US House Redistricting: North Carolina

[krazen1211]

Mecklenburg has already been addressed.

The new map does indeed shrink NC-01's tentacles, but at the expense of an additional split in Wake County.

I can't really tell about the city of Raleigh just from the map.

The existing map does indeed split Rutherford and Gaston Counties where the new map does not, but now you're splitting hairs. There will (in most states) always be split counties, if only to conform to population equality, which is why I avoided criticizing the counties that are split only two ways in the new map. If the existing splits in Rutherford and Gaston Counties are fair game, then I can bring up the new map's splits in Catawba, Randolph, Lee, Orange, Durham, Franklin, Robeson, Martin, Chowan, Perquimans, and Pasquotank Counties.

For population balance, 1 county must be split between any 2 districts. We know this from the Michigan standards. But that's not what's happening here or with the current map; often times 2 districts share numerous borders in order to engage in partisan gerrymandering.

Sampson County, on the current map, has no compelling reason to be split. Yet it is!

The real question is the total number of splits, which will require additional counting. As it stands I believe 65 counties are unsplit on the new map. I will tell you though that Catawba (this one looked curious, so I looked it up), only seems to have population in 1 district per the pdfs, so the map is misleading.

[krazen1211]

in the next big dem wave election, hopefully this would be a dummymander

Its not likely to be.  Dummymanders usually involve spreading your voters too thin across multiple districts, and of the 10 Republican-leaning ones, I think they're all more Republican than any seat the Democrats currently hold in NC.  Even if Ellmers and Foxx lose, their seats will almost certainly be picked up by the Republicans again later on, simply because Democrats usually can't hold on to 55% McCain districts for very long.

Either way, the map is almost guaranteed to see a net Republican gain in seats, so in that way it's highly unlikely to wind up backfiring on the Republicans any time soon.

There really is only 1 place this can backfire, potentially: District 7 and 8, where the GOP went for both but could have split the difference and just take 1 and yielded the other.

Of course, we saw the same tradeoffs with the Illinois map where they went greedy.

[BigSkyBob]

If that 4th district is not the the ugliest non-VRA district in the history of the world, then I don't know what is. Still, I have to admit, one shoestring isn't good for anything. You have to have two to be able to tie your shoes.

Perhaps, you have engaged in a bit rhetorical excess.

May I suggest that you consider the current Illinois 17th district, which is , actually, in contention for "the ugliest non-VRA district in the history of the world."

http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/printableViewer-cd.html?imgF=images/preview/congdist/IL17_110.gif&imgW=750&imgH=452

[BigSkyBob]

in the next big dem wave election, hopefully this would be a dummymander

Its not likely to be.  Dummymanders usually involve spreading your voters too thin across multiple districts, and of the 10 Republican-leaning ones, I think they're all more Republican than any seat the Democrats currently hold in NC.  Even if Ellmers and Foxx lose, their seats will almost certainly be picked up by the Republicans again later on, simply because Democrats usually can't hold on to 55% McCain districts for very long.

Either way, the map is almost guaranteed to see a net Republican gain in seats, so in that way it's highly unlikely to wind up backfiring on the Republicans any time soon.

There really is only 1 place this can backfire, potentially: District 7 and 8, where the GOP went for both but could have split the difference and just take 1 and yielded the other.

Of course, we saw the same tradeoffs with the Illinois map where they went greedy.

If the Republican candidates lose both district it is because they made their defeats the old-fashioned way, they earned them!

[JohnnyLongtorso]

So they went for 10-3; not exactly unexpected. McHenry and Foxx's districts are diluted, but probably not enough to cause them to lose. I do think they're playing with fire making NC-12 majority-black; that could open the district up to being declared an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

[krazen1211]

So they went for 10-3; not exactly unexpected. McHenry and Foxx's districts are diluted, but probably not enough to cause them to lose. I do think they're playing with fire making NC-12 majority-black; that could open the district up to being declared an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Black VAP is 49.35%.

