the same old shit with our RINO's complicit to our ruination. One or the other, no other choice. So, we're better off this way. The curtain has been drawn aside and everybody is exposed, at least till our gov't, your side &&& our RINO's neutralize President Trump.
Again "Before Trump nobody saw how the sausage, aka gerrymandering was made" is just objectively untrue. Project REDMAP was literally the best and most well organized gerrymandering plan ever pulled off in American history, and it happened 5 years before Trump ever even ran for president.

Read this if you don't believe me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REDMAP

This redistricting cycle, notwithstanding involvement from Trump that didn't exist 10 years ago, the GOP has had much less of a stranglehold over the redistricting process than they had for the 2010 redistricting. It's just objective fact.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Yeah Larry Hogan is a stupid comparison. No shit he'd lose, he'd be running in a Biden +30 state, and governors never get the cross ballot support when they run for senate. Kildee is running for the same position he already won in, and midterm elections are almost always less polarized than presidential elections.

Kildee won the district by 35% the last time the Republicans had a wave election (2014); it hasn't shifted right THAT much since then.

Ted Cruz won by 17 in a lean-Dem environment year in 2012 and then only 1.2% in a ruby red state for senator because of a solid-Dem wave environment year in 2018. It happens.

As for Whitmer... sure she'll run up the score in Oakland and Washtenaw county upper middle class work from home voters who were largely unaffected by the shutdowns and mandates and doubled gas prices. The WWC and rural vote will vote in droves and break in roughly Youngkin Virginia numbers in those northern / rural counties. Which will ultimately be her demise this November. She'll lose like 50.4-47.7 ish


This redistricting cycle, notwithstanding involvement from Trump that didn't exist 10 years ago, the GOP has had much less of a stranglehold over the redistricting process than they had for the 2010 redistricting. It's just objective fact.
Yes, and primarily because of the courts being left of what they were in 2010. Lots of Obama appointed judges from 2010-2016 in lower courts but as you've referred to in past, Trump appointees aren't always siding with the GOP solidly either

[Will Hunting]

Yes, and primarily because of the courts being left of what they were in 2010. Lots of Obama appointed judges from 2010-2016 in lower courts but as you've referred to in past, Trump appointees aren't always siding with the GOP solidly either
Na that's not it, has nothing to do with Obama appointments. There was a concerted effort by Dems to win control of state courts that began around 2015, and since then we picked up seats in pretty much all the important states. It happened to work out extremely well for us after SCOTUS basically ruled in Abbott v. Perez that state courts are where you should bring redistricting lawsuits, not federal courts.

All the Dem court victories for redistricting have been in state court, not federal court.

[Will Hunting]

5-4 ruling, with Roberts joining the liberals in dissent, that Alabama's 6-1 map is upheld.

Sucks but not unexpected.

[Thread]

5-4 ruling, with Roberts joining the liberals in dissent, that Alabama's 6-1 map is upheld.

Sucks but not unexpected.

Roberts was always a RINO/Conservative In Name Only (CINO) on that court, and a pure SOB. That's how our side fucks up on the SC appointment and a pert lesson in how MSM/CNN in particular sells it to (us), especially the (us) who don't pay attention, unlike me. Me? I know precisely where the bear shits in the buckwheat, but a lot of Republicans don't. They just sop up the white wash that CNN/MSM lays down..."Oh, that dastardly Roberts, he's the ultimate swing vote." My ass. All a smokescreen. See, your side, Will, works on a 24 hour a day clock, keeping watch on everything. Our side? We don't do that, we trust like a pack-a-fools, and your side watches and when we let our guard down you amble in and steal something from us.

[Will Hunting]

Roberts was always a RINO/Conservative In Name Only (CINO) on that court, and a pure SOB. That's how our side fucks up on the SC appointment and a pert lesson in how MSM/CNN in particular sells it to (us), especially the (us) who don't pay attention, unlike me. Me? I know precisely where the bear shits in the buckwheat, but a lot of Republicans don't. They just sop up the white wash that CNN/MSM lays down..."Oh, that dastardly Roberts, he's the ultimate swing vote." My ass. All a smokescreen. See, your side, Will, works on a 24 hour a day clock, keeping watch on everything. Our side? We don't do that, we trust like a pack-a-fools, and your side watches and when we let our guard down you amble in and steal something from us.
Roberts is usually rock solid for ya'll on Voting Rights stuff though. I agree he's a RINO on social issues, but on voting rights John Roberts has been solid red. That's the part of this ruling that surprises me, Thomas and Gorsuch are the two conservative judges who've been slippery on other voting rights lawsuits...up until this case, Roberts was as solid red as Scalia on voting rights/redistricting.

