Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 27, 2015, 02:10:12 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 526
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Most Conservative and Liberal Presidents since 1964 on: March 26, 2015, 06:41:51 am
1. George W Bush
2. Ronald Reagan
3. George HW Bush
4. Gerald Ford
5. Barack Obama
6. Richard Nixon
7. Bill Clinton/Jimmy Carter
8 . Jimmy Carter/Bill Clinton
9.  Lyndon B Johnson

It wasn't entirely sure about seven and eight.

How was Bill Clinton more Liberal then Obama,Carter, Nixon


Bill Clinton- Cut the growth of government more then any president then IKE
                   Signed NAFTA
                   Welfare Reform of 1996
                   Deregulation
                   DOMA
                   

If it werent for Social Issues he would basically be a Republican


Clinton was indeed way too conservative. But Carter's domestic policy was also on the right-deregulating transport, austerity, budget-cutting. Also, Clinton at least passed a few more progressive measures (CHIP, Americorps, environmental legislation) whereas Carter did almost nothing but fold to the right. On the hand, Carter's foreign policy was relatively progressive, as he did not launch any pointless military "interventions" whereas Clinton pointlessly bombed Mid East countries through 1998. So, it's a draw.

But whereas Carter and Clinton had certain diplomatic successes in promoting peace, Obama has almost totally accepted the Bush Doctrine. Also, his civil liberties is atrocious, and except for the token stimulus, his fiscal program has mostly been austerity. He wouldn't even repeal the Bush tax cuts with a deeply Democratic Congress.

I wouldnt say too Conservative as I agree with more of those policies and I consider myself a moderate. But Obama signed Obama Care, Refuses to invade ISIS territory(I dont mean nation build I mean go in defeat ISIS and leave), Supports Amnesty, Wants to raise taxes etc. For civil liberties Conservatives and Liberals should equally support them so I would say its more of a Liberatirian thing now.

Obamacare was a bailout to insurance and a betrayal to the progressive goal of public health care-even the lousy 1993 Clinton plan let state's set up single-payer systems with their Medicare. And he's launching drones killing thousands of people with mercy over ISIS even though it's clear another Iraqi conflict would be extremely foolish. The lack of ground troops is, in my opinion, a cheap way to have war without sparking a antiwar movement. I see no sign Obama wants to raise taxes; I mean, he extended the 2001 Bush tax cuts when even some of the Blue Dog's thought it was time for an increase. Every president since Reagan has supported amnesty.


For the ISIS situation cant you go in destroy them like we did to the Taliban in 2001 then leave immediately instead of occupying the place for 10 years.

And then who occupies that power vacuum? The world is not that simple.
2  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: the Inland Empire on: March 25, 2015, 05:10:19 pm
I am not sure when it started, but today the IE definitely has its own identity, just like Orange County.

With the exception of a few places like San Bernardino, the IE is a collection of fairly middle class bedroom communities. One of the reasons it may have a bad reputation is due to "bros". Here is the definition from urban dictionary:
Quote
3   
bro
a usually white young male, found commonly in places like san bernardino county in california, as well as orange county. always, without exception, drive big lifted trucks, often white. has the name of their crew or whatever in big white letters on their back window (ie, "skin", "metal mulisha". wear: trucker hats off center, plug earrings, sunglasses, wife beater shirt or no shirt, sagging dickies shorts, high black socks, skater shoes or those black corduroy slipper things, have a lot of tatoos of things like stars.

my neighbor is a bro. hes got the lifted loud truck, wears the stuff, and even has a confederate flag hanging from his rearview mirror.


Also, here is an article about the aftermath of the Huntington Beach riot and the accusations that "909ers" (Inland Empire area code) started it.
3  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama snuffs stoner dreams of legalization on: March 21, 2015, 02:41:13 pm
At least he supports decriminalization. That's a much higher priority than legalization.
Not really. That's like saying "civil unions are a much higher priority than same-sex marriage."