[Miles]

So they went for 10-3; not exactly unexpected. McHenry and Foxx's districts are diluted, but probably not enough to cause them to lose. I do think they're playing with fire making NC-12 majority-black; that could open the district up to being declared an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Black VAP is 49.35%.

Very clever of them...

[BigSkyBob]

in the next big dem wave election, hopefully this would be a dummymander

Its not likely to be.  Dummymanders usually involve spreading your voters too thin across multiple districts, and of the 10 Republican-leaning ones, I think they're all more Republican than any seat the Democrats currently hold in NC.  Even if Ellmers and Foxx lose, their seats will almost certainly be picked up by the Republicans again later on, simply because Democrats usually can't hold on to 55% McCain districts for very long.

Either way, the map is almost guaranteed to see a net Republican gain in seats, so in that way it's highly unlikely to wind up backfiring on the Republicans any time soon.

There really is only 1 place this can backfire, potentially: District 7 and 8, where the GOP went for both but could have split the difference and just take 1 and yielded the other.

Of course, we saw the same tradeoffs with the Illinois map where they went greedy.

I have to say that I commend you for advocating at RRH cleaning up the lines by reducing the splits in Mecklenburg, and Alamance. The pour-salt-into-the-ground crowd eggs on the legislators to act ever more egregiously, [aided by DRA.] It was nice to read a voice for restraint.

[BigSkyBob]

McHenry about 57-42 McCain.

The new 4th isn't even close to being another VRA district. I have it as 51% white, 29% black. Its just a Democratic vote sink thats roughly 70% Obama.

I projecting it at 69.6% Obama 29.6% McCain.

I'll take issue with the claim that isn't "even close to being another VRA district."  I reasonably expect Price to retire within the decade, and due to the inclusion of Duke, UNC, and, I believe, NCST, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a "person of color [other than peach]"  will win within the decade.

I have read lecture after lecture about how a 40% Black district is allegedly VRA compliant since it is probable that such a district would nominate a Black Democrat in the primary and that that Black Democrat would win the general. Why not 29% if it is probable to nominate a Black Democrat whom is likely to win the general [given the particular circumstances of that district?]

[Miles]

A few more election maps:

Dole/Hagan

Bush/Kerry

Outside of the 3 liberal districts, Kerry's best  district was NC-07...were he lost 40/59. Granted, Kerry lost the state by 13 points, there's still a lot of 60% Bush districts here

[krazen1211]

McHenry about 57-42 McCain.

The new 4th isn't even close to being another VRA district. I have it as 51% white, 29% black. Its just a Democratic vote sink thats roughly 70% Obama.

I projecting it at 69.6% Obama 29.6% McCain.

I'll take issue with the claim that isn't "even close to being another VRA district."  I reasonably expect Price to retire within the decade, and due to the inclusion of Duke, UNC, and, I believe, NCST, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a "person of color [other than peach]"  will win within the decade.

I have read lecture after lecture about how a 40% Black district is allegedly VRA compliant since it is probable that such a district would nominate a Black Democrat in the primary and that that Black Democrat would win the general. Why not 29% if it is probable to nominate a Black Democrat whom is likely to win the general?

The track record of such districts is heavily in the favor of whites. Don't kid yourself and pretend otherwise.

[BigSkyBob]

McHenry about 57-42 McCain.

The new 4th isn't even close to being another VRA district. I have it as 51% white, 29% black. Its just a Democratic vote sink thats roughly 70% Obama.

I projecting it at 69.6% Obama 29.6% McCain.

I'll take issue with the claim that isn't "even close to being another VRA district."  I reasonably expect Price to retire within the decade, and due to the inclusion of Duke, UNC, and, I believe, NCST, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a "person of color [other than peach]"  will win within the decade.

I have read lecture after lecture about how a 40% Black district is allegedly VRA compliant since it is probable that such a district would nominate a Black Democrat in the primary and that that Black Democrat would win the general. Why not 29% if it is probable to nominate a Black Democrat whom is likely to win the general?

