Congressional Maps
- Thread starter Spartans9312
- Start date
Obviously both parties engage in gerrymandering. For whatever reason Democrats still use it as a club with which to beat Republicans. It’s a farce obviously, like their current POTUS.
It sounds like those democratic voters need to stop concentrating in one spot.
The powers that be in Indiana could have (should have) made IN-1 a toss up district very easily.
Hey Cray, out of all my over the line posts, this is the one you decide to respond to, and I didn't even say anything?
In addition, I don't even warrant a "FIFY"? Or anything?
Dang. What happened to us?
In addition, I don't even warrant a "FIFY"? Or anything?
Dang. What happened to us?
Gerrymandering is wrong. In past threads I know some of us on the left complained about Maryland being gerrymandered D. I would be in favor of gerrymandering being made illegal everywhere.
You can't spin this as just a Democrat thing. In fact I'll bet the Rs do it more since they control more state governments.
I haven't completely done the research, but I think the key issue is gerrymandering BATTLEGROUND states... No one cares if IN and IL are gerrymandered, neither are in doubt.
But (for example) if you compare NC and CO, you see two states (CO has a Dem Legislature) and (NC has a GOP controlled Legislature) that have applied two different methods on redistricting... The GOP in NC is notorious for their efforts to diminish Black voting, they even divided NC A&T into two different districts, where (theoretically) a dorm and the Library were in two different districts. Pretty simple (and evil) reason- dilute a single heavily Black district into two separate districts where neither one is predominantly Black...
On the other hand, The Dem controlled Legislature in CO agreed to a non-partisan commission being allowed to determine how districts in CO were redrawn. As a result Boebert will likely retain her seat, and escape her district being gerrymandered away.
There may be an example of a Battleground state controlled by the GOP where the GOP was willing to agree to an independent commission (like CO) and agreed to adopt the more bi-partisan CO method, but I'm not aware of any...
Colorado - All About Redistricting
All About Redistricting: all the information about the law and process of redistricting Congress and state legislatures, tracking the history and progress of the maps, reform proposals, and redistricting-related litigation around the country.
redistricting.lls.edu
You don’t care about Indiana and Illinois because of the way the maps look.I haven't completely done the research, but I think the key issue is gerrymandering BATTLEGROUND states... No one cares if IN and IL are gerrymandered, neither are in doubt.
But (for example) if you compare NC and CO, you see two states (CO has a Dem Legislature) and (NC has a GOP controlled Legislature) that have applied two different methods on redistricting... The GOP in NC is notorious for their efforts to diminish Black voting, they even divided NC A&T into two different districts, where (theoretically) a dorm and the Library were in two different districts. Pretty simple (and evil) reason- dilute a single heavily Black district into two separate districts where neither one is predominantly Black...
On the other hand, The Dem controlled Legislature in CO agreed to a non-partisan commission being allowed to determine how districts in CO were redrawn. As a result Boebert will likely retain her seat, and escape her district being gerrymandered away.
There may be an example of a Battleground state controlled by the GOP where the GOP was willing to agree to an independent commission (like CO) and agreed to adopt the more bi-partisan CO method, but I'm not aware of any...
Colorado - All About Redistricting
All About Redistricting: all the information about the law and process of redistricting Congress and state legislatures, tracking the history and progress of the maps, reform proposals, and redistricting-related litigation around the country.
Looks can be deceiving. Illinois' proposed map is ugly as hell (but so was their old map), but that's just because it's a lot easier to gerrymander Indiana. Here's the how the partisan advantage breaks down:
Illinois: Dems got 57% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 82% of the districts in the proposed map
Indiana: GOP got 58% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 78% of the districts in the approved map
So, that's actually pretty close. However, Indiana actually did a better job gerrymandering, because they managed to get rid of all competitive seats. Illinois has three competitive seats, meaning the Dems could reasonably win only 65% of the districts in a year that has a strong GOP performance.
For those who want to follow this story, 538 has an excellent feature here:
What Redistricting Looks Like In Every State
An updating tracker of proposed congressional maps — and whether they might benefit Democrats or Republicans in the 2022 midterm elections and beyond
It's not really that important for House elections if the state is a battleground state or not. What matters is whether there are realistically any battleground districts. Illinois actually added a competitive district, but of course they did it in a politically advantageous way, by losing two GOP districts. Indiana went the other way, and avoided having a competitive district by packing even more Democrats into the 7th.I haven't completely done the research, but I think the key issue is gerrymandering BATTLEGROUND states... No one cares if IN and IL are gerrymandered, neither are in doubt.
