Regional Consolidation: Where to draw the lines? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 11, 2024, 08:53:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Regional Consolidation: Where to draw the lines? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Regional Consolidation: Where to draw the lines?  (Read 2951 times)
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« on: September 16, 2013, 09:06:48 PM »

I think it will be beneficial to start an open and public nationwide dialogue on this topic. Here's a nationwide population map, per the Census Bureau's most recent information; how do you think a three or four region Atlasia should look?


Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2013, 09:18:36 PM »

Tinkering around with it, it looks like a three region map must substantially resemble this one:



Anything that differs from this map by more than a few states will either have a sizable population disparity or rather nonsensical borders. There might be another sensible split, but I haven't found anything.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2013, 09:50:47 PM »


Green: 45
Blue: 35
Red: 39
Yellow: 58



Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Green: 81
Blue: 56
Red: 41
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2013, 09:59:12 PM »
« Edited: September 16, 2013, 10:03:33 PM by Bacon King »

Keep in mind that people are likely to change states no matter what the new map looks like, so population shouldn't be of huge concern.

Some people will move regions, definitely, but arguably if you draw the regions with roughly equal populations, then roughly equal numbers will be moving to and from each new region so population should still be roughly equitable in the end.



And here's my first shot at a four-region map:



edit: I only now realized this is literally Scott's four region map except MD is flipped Tongue

doubleedit: and furthermore wow I am terrible at addition apparently, the Southeast region has 39 not 50, I think I accidentally counted VA with the south when I did the counting
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2013, 10:56:15 PM »

The current map is fine. While many of the four region maps are tolerable the three region maps are absolutely horrid. As it is I oppose any idea of regional consolidation due to its irreparable harm towards the Mideast region.

I agree that is the biggest shortcoming of a "three region" plan. Given its central location, the Mideast would essentially be forced to be split between all three regions.
Logged
Bacon King
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,836
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.63, S: -9.49

« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2013, 09:18:43 AM »

Adam:

Including Canada on the maps would not be appropriate because, strictly speaking, no part of Canada is part of any region and the Canadian provinces are only associated with specific regions due to a bilateral treaty that can not be altered without the consent of the Canadian government!

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 11 queries.