I should caveat this that Roberts' dissent didn't address the merits of the argument, he just said he wouldn't have stayed the lower court ruling.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Tennessee has officially been moved from "in litigation" to Approved. The map is final. Nashville has been cracked and not a damn thing to do about it.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/tennessee/


Roberts is usually rock solid for ya'll on Voting Rights stuff though. I agree he's a RINO on social issues, but on voting rights John Roberts has been solid red. That's the part of this ruling that surprises me, Thomas and Gorsuch are the two conservative judges who've been slippery on other voting rights lawsuits...up until this case, Roberts was as solid red as Scalia on voting rights/redistricting.

I should caveat this that Roberts' dissent didn't address the merits of the argument, he just said he wouldn't have stayed the lower court ruling.

Funny, I always thought of Roberts to be right wing on social issues (e.g.: he voted against gay marriage) but liberal fiscally and on bureaucratic type issues like pushing Obamacare through with the individual mandate citing the individual mandate as a fair tax, which funnily enough is the only part of the original ACA that no longer exists.


5-4 ruling, with Roberts joining the liberals in dissent, that Alabama's 6-1 map is upheld.

Sucks but not unexpected.
Good. Maryland gets their 6-1 D and Alabama gets their 6-1 R.

But what does the Alabama SCOTUS ruling mean for staré decisis in other states? NC? Buehler?

[Will Hunting]

Tennessee has officially been moved from "in litigation" to Approved. The map is final. Nashville has been cracked and not a damn thing to do about it.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/tennessee/



Funny, I always thought of Roberts to be right wing on social issues (e.g.: he voted against gay marriage) but liberal fiscally and on bureaucratic type issues like pushing Obamacare through with the individual mandate citing the individual mandate as a fair tax, which funnily enough is the only part of the original ACA that no longer exists.


Good. Maryland gets their 6-1 D and Alabama gets their 6-1 R.

But what does the Alabama SCOTUS ruling mean for staré decisis in other states? NC? Buehler?
Again you don't understand the difference between federal and state court. The Alabama case was just a stay order being granted. It wasn't even an opinion on the merits but even if it was, it means absolutely nothing for NC. The Alabama case was about the VRA, the NC case is about the NC State Constitution.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Again you don't understand the difference between federal and state court. The Alabama case was just a stay order being granted. It wasn't even an opinion on the merits but even if it was, it means absolutely nothing for NC. The Alabama case was about the VRA, the NC case is about the NC State Constitution.
You're right about NC and Ohio. I guess what I meant to say was that because of the SCOTUS staré decisis that they could gut that particular "proportional minority" section of the VRA meaning that the federal courts and state courts are not going to overturn X-1 (R) maps in Louisiana, Mississippi, (Alabama), Tennessee, South Carolina, etc. It could mean that the GOP in MO will possibly be aggressive with cracking Kansas City since MO is completely GOP controlled, legislature and court, and basically the Alabama SCOTUS ruling means the feds would strike down any opposing counsel trying to stop it. (Only St. Louis would be VRA protected. It would be wise of the GOP to crack the St. Louis western suburbs into two districts, though.) It means the currently proposed Georgia map will likely pass if the state legislature and state courts don't throw it out, or if the state court throws it out strictly on "not enough VRA protected seats" means. (NC was different; the state court ruled that the state constitution had a clause on fair partisan representation, not VRA.) It means that Texas could have done less gerrymandering (i.e. weird-looking districts) to get the same results (24-11-3 ish) while not necessarily being a net benefit for the GOP it could have kept more communities together without literally drawing districts resembling dragons and dicks all over the map.

[Will Hunting]

You're right about NC and Ohio. I guess what I meant to say was that because of the SCOTUS staré decisis that they could gut that particular "proportional minority" section of the VRA meaning that the federal courts and state courts are not going to overturn X-1 (R) maps in Louisiana, Mississippi, (Alabama), Tennessee, South Carolina, etc. It could mean that the GOP in MO will possibly be aggressive with cracking Kansas City since MO is completely GOP controlled, legislature and court, and basically the Alabama SCOTUS ruling means the feds would strike down any opposing counsel trying to stop it. (Only St. Louis would be VRA protected. It would be wise of the GOP to crack the St. Louis western suburbs into two districts, though.) It means the currently proposed Georgia map will likely pass if the state legislature and state courts don't throw it out, or if the state court throws it out strictly on "not enough VRA protected seats" means. (NC was different; the state court ruled that the state constitution had a clause on fair partisan representation, not VRA.) It means that Texas could have done less gerrymandering (i.e. weird-looking districts) to get the same results (24-11-3 ish) while not necessarily being a net benefit for the GOP it could have kept more communities together without literally drawing districts resembling dragons and dicks all over the map.

