Official 2023-24 Redistricting Thread

[clambake]

Lol

[Will Hunting]

another wild card I left out was that there's been some rumor that Zeldin might run for Santos's seat, in which case it'd be a hold instead of a flip.

Not against Suozzi when that wasn't Zeldin's old seat and Suozzi effectively has an in bency advantage running in his old district. That rumor (wherever you heard it) is also bull , Zeldin already announced a PAC he's formed that he's focused on.

I didn't mention Alaska but I assume Peltola could lose if it's 1 vs 1 rather than 1 vs 2? Even with ranked choice voting, Sarah Palin and Trump really screwed Nick Begich last year imo

That doesn't make any sense. There was ranked choice voting; if all of Begich's voters ranked Palin 2nd (or visa versa), then Peltola would have lost. A large part of the GOP base in AK found either Palin and/or Begich to be repulsive human beings and ranked Peltola ahead of one or both of them. Don Young's entire family hates Begich because he tried to coup Young when he was a staffer for him and they all endorsed Peltola because of it.

Don Young was a legend in Alaska politics so Peltola having an endorsement from everyone close to Young as well as Murkowski was a huge deal. She even got close 50% in the first round of the run-off, and now she's an in bent.

The bigger concern is whether Peltola runs again or retires, but she has the seat as long as she wants it. She was popular before and now her husband died in a plane crash, and that's not exactly something she'd lose votes over.

[MultiTroll]

Californians Moving to Arizona Could Upend 2024 Election (msn.com)

Hi Dale and Ducks

[Thread]

Californians Moving to Arizona Could Upend 2024 Election (msn.com)

Hi Dale and Ducks

That's how you got it turned last election, they came over because of the wild fires and never went back.

[MultiTroll]

That's how you got it turned last election, they came over because of the wild fires and never went back.

Bring hot chicks and lib voting to uptight corrupt GOP AZ.

Love it.

[HemisfairArena]

Bring hot chicks and lib voting to uptight corrupt GOP AZ.

Love it.

this gullible thought Putin had a heart attack,,,,lmao

[MultiTroll]

this gullible thought Putin had a heart attack,,,,lmao

Hey Parrott Team 4,,,,
Nope. Simply posted the article and raised the question.

Hasn't been proven nor unproven Numb Nutts.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

New NC and AL maps are official:

https://www.270towin.com/2024-house-...house-forecast

[Will Hunting]

This is where redistricting changes for 2024 stand, ranked in order of significance:

New York - the COA is set to hear the lawsuit in November. If the new liberal majority actually lets Dems gerrymander, they net 4-5 seats. This is a coin flip imo.
North Carolina - It's not a matter of if but when the maps get redrawn, which will net Republicans 3-4 house seats.
Ohio - Map is going to remain as is, and I think all 5 Dem in bents hold their seat in 2024.
New Mexico - Even though it's a liberal state supreme court, it's not overly hackish and I think it forces a new map that nets the Rs a seat.
Utah - Similar to New Mexico, it's a supreme court that's conservative but not hackish at all. I think it forces a redraw w/ a blue Salt Lake City seat.
Georgia - pending VRA lawsuit in Federal court. I still think this one is a longshot but my understanding is that Georgia's lawyers have grossly mismanaged the trial so far.
Alabama - Dems are guaranteed to net a seat now.
Louisiana - Similar lawsuit as what Dems filed in AL that now has a real chance at success since SCOTUS is clearly upholding VRA Section 2, but I still think a 2nd black district in Louisiana isn't as clear as one in AL.
Florida - The Florida GOP has (strangely) already admitted that the current map violates state law, and it's banking on a ruling that said state law violates the (U.S.) cons ution. Even though the FL Supreme Court is hackish, they don't have standing to rule something violates the US cons ution, and idk how they get around Florida admitting that gutting Al Lawson's district violates state law.