Bad analogy. Although I do support it, marijuana legalization is not a civil rights issue. Priority number one should be stopping hundreds of thousands of kids/nonviolent offenders from being thrown into jail for smoking pot.

Cite? Please limit your answer for incarceration based on "smoking" pot as opposed to traffickers.

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/crime#sthash.QBM8Tyac.dpbs

Of the 1,501,043 arrests for drug law violations, 82.3% were for possession of a controlled substance. 40.3% of those arrests were for possession of Marijuana. That comes out to about 604,908 arrests for Marijuana possession in 2013. So yeah, hundreds of thousands of people are being thrown into jail every year for smoking pot, especially Blacks, Latinos and poors.

I question the definition of "arrest" used here, and whether many such "arrests" simply involve police contact and release after service of a citation. Ibin Rushid's comment is more telling and specific, though.

Perhaps I'm seeing this through the lens of Ohio law which decriminalized up to 100 gm of mj ages ago. Oddly, drug paraphernalia was punishable by up to 30 days, so while a joint might only get you a fine (and mandatory license suspension even if not driving/riding in a car at the time), the paper could get you jail time (or the baggie the weed was in, or the pipe, etc.). That long overdue change was finally made only a couple years ago to where MJ related paraphernalia is now only punishable by a fine as well.

Yes, you may look at this differently because Ohio is one state that has decriminalized weed. The fact is that most Midwestern, Mid Atlantic and Southern states have not decriminalized. Or they have ass backwards loopholes like in New York. Plenty of people get arrested for simple possession. The arrests are easy to make, the cases easy to resolve and it is fairly safe for the officer as stoners are usually not violent. And by having more arrests, they can justify their budget.
4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Obama snuffs stoner dreams of legalization on: March 21, 2015, 09:50:42 am
At least he supports decriminalization. That's a much higher priority than legalization.
Not really. That's like saying "civil unions are a much higher priority than same-sex marriage."

Bad analogy. Although I do support it, marijuana legalization is not a civil rights issue. Priority number one should be stopping hundreds of thousands of kids/nonviolent offenders from being thrown into jail for smoking pot.

Cite? Please limit your answer for incarceration based on "smoking" pot as opposed to traffickers.

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/crime#sthash.QBM8Tyac.dpbs

Of the 1,501,043 arrests for drug law violations, 82.3% were for possession of a controlled substance. 40.3% of those arrests were for possession of Marijuana. That comes out to about 604,908 arrests for Marijuana possession in 2013. So yeah, hundreds of thousands of people are being thrown into jail every year for smoking pot, especially Blacks, Latinos and poors.
5  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 18, 2015, 07:38:11 pm
Sbane, cut the Third Worldist crap: we have the responsibility to decry human rights violations and the abuse of minority rights, even when these violations occur in the developing world. Whether Modi is directly or indirectly responsible for the communal riots is besides the point: India has a human rights problem. This really isn't disputable.

I, for one, welcome international meddling in American affairs. I want more nations to stake out a position against our carceral state and our nefarious imperialism.

No, it is not the responsibility of America to tell India how to run its country beyond a certain limit (genocide etc) and the reciprocal is true as well.

My point is that both America and India have its issues. Of course India has an issue with minority rights. Can you tell me one country that doesn't? My point in this thread isn't to minimize that, it is to support Congresswoman Gabbard for standing up against a patronizing piece of legislation. Scolding India for something that happened 14 years ago is just plain silly. It might have made some sense to speak up the moment it occurred, but more than a decade later? Also, it is ridiculous to blame all of India for something that Gujaratis did but that is a discussion for another day.

And the bottom line is that all the legislation would do is harm US-India relations without implementing any solution to solve an actual problem. It is just a worthless piece of legislation that would accomplish nothing, except souring relations.
6  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: The Democratic Party is facing a Catholic apocalypse on: March 18, 2015, 05:12:41 pm
Democrats have a catholic apocalypse while the Republicans face a Hispanic apocalypse. Makes sense. Smiley
7  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 18, 2015, 01:24:39 pm
Another ignorant, ethnocentric atlas thread about the BJP. Oh great. Roll Eyes

So, the BJP had been in power for almost a year now. What exactly have they done that would set them apart from other right wing parties like the Republicans? They are different from European conservative parties but they have a fascist base just like the republicans do here in America. The question is do they allow those people to call the shots. Are they? Give me specific examples.