Alabama was a unique situation in that it was the only state where you could easily draw another relatively compact majority black district. Even if SCOTUS ruled the other way, it wouldn't have mattered. Also keep in mind, this AL ruling is just about whether a stay should be granted, SCOTUS hasn't ruled on the merits yet but for the sake of argument if it did...

-The current Georgia map already passed, and the VRA lawsuit in Georgia was always a stretch, there's no clearcut way to draw another black majority district in GA the way there is in AL (I'm not even sure what the basis of a VRA lawsuit in GA is).
-In South Carolina it's similar, the way black people in SC are spread out makes it very hard to create a 2nd black opportunity district. SC is more of a partisan gerrymander than a racial gerrymander, so there's no real remedy under the VRA.
-As I said before about TN, there's no basis for a VRA lawsuit about Nashville even if the AL ruling was fully resolved in favor of the Dems. Davidson County is only 26% black and it's majority white; there's nowhere near enough minority voters there to argue that a VRA opportunity district is warranted. It's a partisan gerrymander, not a racial one.
-Louisiana is the closest thing there is to another Alabama situation but I the black population there isn't as compact as it is in Alabama, but more importantly it's a fifth circuit state, so it's never going to get a favorable lower court ruling the way the Alabama VRA suit did.
-In MO the decision not to crack Kansas City won't be impacted by this. They might still end up doing it, but it won't be VRA related. The reason they haven't cracked KC is because of selfish incumbents who don't want to absorb blue areas into their district. Personally I don't understand why the state legislators give a shit about what incumbents want, if I was a state legislator I would create as many districts for my party as possible and would tell selfish incumbents to fuck off and retire if going from a D +30 to a D +20 district is so traumatizing for them.
-I'm not familiar with the basis of the DOJ's VRA lawsuit in Texas, but I don't expect it to go anywhere.

A state court is never going to rule on the VRA so I'm not sure what you're talking about with the state court throwing a map out for not having VRA protected seats. The VRA is a federal law, any lawsuit bringing a cause of action under the VRA needs to be brought in federal court. If a plaintiff tried suing under the VRA in state court because it's a state where the state court is more liberal, the defendant would just have it removed to federal court as the proper venue.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Alabama was a unique situation in that it was the only state where you could easily draw another relatively compact majority black district. Even if SCOTUS ruled the other way, it wouldn't have mattered. Also keep in mind, this AL ruling is just about whether a stay should be granted, SCOTUS hasn't ruled on the merits yet but for the sake of argument if it did...

-The current Georgia map already passed, and the VRA lawsuit in Georgia was always a stretch, there's no clearcut way to draw another black majority district in GA the way there is in AL (I'm not even sure what the basis of a VRA lawsuit in GA is).
-In South Carolina it's similar, the way black people in SC are spread out makes it very hard to create a 2nd black opportunity district. SC is more of a partisan gerrymander than a racial gerrymander, so there's no real remedy under the VRA.
-As I said before about TN, there's no basis for a VRA lawsuit about Nashville even if the AL ruling was fully resolved in favor of the Dems. Davidson County is only 26% black and it's majority white; there's nowhere near enough minority voters there to argue that a VRA opportunity district is warranted. It's a partisan gerrymander, not a racial one.
-Louisiana is the closest thing there is to another Alabama situation but I the black population there isn't as compact as it is in Alabama, but more importantly it's a fifth circuit state, so it's never going to get a favorable lower court ruling the way the Alabama VRA suit did.
-In MO the decision not to crack Kansas City won't be impacted by this. They might still end up doing it, but it won't be VRA related. The reason they haven't cracked KC is because of selfish incumbents who don't want to absorb blue areas into their district. Personally I don't understand why the state legislators give a shit about what incumbents want, if I was a state legislator I would create as many districts for my party as possible and would tell selfish incumbents to fuck off and retire if going from a D +30 to a D +20 district is so traumatizing for them.
-I'm not familiar with the basis of the DOJ's VRA lawsuit in Texas, but I don't expect it to go anywhere.

A state court is never going to rule on the VRA so I'm not sure what you're talking about with the state court throwing a map out for not having VRA protected seats. The VRA is a federal law, any lawsuit bringing a cause of action under the VRA needs to be brought in federal court. If a plaintiff tried suing under the VRA in state court because it's a state where the state court is more liberal, the defendant would just have it removed to federal court as the proper venue.
Good analysis overall :tu

I know VRA is a 1965 federal law not state, but for example it's why Mitch McConnell rejected the idea of cracking Louisville in KY 3-4 different ways to create all red districts. He knew even if it held up in state court it might be rejected in federal by the VRA.