UPDATE
New York - oral argument set for November 15th, but both sides seem convinced the court is going to let the NY Dems redraw, and the temporary justice sitting for the justice who recused is a partisan Dem.
North Carolina - New map final, Rs pick up 3.5 seats.
Ohio - Map stays as-is
New Mexico - Map stays as-is
Utah - It's been 3 months since oral argument took place. I think there's a good chance the state supreme court forces a new map, but idk if it happens before the 2024 election.
Georgia - The district court ruled that a 5th VRA district is required but I still don't expect anything - it was an Obama appointed judge and I don't see the 11th circuit upholding his ruling (I also think the ruling is wrong on the merits).
Alabama - The AL01 and AL02 in bents are officially running against each other in AL01, the new VRA seat is open and it's a guaranteed Dem pickup.
Louisiana - I don't really understand what has/hasn't been established in this case, and it might result in a new Dem seat, but the 5th circuit is def. gonna let Louisiana drag it out past 2024.
Florida - No real update. The Florida Supreme Court is very hackish but the defendants have already admitted their map violates the state cons ution and I think they were counting a lot on Kavanaugh having a change of heart re: VRA Section 2.

My probability-weighted redistricting gains from each state:
NY: D +3 seats
OH: D +0 seats
NM: R +0 seats
NC: R +3.5 seats
UT: D +0.25 seats
GA: D +0.1 seats
AL: D +1 seat
LA: D +0.1 seats
FL: D +0.75 seats

[Will Hunting]

My breakdown of how NY would be impacted by a Dem redraw:

NY-01 - IMO LaLota could still hold this seat even though it would definitely get bluer. Probably a toss-up race on a new map (right now it's safe R in 2024).
NY-03 - Guaranteed flip if Santos is the nominee and/or if Suozzi is the Dem nominee, so redistricting doesn't really change the outcome.
NY-04 - This seat was actually redder on the Dems' gerrymandered map than it was on the court-issued map. I doubt the partisanship changes much; it'll be a Biden +15%ish seat either way.
NY-11 - I think they'd make this Biden +9, but Malliotakis is a great in bent who'd I'd almost say is still favored. I think she outran Trump by like 15-20% last year.
NY-17 - Autoflip if they redraw. The Dems would make this seat safe blue and Mike Lawler would be DOA.
NY-19 - Maybe not an autoflip but pretty close. Molinaro is mediocre electorally and he doesn't hide the fact he's a partisan hack the way Lawler/D'Esposito do. He doesn't have the appeal to win a Biden +10% seat.
NY-22 - Also an autoflip if it's redrawn. The Dems would put Ithaca and Syracuse in the same seat and the R in bent doesn't have much in terms of cross party appeal.

[Will Hunting]

5th circuit upholds lower court ruling requiring a 2nd black district in Louisiana before the 2024 election.

Still not sure that this'll actually happen, but the ruling is a surprise.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

5th circuit upholds lower court ruling requiring a 2nd black district in Louisiana before the 2024 election.

Still not sure that this'll actually happen, but the ruling is a surprise.

Seems like the Dems best bet might be to go all in on the House for 2024 and punt away Biden/leave the White House to die for 2024. Flush out Trump's final term and bust their ass to get a House majority in 2024 and 2026 to essentially nerf his agenda (while spending like in swing senate races to minimize Senate losses outside of WV/Tester/Brown), blame whatever happens between 2025-2028 on Trump, and try to get an actual authentic trifecta by Jan. 20, 2029, led by someone like Newsom or Whitmer for President 2028. Flush the old Democrat guard out and get some real more competent Gen X moderate-progressives in charge. Also, if Trump wins in 2024, the Dems have to be favored to win the Presidency in 2028. Where are the MAGA people going to go once Trump is term limited?