As for me, the BJP has disappointed me but that was to be expected. Can't really expect any political party in India to immediately implement the needed reforms. And they do cater to their idiot base by changing things in textbooks and other sh**t like that. I am not excusing that behavior but Republicans do sh**t like that all the time!!! Why hold the BJP to a different standard?

That a Democrat would endorse a right-wing party in another country is ridiculous.

Did she actually endorse the BJP? She was just against a patronizing, "white man's burden" type non-sensical legislation. Should the Indian parliament call on America to improve its racial situation?
Many of the cosponsors are black.

Lol so what?

If you think it is appropriate to meddle in the internal affairs of India, don't you think it would be fair for India to do the same? And I didnt even mention the temple shooting.... I think it's always good to keep in mind that everybody's sh**t stinks. It doesn't smell like roses.
8  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 18, 2015, 06:15:05 am
I don't even know what the legislation was. I just see a Democrat wearing the logo of a right-wing party from a country where there's a perfectly respectable left-wing opposition. That makes her a HP.

A bill admonishing India for not doing enough to protect its religious minorities. They focus on Gujarat even though that happened 11 years before the piece of of legislation was proposed. That is a stupid thing for congress to do considering things like Ferguson, Eric garner and the general antics of police around this country. I applaud congresswoman Gabbard for standing up to this nonsense.
9  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 17, 2015, 11:32:18 pm
Another ignorant, ethnocentric atlas thread about the BJP. Oh great. Roll Eyes

So, the BJP had been in power for almost a year now. What exactly have they done that would set them apart from other right wing parties like the Republicans? They are different from European conservative parties but they have a fascist base just like the republicans do here in America. The question is do they allow those people to call the shots. Are they? Give me specific examples.

As for me, the BJP has disappointed me but that was to be expected. Can't really expect any political party in India to immediately implement the needed reforms. And they do cater to their idiot base by changing things in textbooks and other sh**t like that. I am not excusing that behavior but Republicans do sh**t like that all the time!!! Why hold the BJP to a different standard?

That a Democrat would endorse a right-wing party in another country is ridiculous.

Did she actually endorse the BJP? She was just against a patronizing, "white man's burden" type non-sensical legislation. Should the Indian parliament call on America to improve its racial situation?

Look at the picture at the top of the thread.

Doesn't change the fact that the legislation was a horrible idea.
10  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 17, 2015, 10:38:09 pm
Another ignorant, ethnocentric atlas thread about the BJP. Oh great. Roll Eyes

So, the BJP had been in power for almost a year now. What exactly have they done that would set them apart from other right wing parties like the Republicans? They are different from European conservative parties but they have a fascist base just like the republicans do here in America. The question is do they allow those people to call the shots. Are they? Give me specific examples.

As for me, the BJP has disappointed me but that was to be expected. Can't really expect any political party in India to immediately implement the needed reforms. And they do cater to their idiot base by changing things in textbooks and other sh**t like that. I am not excusing that behavior but Republicans do sh**t like that all the time!!! Why hold the BJP to a different standard?

That a Democrat would endorse a right-wing party in another country is ridiculous.

Did she actually endorse the BJP? She was just against a patronizing, "white man's burden" type non-sensical legislation. Should the Indian parliament call on America to improve its racial situation?
11  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: Tulsi Gabbard and the BJP on: March 17, 2015, 09:16:10 pm
Another ignorant, ethnocentric atlas thread about the BJP. Oh great. Roll Eyes

So, the BJP had been in power for almost a year now. What exactly have they done that would set them apart from other right wing parties like the Republicans? They are different from European conservative parties but they have a fascist base just like the republicans do here in America. The question is do they allow those people to call the shots. Are they? Give me specific examples.