Kansas City area like Nashville isn't black enough and Tennessee provides a good blue print there. Obviously 10 years ago this wouldn't have been possible because Missouri was too blue-dog Dem like Iowa and Wisconsin back then, but now it is. You're right about the selfish incumbents though. I don't think though that cracking a non-VRA-protected metro 3 or 4 ways all of a sudden is a dummymander though, even in a wave year. It's a smart gerrymander and that's that. Pritzker did it in Illinois, Hochul did it in New York, the GOP did it in Tennessee, the GOP should do it in Missouri. It sucks, but it is what it is.

The Democrats will still likely gain about 3-4 net positive seats in this redistricting cycle but it probably won't matter until 2026 in terms of the House majority. For example, the New Mexico "dummymander" could net the GOP 2 out of 3 seats the next 2 cycles, and then they get replaced by Democrats in 2026. Similar for Nevada. Similar for Michigan's swing districts. Etc.

[Will Hunting]

Good analysis overall :tu

I know VRA is a 1965 federal law not state, but for example it's why Mitch McConnell rejected the idea of cracking Louisville in KY 3-4 different ways to create all red districts. He knew even if it held up in state court it might be rejected in federal by the VRA.

Kansas City area like Nashville isn't black enough and Tennessee provides a good blue print there. Obviously 10 years ago this wouldn't have been possible because Missouri was too blue-dog Dem like Iowa and Wisconsin back then, but now it is. You're right about the selfish incumbents though. I don't think though that cracking a non-VRA-protected metro 3 or 4 ways all of a sudden is a dummymander though, even in a wave year. It's a smart gerrymander and that's that. Pritzker did it in Illinois, Hochul did it in New York, the GOP did it in Tennessee, the GOP should do it in Missouri. It sucks, but it is what it is.

The Democrats will still likely gain about 3-4 net positive seats in this redistricting cycle but it probably won't matter until 2026 in terms of the House majority. For example, the New Mexico "dummymander" could net the GOP 2 out of 3 seats the next 2 cycles, and then they get replaced by Democrats in 2026. Similar for Nevada. Similar for Michigan's swing districts. Etc.
That had nothing to do with why McConnell didn't want Louisville cracked at all. There'd be absolutely no basis for a VRA lawsuit if Louisville gets cracked. Jefferson county is 60+% white and <25% black. The Louisville district has no protection under the VRA; McConnell was said keep Louisville together because he's from there and thinks Louisville should have its own seats, even if there was a way to chop it up. My guess is he also wanted to play the bad guy so the house reps in neighboring districts who didn't want to absorb Louisville wouldn't have to worry about it.

You're grossly overestimating how much of an impact the VRA has on redistricting.

[Millennial_Messiah]

That had nothing to do with why McConnell didn't want Louisville cracked at all. There'd be absolutely no basis for a VRA lawsuit if Louisville gets cracked. Jefferson county is 60+% white and <25% black. The Louisville district has no protection under the VRA; McConnell was said keep Louisville together because he's from there and thinks Louisville should have its own seats, even if there was a way to chop it up. My guess is he also wanted to play the bad guy so the house reps in neighboring districts who didn't want to absorb Louisville wouldn't have to worry about it.

You're grossly overestimating how much of an impact the VRA has on redistricting.

Oh there's definitely ways to make Kentucky all red, you crack Louisville 3-4 times without dummymandering. You make sure Lexington is pooled in with large swaths of rural hick eastern Kentucky. It's not particularly hard.

The only reason the Pritzker Illinois sort of dummymander of cracking Chicago all those directions actually works in the Democrats' favor is because the suburbs are vast and generally very blue just as the city is. That kind of map would have been a (R) majority map in 1990 for instance, since the Chicago suburbs were so much redder back then.


Missouri would be another easy state to make 7-1 (R) without dummymandering. The 4th (R+37), 6th (R+41), and 8th (R+62!) district all get an even third of that KC blue district, you call the old 8th district the new 5th district, and you make the new 8th district out of parts of the old 4th and old 8th district down to the boot heel.

You can still end up with 7 (R + 25 or better) safe (R) seats in Missouri that way. Of course you're not going to touch STL or Memphis in TN for multiple reasons... (a) it violates the VRA and (b), more importantly, it would be a pretty obvious dummymander.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/missouri/senate_amendment_3/

[Will Hunting]

Oh there's definitely ways to make Kentucky all red, you crack Louisville 3-4 times without dummymandering. You make sure Lexington is pooled in with large swaths of rural hick eastern Kentucky. It's not particularly hard.