But (for example) if you compare NC and CO, you see two states (CO has a Dem Legislature) and (NC has a GOP controlled Legislature) that have applied two different methods on redistricting... The GOP in NC is notorious for their efforts to diminish Black voting, they even divided NC A&T into two different districts, where (theoretically) a dorm and the Library were in two different districts. Pretty simple (and evil) reason- dilute a single heavily Black district into two separate districts where neither one is predominantly Black...
On the other hand, The Dem controlled Legislature in CO agreed to a non-partisan commission being allowed to determine how districts in CO were redrawn. As a result Boebert will likely retain her seat, and escape her district being gerrymandered away.
There may be an example of a Battleground state controlled by the GOP where the GOP was willing to agree to an independent commission (like CO) and agreed to adopt the more bi-partisan CO method, but I'm not aware of any...
Colorado - All About Redistricting
All About Redistricting: all the information about the law and process of redistricting Congress and state legislatures, tracking the history and progress of the maps, reform proposals, and redistricting-related litigation around the country.
I think the main thing is to make sure that we have a fair election. If you look at this you can see that the US is the outlier as far as restricting voting and a lot of people want to make it easier. Making sure that the votes are valid will probably benefit the Republicans. I don't think most people care if there is cheating as long as their side gets elected.
If you drew Illinois with compact districts & no/minimal county splits you end up 10D-7RLooks can be deceiving. Illinois' proposed map is ugly as hell (but so was their old map), but that's just because it's a lot easier to gerrymander Indiana. Here's the how the partisan advantage breaks down:
Illinois: Dems got 57% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 82% of the districts in the proposed map
Indiana: GOP got 58% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 78% of the districts in the approved map
So, that's actually pretty close. However, Indiana actually did a better job gerrymandering, because they managed to get rid of all competitive seats. Illinois has three competitive seats, meaning the Dems could reasonably win only 65% of the districts in a year that has a strong GOP performance.
For those who want to follow this story, 538 has an excellent feature here:
What Redistricting Looks Like In Every State
An updating tracker of proposed congressional maps — and whether they might benefit Democrats or Republicans in the 2022 midterm elections and beyondprojects.fivethirtyeight.com
Maybe, but that's not relevant to my point. My point was that Indiana Republicans did just as good a job as Illinois Democrats at maximizing their partisan advantage. Maybe even better, because of the aforementioned lack of competitive seats. The geography of the state makes it possible for them to do it with a much nicer looking map than in Illinois, but that doesn't make the partisan advantage any less real.
To be clear, as far as I know, Democrats are for taking the redistricting process out of the hands of state legislatures and putting it into the hands of non-partisan commissions who will then produce fair maps. No one that I know of is in favor of unilateral disarmament.
You don’t think Indiana Republicans could have made district 1 an even district with very little movement?
Even in a GOP wave with everything falling GOP’s way & the statewide congressional popular vote splitting 50-50 the Illinois map would most likely produce a 12D-5R map giving Dems 70% of seats while protecting all current incumbents. It’s a very effective gerrymander.
I didn't say it wasn't effective. I just said Indiana's was also very effective.
Sorry, I don't follow.
BTW, a GOP wave that resulted in a 50-50 split of the vote in Illinois would likely not result in the Dems winning 12 seats. It would result in the Dems winning 10 seats, the GOP 6, and one seat (the 13th) would be a tossup.
A Dem wave that resulted in a 50-50 split of the vote in Indiana would result in the GOP winning 7 seats. The most competitive GOP seat is R+22. Fully half of Illinois' Dem-leaning districts would be more competitive than that.
Virginia Democratic Party Does Redistricting Commission’s Job and Releases Fair, Equitable Congressional Map - Democratic Party of Virginia
Richmond, VA — Today, the Democratic Party of Virginia did the Virginia Redistricting Commission’s job and released an equitable, fair congressional map that represents current Democratic trends of the Commonwealth, keeps communities of interest together and prioritizes the voices of voters of...
vademocrats.org
I'm old enough to remember when the Virginia Democratic Party spent years advocating for an independent commission to draw VA legislative districts. I guess some folks are never happy.
It's hard for a compact map to be considered a "gerrymander"
Okay... some of it is just plain stupid. I remember seeing one district where the ONLY thing that joined the two parts of the district was the median of an interstate.
Disagree. This map protects all Democrat incumbents except for Marie Newman (who machine Democrats want to screw over) and at best in a GOP wave the GOP would only win 4 of 17 seats.
Is it possible that Illinois has more Democrats and Indiana more Republicans? Based on my living (and voting) experiences in both states, that seems to be the case.Looks can be deceiving. Illinois' proposed map is ugly as hell (but so was their old map), but that's just because it's a lot easier to gerrymander Indiana. Here's the how the partisan advantage breaks down:
Illinois: Dems got 57% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 82% of the districts in the proposed map
Indiana: GOP got 58% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 78% of the districts in the approved map
So, that's actually pretty close. However, Indiana actually did a better job gerrymandering, because they managed to get rid of all competitive seats. Illinois has three competitive seats, meaning the Dems could reasonably win only 65% of the districts in a year that has a strong GOP performance.
For those who want to follow this story, 538 has an excellent feature here:
What Redistricting Looks Like In Every State
An updating tracker of proposed congressional maps — and whether they might benefit Democrats or Republicans in the 2022 midterm elections and beyond
Follow the link I shared above. It allows you to look at the partisan lean of each proposed district. You're simply mistaken on this point.
I’ve looked at the proposed map. Which incumbent, other than Newman, is not protected?
The Newman district is designed to endanger her in a primary from working class Democrat in primary and make it competitive enough in a general election where she can’t go too far squad crazy without electoral consequences.
When he refers to gerrymandering, election subversion, voter suppression and the heart of America's democracy badly at risk I'm sure he is talking about the Democrat drawn congressional map of Illinois that gives Democrats 14 out of 17 seats (82%) in a state Biden got 57% of the vote
Biden won 56% of the vote in Oregon and the map the Democrats passed gives them 83.3% of House seats. IL was Biden 57% and Democrats get 82% of seats. Biden got 46% of vote in Texas and Democrats are getting 34% of seats. Texas is mild gerrymandering in comparison.Looks can be deceiving. Illinois' proposed map is ugly as hell (but so was their old map), but that's just because it's a lot easier to gerrymander Indiana. Here's the how the partisan advantage breaks down:
Illinois: Dems got 57% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 82% of the districts in the proposed map
Indiana: GOP got 58% of the 2020 vote, have an edge in 78% of the districts in the approved map
So, that's actually pretty close. However, Indiana actually did a better job gerrymandering, because they managed to get rid of all competitive seats. Illinois has three competitive seats, meaning the Dems could reasonably win only 65% of the districts in a year that has a strong GOP performance.
For those who want to follow this story, 538 has an excellent feature here:
What Redistricting Looks Like In Every State
An updating tracker of proposed congressional maps — and whether they might benefit Democrats or Republicans in the 2022 midterm elections and beyond
"Protecting democracy" is gerrymandering states like Illinois so Democrats can get 82% of House seats with ZERO competitive elections in a state where Biden got 57% of the vote.
So do you agree that all states should use non-partisan commissions? Or perhaps computers designed to only look at numbers of voters and tasked with drawing compact boxes?
This goes back to Hoo point above and the realization on the ground.
We hear all the time (not by you or goat) about Republican “gerrymandering”.
Biden got 46% of vote in Texas and Democrats are getting 34% to 37% of seats. This is mild gerrymandering in comparison to Illinois where Biden got 57% and Democrats get 82% of seats and Oregon where Biden won 56% of the vote and Democrats 83.3% of House seats.
No I’m not.
How about Oregon?
They split Portland 4 ways, connected it to Bend, disregards county integrity and has the GOP vote sink cross the Cascades multiple times. How on Earth is that a clean map?
In the last census, PA and NC were considered the worst. See below. We need all states to disarm.
www.azavea.com
The Most Gerrymandered States Ranked by Efficiency Gap and Seat Advantage
In Part 2 of our series on Azavea's redistricting and gerrymandering work, we rank the efficiency gap for each Congressional delegation in all 50 states.
www.azavea.com
Stop changing the subject. The issue is Illinois. The new map has several competitive seats. It's dishonest to claim otherwise.
Similar threads