The track record of such districts is heavily in the favor of whites. Don't kid yourself and pretend otherwise.

Given the fact that Ron Dellums won in such a Black minority, University dominated district it is not unreasonable to believe that such a coalition could form in the Triangle. The Black Obama beat the White Clinton badly in university dominated counties. That, too is part of the track record. Villification of Whites is a staple of modern campus life. It creates quirky political outcomes.

[Smash255]

McHenry about 57-42 McCain.

The new 4th isn't even close to being another VRA district. I have it as 51% white, 29% black. Its just a Democratic vote sink thats roughly 70% Obama.

I projecting it at 69.6% Obama 29.6% McCain.

I'll take issue with the claim that isn't "even close to being another VRA district."  I reasonably expect Price to retire within the decade, and due to the inclusion of Duke, UNC, and, I believe, NCST, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a "person of color [other than peach]"  will win within the decade.

I have read lecture after lecture about how a 40% Black district is allegedly VRA compliant since it is probable that such a district would nominate a Black Democrat in the primary and that that Black Democrat would win the general. Why not 29% if it is probable to nominate a Black Democrat whom is likely to win the general?

The track record of such districts is heavily in the favor of whites. Don't kid yourself and pretend otherwise.

Given the fact that Ron Dellums won in such a Black minority, University dominated district it is not unreasonable to believe that such a coalition could form in the Triangle. The Black Obama beat the White Clinton badly in university dominated counties. That, too is part of the track record. Villification of Whites is a staple of modern campus life. It creates quirky political outcomes.

If its going to happen, it certainly has a better chance of happening in that district than other portions of the south.  However, it has nothing to do villification of whites are any of that right wing nonsense.  Obama won the district because he was seen as the more liberal candidate and appealed to the younger voters.   I certainly think someone who is black can win that district, but it will have much more to do with ideology and intellectualism than race.

[minionofmidas]

If that 4th district is not the the ugliest non-VRA district in the history of the world, then I don't know what is.

The old Florida-22.

[minionofmidas]

No one's mentioned the actually pointless ugly cruelty yet... Robeson/Scotland/Hoke. Not only is that unjustifiable by any standard, what they did is probably not actually going to be enough to get rid of McIntyre. Mark my words.

[krazen1211]

No one's mentioned the actually pointless ugly cruelty yet... Robeson/Scotland/Hoke. Not only is that unjustifiable by any standard, what they did is probably not actually going to be enough to get rid of McIntyre. Mark my words.

What cruelty is that, exactly?

Good map for Pantano, as he will be a solid fit for the new counties.

[BigSkyBob]

McHenry about 57-42 McCain.

The new 4th isn't even close to being another VRA district. I have it as 51% white, 29% black. Its just a Democratic vote sink that's roughly 70% Obama.

I projecting it at 69.6% Obama 29.6% McCain.

I'll take issue with the claim that isn't "even close to being another VRA district."  I reasonably expect Price to retire within the decade, and due to the inclusion of Duke, UNC, and, I believe, NCST, I don't think it is unreasonable to believe that a "person of color [other than peach]"  will win within the decade.

I have read lecture after lecture about how a 40% Black district is allegedly VRA compliant since it is probable that such a district would nominate a Black Democrat in the primary and that that Black Democrat would win the general. Why not 29% if it is probable to nominate a Black Democrat whom is likely to win the general?

The track record of such districts is heavily in the favor of whites. Don't kid yourself and pretend otherwise.

Given the fact that Ron Dellums won in such a Black minority, University dominated district it is not unreasonable to believe that such a coalition could form in the Triangle. The Black Obama beat the White Clinton badly in university dominated counties. That, too is part of the track record. Vilification of Whites is a staple of modern campus life. It creates quirky political outcomes.