The only reason the Pritzker Illinois sort of dummymander of cracking Chicago all those directions actually works in the Democrats' favor is because the suburbs are vast and generally very blue just as the city is. That kind of map would have been a (R) majority map in 1990 for instance, since the Chicago suburbs were so much redder back then.


Missouri would be another easy state to make 7-1 (R) without dummymandering. The 4th (R+37), 6th (R+41), and 8th (R+62!) district all get an even third of that KC blue district, you call the old 8th district the new 5th district, and you make the new 8th district out of parts of the old 4th and old 8th district down to the boot heel.

You can still end up with 7 (R + 25 or better) safe (R) seats in Missouri that way. Of course you're not going to touch STL or Memphis in TN for multiple reasons... (a) it violates the VRA and (b), more importantly, it would be a pretty obvious dummymander.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/missouri/senate_amendment_3/
I didn't say there wasn't a way to make Kentucky all red. McConnell didn't want them to crack Louisville though for various reasons, most of which weren't really political. He has a soft spot for Louisville because he's from there so he cares about the city having representation, and he more or less owns the KY GOP so if he says don't crack Louisville, the state leg is going to listen to him.

Again I'm not sure what you're saying. Missouri would be an easy 7-1 gerrymander and Indiana would have also been an easy 8-1 gerrymander by cracking Gary, but the challenge in both instances are selfish incumbents / state legislators not wanting to face backlash from a completely fucked up looking map. It has absolutely nothing to do with the VRA though; Cleaver's KC seat isn't VRA protected. If it was really the VRA preventing a 7-1 map in MO, the state leg would simply pass the 7-1 map and force Democrats to sue over it, but the reason they don't is because keeping KC intact has absolutely nothing to do with the VRA.

Even in Illinois, the Pritzkermander wasn't as effective as it could have been because Bobby Rush bitched and moaned about his district going from D+45 to D+40. They could have moved some of the deep blue precincts in his district to IL-06 to make IL-06 a much safer seat, but they didn't because he threw a hissyfit. Of course after doing that he fucking retired, so like you and I have been saying, letting selfish incumbents dictate redistricting is just really stupid.

Also in NY, the DCCC & Mark Elias submitted a proposal for NY-11 to go into Manhattan rather than Brooklyn which would have made it a totally safe D seat, but fat fuck Jerry Nadler became grumpy about having to give some of his district up even though he's probably close to retirement and still would have been safe.

Prior to 2010, gerrymandering was largely done to protect incumbents and it didn't play THAT big of a role. Project REDMAP is when completely carving up a state to create additional seats for one party really became a thing.

[Will Hunting]

This list has all the districts with VRA protections and implications.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_majority-minority_United_States_congressional_districts

The districts you're complaining about the GOP not cracking (KC, Louisville, etc.) don't have and have never had VRA protections.

[Will Hunting]

Damn I didn't realize that the 6-1 Alabama map was originally pre-cleared by the DOJ in 2011 (when Holder was AG).

That's definitely where this case was lost; can't really expect SCOTUS to be MORE progressive than Eric Holder's justice department.

1491045435494252545

[boutons_deux]

SCotus augments their Bona fides as extreme right-wing racists

lifelong racist Roberts hides with the progressives to protect his personal Legacy

[Millennial_Messiah]

Damn I didn't realize that the 6-1 Alabama map was originally pre-cleared by the DOJ in 2011 (when Holder was AG).

That's definitely where this case was lost; can't really expect SCOTUS to be MORE progressive than Eric Holder's justice department.

1491045435494252545

By that logic, can't they just make only one majority black district in say, Georgia and call it a day? Just an example


SCotus augments their Bona fides does extreme right-wing racists

lifelong racist Roberts hides with the progressives to protect his personal Legacy
You're just a biased extremist. No use dealing with you. Same for the Qanon'ers


This list has all the districts with VRA protections and implications.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_majority-minority_United_States_congressional_districts

The districts you're complaining about the GOP not cracking (KC, Louisville, etc.) don't have and have never had VRA protections.
Okay, so yeah Indiana should have cracked up the NW blue district and McConnell was wrong. I also have no earthly fuckin' idea as to why Omaha wasn't cracked. That one is the most meaningful because it factors into presidential elections, too.

[Will Hunting]

By that logic, can't they just make only one majority black district in say, Georgia and call it a day? Just an example
Well no....GA has a lot more black people than Alabama does, and the black population in GA is very compact. There's easily enough black people in southwest GA for 1 blackbelt district + enough black people in the ATL area for 3 black VRA districts. IMO the VRA actually hurts Democrats in GA though so the GOP would never even try to crack 1 of the 4 VRA districts, it more or less requires that the ATL area gets drawn with the bluest precincts packed into 3 VRA districts.