As for me, the BJP has disappointed me but that was to be expected. Can't really expect any political party in India to immediately implement the needed reforms. And they do cater to their idiot base by changing things in textbooks and other sh**t like that. I am not excusing that behavior but Republicans do sh**t like that all the time!!! Why hold the BJP to a different standard?
12  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: U.S. senate to consider changing Marijuana status from Class 1 to Class 2 on: March 15, 2015, 06:34:26 pm
I'm sure there are better drugs to be used for medical purposes other than marijuana.  I'm reluctant to support its use for medical purposes since we have better ways of treating people.

     I'm sure it is not always or even often perfect, but it does have medicinal uses. That alone should make us reconsider placing it in Schedule I.

The main psychoactive compound in Marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol(THC), is considered a Schedule 3 drug by the DEA. So why should the plant be Schedule 1? Especially since the plant contains other non-psychoactive compounds such as cannabidiol(CBD), which potentially has even more medicinal benefits than THC.

Also, the FDA is likely to approve another drug, Sativex, which is made from the plant itself. The other two cannabinoids that are prescription drugs are synthetically made. It will be interesting to see how the DEA manages to explain why the plant should be Schedule 1 but a medicine made from it be available with a prescription.
13  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: March 2015 At-Large Special Senate Election on: March 13, 2015, 09:58:23 pm
1. Foucaulf
14  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: U.S. senate to consider changing Marijuana status from Class 1 to Class 2 on: March 13, 2015, 02:33:29 pm
High potential for abuse? Based on what?

The argument is that people are willing to break the law to get marijuana, so that constitutes a high potential for abuse.
You phrased it in a manner that suggests that's not your argument, so please don't take this personally, but that is some serious Naso style logic.

You are correct, it's not my argument, but I've heard phrases like it many times, including from anti-marijuana lobbyists, but I have no one to attribute it to. I just thought the thread should have an example of what is said.

What does  high potential for abuse mean? That folks will buy it illegally? If so, that is rather circular, and as it is legalized by more and more states, it won't be illegal to buy it, except in the eyes of the Feds.

I don't claim it's a good argument, but I think it comes from the meaning of the word abuse. Medically abuse means intentionally taking something outside of its prescribed dose or indicated use. If the indicated dose is zero because it's schedule I then any use of it is abuse, so in that case it seems to be self-fulfilling that if lots of people are using it then there is a high potential of abuse.

So if someone uses alcohol for a non-medical use, it is abuse?


Alcohol is not scheduled substance and not generally the subject of a prescription. Alcohol can be abused, and the CDC and major medical organizations define alcohol abuse based on the amount and the circumstances of the user. Here's the CDC definition.

Quote
Alcohol abuse is a pattern of drinking that results in harm to one’s health, interpersonal relationships, or ability to work.

So basically someone (aka politicians who base decisions on fear and propoganda vs evidence based medicine) needs to make it a scheduled drug before it can be considered to be a drug of abuse. That seems like a good way of going about things.

Or we can realize the politics behind the scheduling of drugs and understand it is completely worthless when discussing the actual abuse potential of a drug, especially Marijuana.
15  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: U.S. senate to consider changing Marijuana status from Class 1 to Class 2 on: March 13, 2015, 02:00:04 pm
High potential for abuse? Based on what?

The argument is that people are willing to break the law to get marijuana, so that constitutes a high potential for abuse.
You phrased it in a manner that suggests that's not your argument, so please don't take this personally, but that is some serious Naso style logic.

You are correct, it's not my argument, but I've heard phrases like it many times, including from anti-marijuana lobbyists, but I have no one to attribute it to. I just thought the thread should have an example of what is said.

What does  high potential for abuse mean? That folks will buy it illegally? If so, that is rather circular, and as it is legalized by more and more states, it won't be illegal to buy it, except in the eyes of the Feds.