[Will Hunting]

Seems like the Dems best bet might be to go all in on the House for 2024 and punt away Biden/leave the White House to die for 2024. Flush out Trump's final term and bust their ass to get a House majority in 2024 and 2026 to essentially nerf his agenda (while spending like in swing senate races to minimize Senate losses outside of WV/Tester/Brown), blame whatever happens between 2025-2028 on Trump, and try to get an actual authentic trifecta by Jan. 20, 2029, led by someone like Newsom or Whitmer for President 2028. Flush the old Democrat guard out and get some real more competent Gen X moderate-progressives in charge. Also, if Trump wins in 2024, the Dems have to be favored to win the Presidency in 2028. Where are the MAGA people going to go once Trump is term limited?

This strategy wouldn't actually be a terrible idea if not for judges. Giving Trump another 2-4 years to confirm judges with an R senate majority would mean 30+ years of extremely conservative courts.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

This strategy wouldn't actually be a terrible idea if not for judges. Giving Trump another 2-4 years to confirm judges with an R senate majority would mean 30+ years of extremely conservative courts.

1) The point is, you minimize Senate losses. With money spent properly in some states and in bency advantages in others, even in an unfavorable map the Dems could very well retain 48 Senate seats in 2024, even if many of those states go red at the top of the ticket because Biden sucks.

2) The judge issue isn't as big of a deal now that Breyer is off the court and your 3 Democrat justices aren't retiring any time soon. Even if Trump gets Thomas and possibly even Alito to retire, there's no chance in their replacements will be as conservative as they are... chances are, they will fall more in line with Trump's first three who doesn't always see eye to eye with the conservative side. As for Roberts, even if he retires and is replaced by a more solidly conservative vote, that's pretty much it. The SCOTUS is something the Democrats will have to contend with long term in terms of checks and balances but with partisan hardliners being replaced by conservative Trump appointees that are more moderate on certain issues, like Kavanaugh's VRA decisions to this point, they will be able to iron out deals.

3) There's a solid probability the Democrats will be able to flip Susan Collins' seat in Maine in 2026 with an in bent Trump, and who knows, maybe the in bent GOP senator in Alaska retires in 2026 and Mary Peltola runs. Maybe Thom Tillis retires and makes that an interesting open race. Lots of moving parts, and the Democrats really aren't on defense much in 2026 outside of holding Ossoff's and Peters' seats, which shouldn't be too hard with an in bent GOP president.

4) The Dems could make further Senate gains in 2028, particularly if Ron Johnson retires.

Either way, the Senate and the SCOTUS will be the Dems' long term disadvantages, while the House is looking more and more to be favorable to Democrats long term, unless SCOTUS somehow changes their mind on VRA Section 2 at some point but they have had multiple chances in the past year or two and haven't so I doubt they ever will.

[ElNono]

5th circuit upholds lower court ruling requiring a 2nd black district in Louisiana before the 2024 election.

Still not sure that this'll actually happen, but the ruling is a surprise.

It actually ties the district court hands until January 2024, basically allowing the Legislature to delay this until that time, despite that the Legislature made no such request.

It explicitly says the district court cannot proceed with anything until then (which means it can't do remedial maps either).

I think the gambit here seems to be to delay this long enough such that the maps can't be used in time for the 2024 election, but we'll see.

[Will Hunting]

It actually ties the district court hands until January 2024, basically allowing the Legislature to delay this until that time, despite that the Legislature made no such request.

It explicitly says the district court cannot proceed with anything until then (which means it can't do remedial maps either).

I think the gambit here seems to be to delay this long enough such that the maps can't be used in time for the 2024 election, but we'll see.

Yes but it could have gone further and completely overturned the district court saying that a new map isn’t needed prior to 2024 but it didn’t.

[ElNono]

Yes but it could have gone further and completely overturned the district court saying that a new map isn’t needed prior to 2024 but it didn’t.

But because of the SCOTUS Arizona ruling, the plaintiffs would've gone to the SCOTUS and had that likely overturned. While that appeals was in place, the district court could've started to create a remedial map in case the Legislature decided either not to change the maps or the changes were bad again.