Okay, so yeah Indiana should have cracked up the NW blue district and McConnell was wrong. I also have no earthly fuckin' idea as to why Omaha wasn't cracked. That one is the most meaningful because it factors into presidential elections, too.
Omaha wasn't cracked but they definitely made it redder than a compact Omaha district would be. It's Biden +6 RN with a lot of ancestral down ballot Republicans, and a compact Omaha district would be closer to Biden +9-10%. In that case they were worried about a dummymander; NE-01 is only a Trump +14 districts with a lot of areas that shifted hard left from '16 to '20; they didn't want to create 2 Omaha districts that are winnable for Dems in a wave year, plus Don Bacon is an overperformer and should easily hold a Biden +6 seat.

It's not exactly gonna become a blue state, but I've actually met the head of the Nebraska Dems and she's very sharp. Knows how to win rural voters better than your usual incompetent state party chair and has definitely made inroads with Omaha + the Omaha suburbs. It made sense not to give her a second competitive district.

Whatever McConnell's reason for not cracking Louisville was (I doubt it really was the reason he gave about muh sweet Louisville), I'm sure it made sense. One common denominator is the cities that weren't cracked (KC, Gary, Louisville, Omaha, etc.) are all on a state border, which just makes them geographically harder to crack than cities like Nashville, OKC & SLC that are surrounded by red areas in all 4 directions. You usually want to slice a blue county like that into 3 districts to avoid a dummymander, and when it's on a state border there's no way to do that without it looking like an "extreme gerrymander" which even the Roberts Court says could still be actionable in federal court.

[Will Hunting]

SCotus augments their Bona fides as extreme right-wing racists

lifelong racist Roberts hides with the progressives to protect his personal Legacy
Roberts didn't even rule on the merits; he just said a stay wasn't warranted.

Chances are, Roberts and one of the other conservatives switch places when the case it fully heard on the merits to make it seem like there's actual deliberation and minds can be changed.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Well no....GA has a lot more black people than Alabama does, and the black population in GA is very compact. There's easily enough black people in southwest GA for 1 blackbelt district + enough black people in the ATL area for 3 black VRA districts. IMO the VRA actually hurts Democrats in GA though so the GOP would never even try to crack 1 of the 4 VRA districts, it more or less requires that the ATL area gets drawn with the bluest precincts packed into 3 VRA districts.



Omaha wasn't cracked but they definitely made it redder than a compact Omaha district would be. It's Biden +6 RN with a lot of ancestral down ballot Republicans, and a compact Omaha district would be closer to Biden +9-10%. In that case they were worried about a dummymander; NE-01 is only a Trump +14 districts with a lot of areas that shifted hard left from '16 to '20; they didn't want to create 2 Omaha districts that are winnable for Dems in a wave year, plus Don Bacon is an overperformer and should easily hold a Biden +6 seat.

It's not exactly gonna become a blue state, but I've actually met the head of the Nebraska Dems and she's very sharp. Knows how to win rural voters better than your usual incompetent state party chair and has definitely made inroads with Omaha + the Omaha suburbs. It made sense not to give her a second competitive district.

Whatever McConnell's reason for not cracking Louisville was (I doubt it really was the reason he gave about muh sweet Louisville), I'm sure it made sense. One common denominator is the cities that weren't cracked (KC, Gary, Louisville, Omaha, etc.) are all on a state border, which just makes them geographically harder to crack than cities like Nashville, OKC & SLC that are surrounded by red areas in all 4 directions. You usually want to slice a blue county like that into 3 districts to avoid a dummymander, and when it's on a state border there's no way to do that without it looking like an "extreme gerrymander" which even the Roberts Court says could still be actionable in federal court.
On GA, yes there are a lot of blacks in the Atlanta metro but for being the bluest county in the state, DeKalb County isn't as black as you think. Once you get past East Atlanta (within Atlanta city limit) it more or less resembles Washtenaw county Michigan. Huge university, bunch of suburban whites and yes a couple black majority towns like they have in Ypsilanti, MI. DeKalb also has a lot of non-black minorities like they have in Ann Arbor because of Emory University and Healthcare system being there. It's a pretty mixed bag. Not so sure you can't make an entire district on just that county alone and not necessarily a VRA one. Just random thoughts there.

As far as Omaha goes, the simplest solution is to draw roughly three horizontal maps in Nebraska from west to east with roughly equal population, giving each of NE-01, NE-02 and NE-03 an even chunk of Omaha while also cracking Lincoln a couple ways to be safe. No dummymander there. NE-03 is currently one of the reddest districts in the entire USA so you have a lot of play-doh to work with there. It wouldn't look like an "extreme gerrymander" in that case either, because it'd be 3 roughly proportional rectangles with only a few abnormalities in shape.