I don't claim it's a good argument, but I think it comes from the meaning of the word abuse. Medically abuse means intentionally taking something outside of its prescribed dose or indicated use. If the indicated dose is zero because it's schedule I then any use of it is abuse, so in that case it seems to be self-fulfilling that if lots of people are using it then there is a high potential of abuse.

So if someone uses alcohol for a non-medical use, it is abuse?

16  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 10, 2015, 02:32:43 pm
Here is what I would draw in Pima County and the Hispanic district in the Phoenix area.

AZ-2    Obama: 49.4% McCain:49.5%
AZ-3    Obama: 56.7% McCain: 42.2%   Hispanic: 60.5%
AZ-4    Obama: 63.9% McCain: 34.9%   Hispanic: 65.8%

17  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: St Louis police murder scandal (PLUS: riots, idiotic press conferences, etc.) on: March 10, 2015, 12:13:21 pm
No, it's not. Stop grasping at straws. I mean, wow, even I wasn't expecting it to be this bad.

I feel sorry for Obama, actually, for having to have put up with this.

Why is it not important? It makes a great deal of difference if he was 10 feet away and coming towards him or 30 feet away and facing towards him while still.
18  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: U.S. senate to consider changing Marijuana status from Class 1 to Class 2 on: March 10, 2015, 09:36:37 am
If Sativex needs to be approved, I would think a rescheduling of Marijuana would be necessary. And that drug is approved in almost 30 countries with a wide variety of uses so.....
19  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: St Louis police murder scandal (PLUS: riots, idiotic press conferences, etc.) on: March 10, 2015, 08:23:59 am
How far was Brown from Wilson when the fatal shots were fired? That is one of the most important thing to know and this report doesn't provide that. Why?
20  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 10, 2015, 12:24:29 am
Toriie, is the current Hispanic district 50% HVAP? I don't think it is and there is no reason to racially gerrymander to such an extent.

A good government map should have one whole district within Pima county. it would be very hard to convince me otherwise. What argument do you even have, besides inflating Hispanic numbers for no reason.

Your map isn't the worst Republican gerrymander (well, the last one is) but is certainly still a gerrymander. Furthermore, it most certainly is not a "good government" map and you should stop calling it that.

Well we will just have to agree to disagree. AZ-03 is 60% Hispanic (probably just based on population - HVAP might be more like 55%); they really packed it. The "Dem" AZ Commission moved the white liberals in Tucson into AZ-02, and AZ-03 took in lots of Hispanics in the Phoenix area to find the replacement, this time Hispanic, Democrats (which since they tend not to vote in high numbers, is why the Dem Hispanic incumbent's margins tend to be somewhat lackluster now). My little reverse gerrymander just moved the white liberals back out of AZ-02, but instead of going into AZ-03, they went into a Pub vote sink instead.  White liberals (and of course blacks when not leashed by the VRA), are the key groups to move around when gerrymandering.

Obviously krazen is more skilled at this than I am (having a Pub vote sink take in the white liberals, and the Dem Phoenix Hispanic vote sink take in the Hispanics, in a tag team effort to chop Tucson to bits). Now AZ-03 has basically mostly moved to Phoenix, except that rather than Hispanic Phoenix, it's now white Pub Phoenix. The only flaw in his map is that he failed to have all the AZ CD's take in some of Maricopa County, but he got closer than I did. Those Mormons in Mesa and environs are just spreading their seed everywhere as it were. Smiley

However, I am not sure kraxen's map is legal under the VRA. Creating an ersatz Hispanic CD like that, losing Hispanics on the perimeters in various locations to take in the core in disparate locations, might be viewed as racial gerrymandering ala that NC map, where SCOTUS axed that Watt CD back when. It may have taken erosity a bit too far. The point being that if an Hispanic (black) CD can be created that is compact, is it legal to make one hideously erose, going all over the state? Interesting question. Maybe Muon2 has a thought on it. It's one thing to create a majority minority CD that can only be done by going all over the place (not mandated of course, but legal); quite another when it is unnecessary to do so, to create the requisite majority minority CD.