I mean, I don't think the decision per-se is bad, and the writing is on the wall for Louisiana, but I don't like the fact that 1) it gives time to the Legislature that the Legislature itself didn't ask for, and 2) it completely freezes the district court.

Again, we'll see how this develops, but I have the su ion that the Louisiana legislature is going to ask for an extension to the Fifth circuit to February or March, then put out no changed maps or bad maps again.

That'll free the district court at that point, which only then can start creating remedial maps, which will eventually be litigated and appealed to the Fifth again. Timing is everything here. IIRC, if new maps are not in place by May, then you gotta use the old maps.

[Will Hunting]

New York had oral argument on redistricting today.

The only opinions I’ve seen so far on how it went have been left leaning sources, would love to see a legal analysis that’s from a nonpartisan source.

[Winehole23]

under this ruling, Americans have only such rights as the Attorney-General will enforce.

it'll be appealed

[Will Hunting]

New York Court of Appeals just greenlit a new congressional map.

RIP Mike Lawler, you fake moderate sanctimonious jackass!

[Will Hunting]

The Wisconsin state legislature’s maps have been ruled uncons utional by the new liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court majority. Both sides will submit maps and the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide which one is implemented.

The conservative justice dissent was so ing angry

[UNT Eagles 2016]

The Wisconsin state legislature’s maps have been ruled uncons utional by the new liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court majority. Both sides will submit maps and the Wisconsin Supreme Court will decide which one is implemented.

The conservative justice dissent was so ing angry

right. this was a long time coming. The state house and state senate maps are an ugly GOP gerrymander and there's no reason the GOP should have a supermajority in both chambers there.

This won't necessarily affect the federal level house map there as that map is already not only fair but fairly favorable to the Dems, as it's the map Evers himself drew in 2021 and it gives Dems an outside chance to win the driftless district if they perform well there at the presidential level, but that district is admittedly trending red. Geography stinks for Democrats in that state because Dems are so spread out fairly evenly across the state outside of the two big cities that aren't big enough to draw two districts for either without an ugly crackmander, and none of the populous suburban areas are blue enough to draw an extra blue district around the two medium sized blue cities.

For the federal map, Democrat Governor Evers drew it in 2021 and the court picked his map over the GOP proposal which pretty much was similar but tried to move Van Orden's district from R+4 to about R+8. The most likely outcome for the federal map is it's in place until 2030, and same for Ohio considering how the court elections went there last year.

But the state house and state senate maps are a different story, the GOP has been cracking small slivers of Milwaukee for years to guarantee extra seats and minimize Democrat seats and limit them to the very middle of the major urban centers. A fair redraw would probably still have the GOP in a slight majority in both chambers outside of a blue tsunami type environment, but definitely not the kind of majority and supermajority they currently have, which means they probably cave on certain issues. The population is generally pretty secular on issues like abortion there. I don't know why they haven't had an abortion ballot initiative there already like the other rust belt states.

[Winehole23]

right. this was a long time coming. The state house and state senate maps are an ugly GOP gerrymander and there's no reason the GOP should have a supermajority in both chambers there.

odd moment of clarity

[Will Hunting]

right. this was a long time coming. The state house and state senate maps are an ugly GOP gerrymander and there's no reason the GOP should have a supermajority in both chambers there.

This won't necessarily affect the federal level house map there as that map is already not only fair but fairly favorable to the Dems, as it's the map Evers himself drew in 2021 and it gives Dems an outside chance to win the driftless district if they perform well there at the presidential level, but that district is admittedly trending red. Geography stinks for Democrats in that state because Dems are so spread out fairly evenly across the state outside of the two big cities that aren't big enough to draw two districts for either without an ugly crackmander, and none of the populous suburban areas are blue enough to draw an extra blue district around the two medium sized blue cities.

For the federal map, Democrat Governor Evers drew it in 2021 and the court picked his map over the GOP proposal which pretty much was similar but tried to move Van Orden's district from R+4 to about R+8. The most likely outcome for the federal map is it's in place until 2030, and same for Ohio considering how the court elections went there last year.

But the state house and state senate maps are a different story, the GOP has been cracking small slivers of Milwaukee for years to guarantee extra seats and minimize Democrat seats and limit them to the very middle of the major urban centers. A fair redraw would probably still have the GOP in a slight majority in both chambers outside of a blue tsunami type environment, but definitely not the kind of majority and supermajority they currently have, which means they probably cave on certain issues. The population is generally pretty secular on issues like abortion there. I don't know why they haven't had an abortion ballot initiative there already like the other rust belt states.

I ain’t reading all that but regarding the federal map there isn’t even a lawsuit pending and the two issues that allowed the state leg maps to be decided on an expedited basis (contiguity and separation of powers) don’t apply to the federal map. A challenge to the federal map on partisan fairness would probably work given the makeup of the court but it would need to work its way through the lower courts first and wouldn’t be done on time for 2024.

Youre wrong however that it’s a map Evers drew tho. It was the map Evers proposed when the 2021 court mandated a least change criteria so he was anchored by the 2011 gerrymander and the current court made it clear in the new state leg ruling that it would completely ditch the least change criteria in the future.

[Will Hunting]

This is where redistricting changes for 2024 stand, ranked in order of significance:

New York - the COA is set to hear the lawsuit in November. If the new liberal majority actually lets Dems gerrymander, they net 4-5 seats. This is a coin flip imo.
North Carolina - It's not a matter of if but when the maps get redrawn, which will net Republicans 3-4 house seats.
Ohio - Map is going to remain as is, and I think all 5 Dem in bents hold their seat in 2024.
New Mexico - Even though it's a liberal state supreme court, it's not overly hackish and I think it forces a new map that nets the Rs a seat.
Utah - Similar to New Mexico, it's a supreme court that's conservative but not hackish at all. I think it forces a redraw w/ a blue Salt Lake City seat.
Georgia - pending VRA lawsuit in Federal court. I still think this one is a longshot but my understanding is that Georgia's lawyers have grossly mismanaged the trial so far.
Alabama - Dems are guaranteed to net a seat now.
Louisiana - Similar lawsuit as what Dems filed in AL that now has a real chance at success since SCOTUS is clearly upholding VRA Section 2, but I still think a 2nd black district in Louisiana isn't as clear as one in AL.
Florida - The Florida GOP has (strangely) already admitted that the current map violates state law, and it's banking on a ruling that said state law violates the (U.S.) cons ution. Even though the FL Supreme Court is hackish, they don't have standing to rule something violates the US cons ution, and idk how they get around Florida admitting that gutting Al Lawson's district violates state law.

UPDATE (green means lawsuit is over, red means things are still pending)

New York - Dems probably pick up 3-4 seats
North Carolina - Rs pick up 3.5 seats
Ohio - No changes
New Mexico - No changes
Utah - ruling has been pending forever, I expect this to be a 3-2 decision whichever way it goes. The justices in Utah are all conservative but it's a very moderate court because of how judges are selected in Utah.
Georgia - Dems picked up no seats, they just ghettoized themselves with a new map that makes the red suburban Atlanta districts less likely to flip this decade. The whole lawsuit was dumb.
Alabama - Dems pick up 1 seat.
Louisiana - I'm really torn on how this one pans out. The 5th circuit has had opportunities to pillow smother this lawsuit so far but hasn't, at the same time it's allowed the defendants to stall.
Florida - Same thing as LA. No idea how this one shakes out. It's a very conservative state supreme court but the FL GOP is basically asking the FL Supreme Court to rule that the VRA is uncons utional.

End result - New York and NC should roughly cancel each other out, the Dems picked up 1 seat in AL, and there's 3 additional Dem lawsuits left unresolved. My guess is that between LA, FL and UT, the Dems pick up 1 additional seat, so all of the lawsuits and map changes from 2022 to 2024 will result in a total of 2 net Dem pickups.