[Will Hunting]

On GA, yes there are a lot of blacks in the Atlanta metro but for being the bluest county in the state, DeKalb County isn't as black as you think. Once you get past East Atlanta (within Atlanta city limit) it more or less resembles Washtenaw county Michigan. Huge university, bunch of suburban whites and yes a couple black majority towns like they have in Ypsilanti, MI. DeKalb also has a lot of non-black minorities like they have in Ann Arbor because of Emory University and Healthcare system being there. It's a pretty mixed bag. Not so sure you can't make an entire district on just that county alone and not necessarily a VRA one. Just random thoughts there.

As far as Omaha goes, the simplest solution is to draw roughly three horizontal maps in Nebraska from west to east with roughly equal population, giving each of NE-01, NE-02 and NE-03 an even chunk of Omaha while also cracking Lincoln a couple ways to be safe. No dummymander there. NE-03 is currently one of the reddest districts in the entire USA so you have a lot of play-doh to work with there. It wouldn't look like an "extreme gerrymander" in that case either, because it'd be 3 roughly proportional rectangles with only a few abnormalities in shape.
I forgot to mention the Nebraska constitution is weird with its rules around cloture, it basically gives the Democrats power to indefinitely filibuster any proposed legislation map. I think they actually proposed a map that splits Douglas County two ways and it got filibustered.

Even on top of that, if you were to slice Nebraska up perfectly, it'd make every district a Trump +18ish district. Sounds safe until you factor in how quickly rural Nebraska is losing population vs. the Omaha area adding population and trending blue. Couple that with how pissed off the incumbents would be, the nightmare that election administration in Douglas County would be & the general public outrage that you'd have in and around Omaha if it got chopped up, it's pretty obvious why it didn't get split. It's easy to gerrymander areas with poor people and minorities that vote Democrat, gerrymandering a bunch of suburban wine moms who can flood congressional campaigns with small dollar donations is a different ball game.

[Thread]

I forgot to mention the Nebraska constitution is weird with its rules around cloture, it basically gives the Democrats power to indefinitely filibuster any proposed legislation map. I think they actually proposed a map that splits Douglas County two ways and it got filibustered.

Even on top of that, if you were to slice Nebraska up perfectly, it'd make every district a Trump +18ish district. Sounds safe until you factor in how quickly rural Nebraska is losing population vs. the Omaha area adding population and trending blue. Couple that with how pissed off the incumbents would be, the nightmare that election administration in Douglas County would be & the general public outrage that you'd have in and around Omaha if it got chopped up, it's pretty obvious why it didn't get split. It's easy to gerrymander areas with poor people and minorities that vote Democrat, gerrymandering a bunch of suburban wine moms who can flood congressional campaigns with small dollar donations is a different ball game.

Christ, that old load a shit has been dragged around for decades.

[Millennial_Messiah]

If Kansas had the votes to override a Laura Kelly veto, I have no idea why they didn't create 4 safe (R) seats by cracking the Kansas-side KC metro?

The GOP has done an absolutely stupid job this cycle in a lot of fronts.

[Will Hunting]

If Kansas had the votes to override a Laura Kelly veto, I have no idea why they didn't create 4 safe (R) seats by cracking the Kansas-side KC metro?

The GOP has done an absolutely stupid job this cycle in a lot of fronts.

Extremely partisan Dem state supreme court majority. There were 3 justices who waited Brownback out and retired once Kelly won, I think she's appointed like 5 of KS's 7 supreme court justices.

Also, once again, incumbents don't want to absorb tons of blue areas, especially educated white suburbs in places like KS that are getting rapidly bluer.

[RandomGuy]

If Kansas had the votes to override a Laura Kelly veto, I have no idea why they didn't create 4 safe (R) seats by cracking the Kansas-side KC metro?

The GOP has done an absolutely stupid job this cycle in a lot of fronts.

Sooooo after all is said and done, Democrats have finished doing to the GOP, what the GOP has done for a decade.

... the howls of protest from Republicans in blue states rings a tad... hollow at this point.

Pick your cliche.

Hoist by their own petard.
Cooked in their own sauce.
et cetera.

Makes me wonder what happens when Democrats get some strategy to retake the judiciary from the Federalist society.

[boutons_deux]

Pennsylvania Supreme Court court picks national Dems’ map as new congressional plan

a map (https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::c2d737ae-ab94-4842-a465-e3f331508082) submitted by voters backed by a national group aligned with Democrats to be the commonwealth’s next congressional map.

the state Supreme Court ordered 4-3 that the map, known as the Carter plan, be adopted as soon as possible.

https://www.rawstory.com/bank/pennsylvania-supreme-court-court-picks-national-dems-map-as-new-congressional-plan/

[Will Hunting]

Dems got the map they wanted in PA, and it'll last for a full decade.

Dems also got the 7-7 map they wanted in NC, but that probably won't even last through 2024.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Dems got the map they wanted in PA, and it'll last for a full decade.

Dems also got the 7-7 map they wanted in NC, but that probably won't even last through 2024.

8-6 most likely in 2022, as that swing district (R+3) will swing red in a red wave year in 2022.

When (most likely, since it's a red wave year) the GOP retakes the NC state supreme court, they will Pritzkermander the state into oblivion before 2024, something like 12-2, and frankly I wouldn't blame them. Roy Cooper can't even override or veto it because he limited the power of the governor in terms of redistricting back in 1996. :lol (Ohio will elect more solid Republicans to their supreme court and re-gerrymander their map by 2024 as well.)

This temporary 2022 NC (and likely Ohio) map will help mitigate the losses in the US House in 2022 for the Democrats for sure, but it will bite them in the ass long term including in 2024.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/north-carolina/

"
While this map is a victory for Democrats, it could be a short-lived one. The remedial map is only in place for 2022 (https://myfox8.com/your-local-election-hq/today-is-the-day-for-court-to-choose-new-election-maps-in-north-carolina-how-will-it-play-out/), meaning a new map will need to come together before the 2024 election. And while the state Supreme Court currently has a narrow Democratic majority, Republicans could retake the court (https://www.carolinacoastonline.com/regional/article_a27c0c8c-e034-11eb-844f-0fa1b104e184.html) in 2022. Assuming they also hold onto their majorities in the state legislature, Republicans would then have a free hand to draw the map that will be used for the rest of the decade, as Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper has no veto power over redistricting legislation.
"

[Millennial_Messiah]

As for Pennsylvania, that Connor Lamb west-of-Pittsburgh district (he's running for senate) is going to flip red as the area is trending red and he was a strong incumbent leaving and the trend in the northeast part of the state is red as well, so the long term equilibrium in PA is likely 10-7 (R).

[Millennial_Messiah]

GOP victorious in Ohio, passed basically the same gerrymandered map as before, still drawing out Marcy Kaptur in NW Ohio; will be valid until 2025, and by then the courts will inevitably be more right leaning because of the 2022 red wave and the 2024 lean-R or tilt-R environment, so even if 2026 is to be a blue wave election year it probably won't matter too much in that state.

The only good news for the Democrats is that Steve Chabot's Cincinnati district is still blue, as the court had ruled in the past that that city could not be cracked. Maybe he survives 2022 in a likely-R environment but loses in 2024 in a lean or tilt R environment, or at the very worst loses for sure in a potential likely-D environment in 2026 if the Ohio courts don't take a hard right wing turn before then.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/ohio/ Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)

[Will Hunting]

GOP victorious in Ohio, passed basically the same gerrymandered map as before, still drawing out Marcy Kaptur in NW Ohio; will be valid until 2025, and by then the courts will inevitably be more right leaning because of the 2022 red wave and the 2024 lean-R or tilt-R environment, so even if 2026 is to be a blue wave election year it probably won't matter too much in that state.

The only good news for the Democrats is that Steve Chabot's Cincinnati district is still blue, as the court had ruled in the past that that city could not be cracked. Maybe he survives 2022 in a likely-R environment but loses in 2024 in a lean or tilt R environment, or at the very worst loses for sure in a potential likely-D environment in 2026 if the Ohio courts don't take a hard right wing turn before then.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/ohio/ Will Hunting (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=17032)
That map still needs the supreme court’s approval and there’s a less than 10% chance they sign off on it.

[Millennial_Messiah]

That map still needs the supreme court’s approval and there’s a less than 10% chance they sign off on it.

We'll see. The NC legislature appealed to the SCOTUS that the state court system shouldn't be allowed to override state legislatures. The SCOTUS is fresh off hearing and voting in favor of the Alabama GOP case. That NC case, if the SCOTUS were to rule in favor of the NC GOP, would be an enormous staré decisis going forward and a devastating blow to state courts and Democrats in general across many states, especially critical states, including Ohio, Florida (to an extent), and possibly the state legislature's case in PA as well, even though the PA map isn't really that bad.

It's crunch time in the redistricting cycle right now and the victor of the 2021 redistricting cycle will hinge on getting either Kavanaugh (likely) or Roberts (less likely) to join the 4 solid R's in the SCOTUS to rule in favor of the GOP in the North Carolina case.