If its going to happen, it certainly has a better chance of happening in that district than other portions of the south.  However, it has nothing to do vilification of whites are any of that right wing nonsense. 

You don't exactly buttress your claims about the lack of animosity towards Whites among the left by having as your tag the symbol of an anti-White racist organization that murdered police officers!

Imagine the outrage that would ensue had the clinched fist been the symbol of a White racist organization in the sixties that murdered police officers.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[minionofmidas]

No one's mentioned the actually pointless ugly cruelty yet... Robeson/Scotland/Hoke. Not only is that unjustifiable by any standard, what they did is probably not actually going to be enough to get rid of McIntyre. Mark my words.

What cruelty is that, exactly?

Ever had a look at the demographics of the area?

[krazen1211]

No one's mentioned the actually pointless ugly cruelty yet... Robeson/Scotland/Hoke. Not only is that unjustifiable by any standard, what they did is probably not actually going to be enough to get rid of McIntyre. Mark my words.

What cruelty is that, exactly?

Ever had a look at the demographics of the area?

In Robeson County they kind of split some of the native American community...but I have no idea what you're referring to with the other counties.

[minionofmidas]

It continues into there (though the percentage declines), so the three counties belong together. I'd consider it stomachable if they'd just split them from Robeson rather than splitting Robeson itself, though.

(As to the rest of the map, I'd echo Al's sentiments of "what comes around goes around".  As long as no idiot tries to pretend this isn't a bad gerrymander, I cannot even manage fake outrage. But Indian issues tend to be close to my heart, and splitting Indian communities is quite rightly something that used to be "not done" in redistricting.)

[muon2]

So they went for 10-3; not exactly unexpected. McHenry and Foxx's districts are diluted, but probably not enough to cause them to lose. I do think they're playing with fire making NC-12 majority-black; that could open the district up to being declared an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Black VAP is 49.35%.

Very clever of them...

Actually 49.35% is the black-only VAP. Technically one must also count those who had multiple races including black as well. In that case the district is 50.41% any part black VAP. The current district was 51.07% any part black VAP in 2000.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

It continues into there (though the percentage declines), so the three counties belong together. I'd consider it stomachable if they'd just split them from Robeson rather than splitting Robeson itself, though.

(As to the rest of the map, I'd echo Al's sentiments of "what comes around goes around".  As long as no idiot tries to pretend this isn't a bad gerrymander, I cannot even manage fake outrage. But Indian issues tend to be close to my heart, and splitting Indian communities is quite rightly something that used to be "not done" in redistricting.)

The Democrats did this to themselves when they removed the governor's veto power because they were afraid of having a Republican governor veto their plan.

[dpmapper]

It continues into there (though the percentage declines), so the three counties belong together. I'd consider it stomachable if they'd just split them from Robeson rather than splitting Robeson itself, though.

The D's split the three counties last go-around.  And the way Robeson is split now, the southeast part is all that's in McIntyre's district, and that's the part where the Lumbee population is at its smallest (precincts ~10-20% Native American).  So I don't see that it's that much more outrageous - the main center of Native American population gets split from the relatively few in SE Robeson but gains the ones in Hoke/Scotland.  

[nclib]

It continues into there (though the percentage declines), so the three counties belong together. I'd consider it stomachable if they'd just split them from Robeson rather than splitting Robeson itself, though.

(As to the rest of the map, I'd echo Al's sentiments of "what comes around goes around".  As long as no idiot tries to pretend this isn't a bad gerrymander, I cannot even manage fake outrage. But Indian issues tend to be close to my heart, and splitting Indian communities is quite rightly something that used to be "not done" in redistricting.)

The Democrats did this to themselves when they removed the governor's veto power because they were afraid of having a Republican governor veto their plan.

What year? The governor of NC didn't use to have veto power over anything until the 1990s. I thought it was a holdover from that.

[nclib]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This proves how white liberals were really distributed throughout the non-liberal districts, since NC-7 is quite socially conservative.