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 cons utional 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 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 cons utional requirements are very vague and this map isn't the "extreme" 23-3 gerrymander that the DCCC wanted.
Damn, potentially another W for Dems if the liberal PA supreme court hijacks the redistricting process.
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.
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:
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.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:
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%.
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.
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) in bent 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) in bents like the Democrat gerrymander team in NY is doing to (R) in bents 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.
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.
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 in bent the same way a 5-2 map would in Alabama. If drawing out an in bent 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 in bents because it wouldn't have made sense; the geography for Republicans in Texas is terrible so they were focused on protecting their in bents 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.
Congress mandating independent commissions would potentially be uncons utional, 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 cons utions 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 cons utions 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.
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.
you probably already knew this, but they hijacked it
I expect a 6 D - 6 R - 5 Compe ive 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.
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.
and yet 538 Redistricting HQ site is showing NC original gerrymander map as "Approved" status.
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 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.
What Republicans refuse to acknowledge is that prior to 2010, gerrymandering was very disorganized and localized, it was largely done to protect in bents 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.
It was approved by the state leg.
now it’s been overturned by the state Supreme Court.
keep coping though.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
