raw power politics begets more of the same
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
moar racial gerrymanders
damn, i might live in an Austin based district now.
been a long time.
6 is just as insane. Covers all of Ellis county and then leaks up into northwest Dallas County to cover Irving.
Not even trying to hide it.
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.
Yeah the Dems should still sue the 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.
The primary for that seat is going to be . Please don’t vote for Wendy Davis, Mike Siegel is the best choice.
Yep, playing defense instead of offense.
Hopefully TX-28 is blue enough for that lazy Cuellar to get primaried.
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 all get redder.
I voted for him last time, no reason not to again.
Which state legislate is in control of gerrymandering Michigan? someone please let me know... I appreciate DoK's unbiased approach to this thread btw
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.
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 cons utional amendment, imo
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 in bents than expanding its map. I still expect the Dems in IL/NY/MD to go medieval.
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.
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.
GA-02 survives another decade. Hopefully the Dems control GA by then and can keep it intact.
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.
what about urban? and wealth?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)