Off topic, sbane, but what do you think my signature map is about? Smiley  You still in Nashville by the way?


I drew a district wholly within Pima County and used the excess to pad the Hispanic numbers in AZ-3. AZ-2 is a swing district with Obama and McCain getting almost the same number of votes. AZ-4 is more than 65% Hispanic. So you can have a district that is wholly within Pima County as well as two districts that can elect Hispanics.

Yeah, I am in Nashville until this summer. Plans after that haven't been finalized yet. Stay tuned!

And the mystery of the map was already solved on page 4 of this thread. Smiley
21  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 08, 2015, 09:29:28 pm
In other news, while Train and Bane fantasize about maps on the Cali terrain that will never, ever be drawn (I doubt the Dems will go even go so far as to do what I did, and suspect they will do absolutely nothing actually but enact the existing map (inter alia, Governor Brown not wanting to unduly embarrass himself) for reasons adduced by moi above), here is a "de-gerrymandered" good government map of AZ that the Commission should have drawn, but didn't, due to the Mathis mole machinations. Cheers. Tongue

Oh, in an attempt to be as solicitous and helpful to our Dem friends as possible, and resolve all doubts in their favor without deterioration in map quality, the third map below is an alternative for Phoenix that creates 2% to 3% Pub PVI CD's per 2008 figures (subtracting 5.5 points from the inflated favorite son McCain totals to correct for that distortion in the partisan baseline (5.5 points is my guess; the trend in 2008 was 7.31%, and the trend back to the Dems in 2012 was 1.72%, so it could be anywhere from 7.31% to 1.72, and the average of the two trends would be 4.52%), and the averagewhat AZ trended from 2004 to 2008 in the Pub direction). They get this alternative map in exchange for the CA Dems leaving the existing map alone (other than perhaps strengthening Dem incumbents which they really don't need to do anymore (other than perhaps the Costa CD), but I digress). Tongue

That map is a nasty gerrymander of Tucscon. And what you did with Tempe was cute too. Do you genuinely believe this is not a Republican gerrymander you have drawn?

Oh, did you ever draw a map that kept Tucson and adjacent Hispanic areas (I assume that you don't want to chop up the Hispanic community) all in one CD? You keep talking about chopping Tucson, but all the maps chop. The thing is, is that if you keep Tucson whole, sure it's Dem, but doesn't that make AZ-02 safely Pub in turn (you just turned the second Hispanic CD into a white liberal CD)?

Below is a map that keeps Tucson and adjacent burbs and Hispanics together, in a responsible way. Now what?



Maybe something like this?  You know what, I think the Pubs, if not in a krazen mood, might just cut a deal with you. Smiley  Moral of the story: once you lose from AZ-02 the white liberals in Tucson to unite the city in one CD, AZ-02 becomes safe Pub. That was the last thing the "Dem" AZ Commission wanted to do. They think your idea sucks, actually.
Tongue


I don't care what some partisans want. A whole district within Pima county is what makes sense and what a fair map would draw. Keep the metro area and county whole as much as possible.

And yes, I have drawn a map that keep Pima county together and the leftover population are the Hispanic areas which are put in Grijalva's district.
22  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 08, 2015, 03:58:09 pm
Toriie, is the current Hispanic district 50% HVAP? I don't think it is and there is no reason to racially gerrymander to such an extent.

A good government map should have one whole district within Pima county. it would be very hard to convince me otherwise. What argument do you even have, besides inflating Hispanic numbers for no reason.

Your map isn't the worst Republican gerrymander (well, the last one is) but is certainly still a gerrymander. Furthermore, it most certainly is not a "good government" map and you should stop calling it that.
23  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 07, 2015, 09:46:03 pm
In other news, while Train and Bane fantasize about maps on the Cali terrain that will never, ever be drawn (I doubt the Dems will go even go so far as to do what I did, and suspect they will do absolutely nothing actually but enact the existing map (inter alia, Governor Brown not wanting to unduly embarrass himself) for reasons adduced by moi above), here is a "de-gerrymandered" good government map of AZ that the Commission should have drawn, but didn't, due to the Mathis mole machinations. Cheers. Tongue

Oh, in an attempt to be as solicitous and helpful to our Dem friends as possible, and resolve all doubts in their favor without deterioration in map quality, the third map below is an alternative for Phoenix that creates 2% to 3% Pub PVI CD's per 2008 figures (subtracting 5.5 points from the inflated favorite son McCain totals to correct for that distortion in the partisan baseline (5.5 points is my guess; the trend in 2008 was 7.31%, and the trend back to the Dems in 2012 was 1.72%, so it could be anywhere from 7.31% to 1.72, and the average of the two trends would be 4.52%), and the averagewhat AZ trended from 2004 to 2008 in the Pub direction). They get this alternative map in exchange for the CA Dems leaving the existing map alone (other than perhaps strengthening Dem incumbents which they really don't need to do anymore (other than perhaps the Costa CD), but I digress). Tongue

That map is a nasty gerrymander of Tucscon. And what you did with Tempe was cute too. Do you genuinely believe this is not a Republican gerrymander you have drawn?
24  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 06, 2015, 11:14:04 pm
Here are the numbers for the map I posted in this thread. I kept all the districts together with their current occupants for easy comparison and drew the districts in fairly similar regions as the current districts.

CA-1* (La Malfa)- Obama: 59.4-40.6. Brown: 55.5-45.5
CA-2 (Huffman)- Obama: 60.6-39.4. Brown: 54.9-45.1
CA-3 (Garamendi)- Obama: 58.0-42.0. Brown: 55.5-45.5
CA-4 (McClintock)- McCain: 57.6-42.4. Whitman: 60.3-39.7
CA-5 (Thompson)-  Obama: 74.6-24.5. Brown: 69.1-30.9
CA-6 (Matsui)- Obama: 61.0-39.0. Brown: 60.7-39.3
CA-7 (Bera)- Obama: 60.0-40.0. Brown: 60.0-40.0
CA-8 (Cook)- McCain: 60.2-39.8. Whitman: 63.6-36.4
CA-9 (Mcnerney)- Obama: 59.8-40.2. Brown: 54.9-45.1
CA-10* (Denham)- Obama: 60.2-39.8. Brown: 54.3-45.7     Hispanic: 47.5%
CA-11 (De Saulnier)- Obama: 60.1-39.9. Brown: 55.7-44.3
CA-12 (Pelosi)- Obama: 86.4-13.6. Brown: 81.9-18.1
CA-13 (Lee)- Obama: 92.2-7.8. Brown: 90.6-9.4
CA-14 (Spier)- Obama: 74.4-25.6. Brown: 69.4-30.6
CA-15 (Swalwell)- Obama: 68.1-31.9. Brown: 61.1-38.9
CA-16 (Costa)- Obama: 59.5-40.5. Brown: 54.2-45.8     Hispanic: 54.8%
CA-17 (Honda)- Obama: 71.7-28.3. Brown: 66.4-33.6    Asian: 50.3%
CA-18 (Eshoo)- Obama: 74.2-25.8. Brown: 65.5-34.5
CA-19 (Lofgren)- Obama: 70.9-29.2. Brown: 64.2-35.8
CA-20 (Farr)- Obama: 66.6-33.4. Brown: 61.0-39.0       Hispanic: 47.1%
CA-21* (Valadao)- Obama: 60.3-39.7. Brown: 58.7-41.3      Hispanic: 75.3%
CA-22 (Nunes)- McCain: 60.8-39.2. Whitman: 65.5-34.5
CA-23 (McCarthy)- McCain: 63.0-37.0. Whitman: 63.7-36.3
CA-24 (Capps)- Obama: 61.8-38.2. Brown: 52.9-47.1
CA-25* (Knight)- Obama: 59.3-40.7. Brown: 53.7-46.3      Hispanic: 50.1%
CA-26 (Brownley)- Obama: 59.4-40.6. Brown: 51.8-48.2
CA-27 (Chu)- Obama: 60.1-39.9. Brown: 55.7-44.3      Asian: 38.2%
CA-28 (Schiff)- Obama: 72.6-27.4. Brown: 67.4-32.6
CA-29 (Cardenas)- Obama: 74.8-25.2. Brown: 71.5-28.5      Hispanic: 65.5%
CA-30 (Sherman)- Obama: 61.7-38.3. Brown: 52.5-47.5 
CA-31 (Aguilar)- Obama: 58.2-41.8. Brown: 54.4-45.6       Hispanic: 49.9%
CA-32 (Napolitano)- Obama: 66.6-33.4. Brown: 64.9-35.1       Hispanic:70.4%
CA-33 (Lieu)- Obama: 66.1-33.9. Brown: 58.6-41.4
CA-34 (Becerra)- Obama: 80.9-19.1. Brown: 82.5-17.5       Hispanic: 65.4%
CA-35 (Torres)- Obama: 60.1-39.9. Brown: 56.0-44.0      Hispanic: 62.0%
CA-36 (Ruiz)- Obama: 56.8-43.2. Brown: 51.5-48.5      Hispanic: 49.5%
CA-37 (Bass)- Obama: 86.4-13.6. Brown: 84.0-6.0       Hispanic: 39.9% Black: 22.5% White: 25.9%
CA-38 (Linda Sanchez)- Obama: 61.8-38.2. Brown: 58.4-41.6       Hispanic: 67.4%
CA-39* (Royce)- Obama: 58.9-41.1. Brown: 53.6-46.4       Hispanic: 46.1% Asian: 24.0%
CA-40 (Roybal-Allard)- Obama: 73.1-26.9. Brown: 72.1-27.9       Hispanic: 72.5%
CA-41 (Takano)- Obama: 58.2-41.8. Brown: 53.6-46.4       Hispanic: 52.4%
CA-42 (Calvert)- McCain: 58.5-41.5. Whitman: 66.5-33.5
CA-43 (Waters)- Obama: 94.3-5.7. Brown: 93.4-6.6       Hispanic: 63.0% Black: 33.1%
CA-44 (Hahn)- Obama: 63.8-36.2. Brown: 60.2-39.8
CA-45 (Walters)- McCain: 55.8-44.2. Whitman: 67.4-32.6
CA-46 (Loretta Sanchez)- Obama: 59.0-41.0. Brown: 52.8-47.2       Hispanic: 68.0%
CA-47 (Lowenthal)- Obama: 59.0-41.0. Brown: 52.6-47.4
CA-48^ (Rohrabacher)- Obama: 55.3-44.7. Whitman: 53.1-46.9     Hispanic: 30.4% Asian: 26.6%
CA-49^ (Issa)- Obama: 56.3-43.7. Whitman: 53.7-46.3
CA-50 (Hunter)- McCain: 60.5-39.5. Whitman: 68.0-32.0
CA-51 (Vargas)- Obama: 59.3-40.7. Brown: 55.0-45.0       Hispanic: 69.9%
CA-52 (Peters)- Obama: 62.2-37.8. Brown: 53.1-46.9       
CA-53 (Davis)- Obama: 59.0-41.0. Brown: 53.7-46.3

*= pickup (all went from R-->D)
^= swing seat

In 2010, Jerry Brown won 44 out of 53 of these districts while winning the state by a 13 point margin. Pretty solid map, I would say. Smiley
25  General Politics / Political Geography & Demographics / Re: Per SCOTUS, initiative created redistricting commissions may be l'histoire on: March 06, 2015, 08:41:49 pm
Didn't realize I hadn't posted the Norcal maps to this thread. Like I said, the u-shaped district is a little odd but can be defended as a "Mountains and Coast" district. Also, it doesn't really help that much because you still have to take in a lot of Republican territory while picking up Lake Tahoe, Truckee and Mammoth Lakes. Except for that, my map is really not that terrible in NorCal.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 526


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines