Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 26, 2014, 03:35:27 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  US House Redistricting: California
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 Print
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: California  (Read 29355 times)
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #400 on: October 09, 2011, 05:23:22 pm »
Ignore



Since there was some complaining about the non VRA SBD district, I decided to see if it could be made a little more favorable to Republicans without radically changing it, which is not really possible, and not drawing a Republican gerrymander. The best thing the Republicans on the commission could asked for is no split of Upland. Make the 27th take in most of Montclair, instead of having it in the 35th, but now Montclair would need to be split instead of Upland though the vast majority would be in the 27th. Rialto still gets split, but to a lesser extent and the 35th just exchanges Latino areas in Montclair for Rialto so it still remains 50%+CVAP Latino. The Obama numbers barely move for the 31st even in this drawing, at 56% Obama instead of 57%. But most importantly the advantage in the governor's race in 2010 drop from a 8 point margin to only 3.

And picking up Highland would have been less beneficial. First of all those areas that seem to be painstakingly avoided are actually quite Democratic. But there are some suburban areas to the east of town that make up for it. If the map was made pretty and those areas added, in exchange for Rialto, I doubt the numbers would have moved much, especially not for the governor's race which is more important than Obama numbers (about 10,000 people in Highland would have to be kept in the desert district since Montclair is only about 40,000 people). And keeping all of Upland and Rancho Cucamonga together makes sense. If I was on the commission, I would have voted for this version.

Also the original version actually is barely majority Latino. That is why it takes in the southern part of Upland, which has a higher Latino population than the north. Of course that is the whole population and it drops to 35% CVAP, but I bet Latinos asked for that district. There is no vast left wing conspiracy! Who knew? Smiley
« Last Edit: October 09, 2011, 05:31:25 pm by sbane »Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #401 on: October 09, 2011, 06:31:39 pm »
Ignore

And trying to draw the Long Beach district mostly within LA county will lead to a Latino district not being 50% CVAP.....

Logged
freepcrusher
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2301
United States


View Profile
« Reply #402 on: November 14, 2011, 12:00:25 am »
Ignore

update: who's running where

From What I Know:

1st Herger
2nd Open
3rd Garamendi
4th McClintock
5th Thompson
6th Matsui
7th Lungren
8th Lewis? He'd be an idiot not to run there
9th McNerney
10th Denham
11th Miller
12th Pelosi
13th Lee
14th Speier
15th Stark
16th Costa
17th Honda
18th Eshoo
19th Lofgren
20th Farr
21st Open
22nd Nunes
23rd McCarthy
24th Capps
25th McKeon
26th Gallegly? I've heard he may retire
27th Chu
28th Schiff
29th Berman
30th Sherman
31st Open
32nd Napolitano
33rd Waxman
34th Becerra
35th Baca?
36th Bono
37th Bass
38th Linda Sanchez
39th Royce or Miller. I've heard Miller might throw the towel in
40th Roybal
41st Open
42nd Calvert
43rd Waters
44th Hahn maybe? I don't see how she thinks she can win the primary in a minority district
45th Campbell
46th Loretta Sanchez
47th Richardson? She's too corrupt to hold a D+4 district so I hope she retires
48th Rohrabacher
49th Issa
50th Hunter
51st Open
52nd Bilbray
53rd Davis
Logged

-1.38, -1.38
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29861
United States


View Profile
« Reply #403 on: November 14, 2011, 10:16:20 pm »
Ignore

Could you perhaps do the same thing only with the Obama numbers beside them instead of the candidates?
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5834
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #404 on: November 23, 2011, 09:20:23 pm »
Ignore

A petition for a referendum on the senate districts has been filed:

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/pending-signature-verification.htm#1499
Logged
nclib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8828


View Profile
« Reply #405 on: December 21, 2011, 08:25:37 pm »
Ignore

What is the best site for election results and demographics of the new districts, in addition to which districts overlap well with a 2000-2010 district?
Logged



[George W. Bush] has shattered the myth of white supremacy once and for all. -- Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY)

"George Bush supports abstinence. Lucky Laura."
- sign seen at the March for Women's Lives, 4/25/04

Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27416
United States


View Profile
« Reply #406 on: April 20, 2012, 07:05:09 pm »
Ignore

Which of these two versions of the CA-01-02-03-05 merry-go-round do you prefer, and why?  The CA-05 snake into Contra Costa follows with some changes the template of the Commission, and CA-03 doing the snake instead follows my original template. Is it half dozen one of the other, or is one clearly superior?  The question is framed in the context of a map which hews to best practice when it comes to generally accepted "good government" redistricting principles. Thanks.



« Last Edit: April 20, 2012, 09:00:02 pm by Torie »Logged

Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #407 on: April 20, 2012, 08:34:12 pm »
Ignore

I don't like that cut of SF from the north, especially by the 2nd. Overall I like the map on the right. Davis is in the 3rd in both maps, correct?
Logged
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27416
United States


View Profile
« Reply #408 on: April 20, 2012, 08:48:37 pm »
Ignore

I don't like that cut of SF from the north, especially by the 2nd. Overall I like the map on the right. Davis is in the 3rd in both maps, correct?

No, SF is not cut in either map (SF is cut from the south - the north thing was a Muon2 "innovation" to max his algorithm). Or did you mean SR? SR is cut in both maps, but it is disconcerting for a Marin CD  to not take Santa Rosa, while moving up north to take Eureka. On the other hand, the map on the left makes CA-02 more compact, while CA-05 basically becomes an all  SF metro CD, while CA-02 is more rural, and Marin due to its hyper tight land use controls, almost has a bucolic feel itself (Santa Rosa does not). Meanwhile, in the left side map, CA-03 basically becomes mostly a Central Valley CD, rather than a hybrid one, while CA-05 unites the wine country plus down market to middle class Contra Costa CD via down market Vallejo. so the left map is arguably better from a uniting of the distinct regions perspective (putting aside the class warfare consideration). However, the left map chops Vallejo, although in a rather logical way, but it is still a nasty chop. Yes, Davis is in CA-03 in both maps.

I assume that you can outline the pros and cons of both maps. The issue is what weight to give to them.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2012, 08:56:25 pm by Torie »Logged

jimrtex
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5834
Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #409 on: April 20, 2012, 11:48:35 pm »
Ignore

Which of these two versions of the CA-01-02-03-05 merry-go-round do you prefer, and why?  The CA-05 snake into Contra Costa follows with some changes the template of the Commission, and CA-03 doing the snake instead follows my original template. Is it half dozen one of the other, or is one clearly superior?  The question is framed in the context of a map which hews to best practice when it comes to generally accepted "good government" redistricting principles. Thanks.



I think the one on the right recognizes that Solano and Sonoma are contiguous and you shouldn't just arbitrarily cut across a county when it becomes convenient - even though Fairfield and Vacaville may not have that strong of tie to Vallejo.

Also, I'm not really fond of the coastal district coming all the way down into Marin.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8761


View Profile
« Reply #410 on: April 21, 2012, 04:31:47 am »

Which of these two versions of the CA-01-02-03-05 merry-go-round do you prefer, and why?  The CA-05 snake into Contra Costa follows with some changes the template of the Commission, and CA-03 doing the snake instead follows my original template. Is it half dozen one of the other, or is one clearly superior?  The question is framed in the context of a map which hews to best practice when it comes to generally accepted "good government" redistricting principles. Thanks.





I was most partial to CA-1 as on the left and CA-3 and 5 as on the right. Tongue From compactness, the left map sacrifices CA-2 to gain for the others, so it depends on whether compactness is by mean or median.

NW Contra Costa w/ Vallejo is the odd piece here. It doesn't really seem to go with either Napa or Fairfield as a community of interest. Keeping it with all of Solana makes sense from the goal of county integrity.

I don't like that cut of SF from the north, especially by the 2nd. Overall I like the map on the right. Davis is in the 3rd in both maps, correct?

No, SF is not cut in either map (SF is cut from the south - the north thing was a Muon2 "innovation" to max his algorithm).  

It also allows one to keep Redding with Chico. One problem is that the North Coast is short of population for two districts. Adding part of SF to a Marin-SR district is an alternative to Shasta Co in the north.

If you are considering all the rotations for that area, there is another. Marin + Richmond-Vallejo + Petaluma is just the right size and very compact. The rest of Sonoma + Napa + Lake and all but 10 K of Mendocino makes another compact district. Finally link Eureka to Redding and Chico to complete the north. A CV district similar to the left map CD-3 remains.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #411 on: April 21, 2012, 01:26:05 pm »
Ignore

I don't like that cut of SF from the north, especially by the 2nd. Overall I like the map on the right. Davis is in the 3rd in both maps, correct?

No, SF is not cut in either map (SF is cut from the south - the north thing was a Muon2 "innovation" to max his algorithm). Or did you mean SR? SR is cut in both maps, but it is disconcerting for a Marin CD  to not take Santa Rosa, while moving up north to take Eureka. On the other hand, the map on the left makes CA-02 more compact, while CA-05 basically becomes an all  SF metro CD, while CA-02 is more rural, and Marin due to its hyper tight land use controls, almost has a bucolic feel itself (Santa Rosa does not). Meanwhile, in the left side map, CA-03 basically becomes mostly a Central Valley CD, rather than a hybrid one, while CA-05 unites the wine country plus down market to middle class Contra Costa CD via down market Vallejo. so the left map is arguably better from a uniting of the distinct regions perspective (putting aside the class warfare consideration). However, the left map chops Vallejo, although in a rather logical way, but it is still a nasty chop. Yes, Davis is in CA-03 in both maps.

I assume that you can outline the pros and cons of both maps. The issue is what weight to give to them.

On balance I prefer the map on the right. In Sonoma County it steers clear of Santa Rosa and maybe Windsor. If Windsor is in the 5th and not the 2nd, even better since that is the dividing line between urban and rural area up there. Napa County going with a coastal district also is fine with me. The only other place it could go is with a Marin/Sonoma based district but even there it's not a perfect fit, especially if the district then proceeds to take in the working class areas of west Contra Costa. In the map on the right, those areas in Contra Costa are kept with Vallejo, a place that is similar, as well as Fairfield. I suppose it's not ideal that Davis is in that district but it's not as if Davis has any obvious area it should be matched with. Redding being in the 2nd is not ideal either but on balance that is the better map in my opinion.
Logged
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5476
United States


View Profile
« Reply #412 on: April 29, 2012, 06:02:45 pm »
Ignore

I don't like that cut of SF from the north, especially by the 2nd. Overall I like the map on the right. Davis is in the 3rd in both maps, correct?

No, SF is not cut in either map (SF is cut from the south - the north thing was a Muon2 "innovation" to max his algorithm). Or did you mean SR? SR is cut in both maps, but it is disconcerting for a Marin CD  to not take Santa Rosa, while moving up north to take Eureka. On the other hand, the map on the left makes CA-02 more compact, while CA-05 basically becomes an all  SF metro CD, while CA-02 is more rural, and Marin due to its hyper tight land use controls, almost has a bucolic feel itself (Santa Rosa does not). Meanwhile, in the left side map, CA-03 basically becomes mostly a Central Valley CD, rather than a hybrid one, while CA-05 unites the wine country plus down market to middle class Contra Costa CD via down market Vallejo. so the left map is arguably better from a uniting of the distinct regions perspective (putting aside the class warfare consideration). However, the left map chops Vallejo, although in a rather logical way, but it is still a nasty chop. Yes, Davis is in CA-03 in both maps.

I assume that you can outline the pros and cons of both maps. The issue is what weight to give to them.

On balance I prefer the map on the right. In Sonoma County it steers clear of Santa Rosa and maybe Windsor. If Windsor is in the 5th and not the 2nd, even better since that is the dividing line between urban and rural area up there. Napa County going with a coastal district also is fine with me. The only other place it could go is with a Marin/Sonoma based district but even there it's not a perfect fit, especially if the district then proceeds to take in the working class areas of west Contra Costa. In the map on the right, those areas in Contra Costa are kept with Vallejo, a place that is similar, as well as Fairfield. I suppose it's not ideal that Davis is in that district but it's not as if Davis has any obvious area it should be matched with. Redding being in the 2nd is not ideal either but on balance that is the better map in my opinion.


You don't think UC Davis should be split up like it is now? Tongue
Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #413 on: May 02, 2012, 04:26:32 pm »
Ignore

I see CA-03 is being talked about here. John Garamendi was a big loser in my opinion in redistricting going from a D+10 district to a D+1. His old district(well his current one) was in   the suburbs of San Fran I think with the town of Antioch being the base of the district. The current district looks like it is outside of the Sacramento suburbs on his campaign web site. The district looks like the shape of Texas.

I see CA-21 is still an open seat. Why doesn't Drier run there? Its an R+3 district which is the same PVI as his current district. It strikes me there is no Republican yet thats running there.

It seems to me the new California map the Republican districts got more Demoratic(Bilbray's) and the Dem districts got more Republican(Davis's.) Barbara Lee's new district has alot more black population(50%) than her current district(35%) I have heard though so therefore its more Democartic.

The new map could be a wash in my opinion except if you are Garamendi, Sherman or Berman(whoever wins there), or Laura Richardson. In a Republican Wave Year Garamendi is toast.
Logged
Хahar
Xahar
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 38877
Bangladesh


View Profile
« Reply #414 on: May 02, 2012, 06:20:43 pm »
Ignore

In a Republican Wave Year Garamendi is toast.

One might have said the same thing about McNerney, but he held his seat in 2010.
Logged

Update reading list

The idea of parodying the preceding Atlasian's postings is laughable, of course, but not for reasons one might expect.
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #415 on: May 02, 2012, 06:46:31 pm »
Ignore


I see CA-21 is still an open seat. Why doesn't Drier run there? Its an R+3 district which is the same PVI as his current district. It strikes me there is no Republican yet thats running there.

You do realize that district is in the Central Valley, don't you? Also it looks like David Valadao is running in that district.
Logged
Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29861
United States


View Profile
« Reply #416 on: May 02, 2012, 07:08:43 pm »
Ignore


I see CA-21 is still an open seat. Why doesn't Drier run there? Its an R+3 district which is the same PVI as his current district. It strikes me there is no Republican yet thats running there.

You do realize that district is in the Central Valley, don't you? Also it looks like David Valadao is running in that district.



Not that I agree with the concept, but haven't multiple Republicans in CA, "gone northward" to take advantage of opportunities?
Logged

He's BACK!!! His Time Has Come Once Again! Now We're All Gonna Die! No One is Safe From His Wrath!



Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27416
United States


View Profile
« Reply #417 on: May 02, 2012, 07:12:41 pm »
Ignore


I see CA-21 is still an open seat. Why doesn't Drier run there? Its an R+3 district which is the same PVI as his current district. It strikes me there is no Republican yet thats running there.

You do realize that district is in the Central Valley, don't you? Also it looks like David Valadao is running in that district.



Not that I agree with the concept, but haven't multiple Republicans in CA, "gone northward" to take advantage of opportunities?

Two, McClintock and Lungren, with the latter under a lot of stress, and the former an under performer. McClintock  just can't seem to cut it with the Grass Valley folks. CA-03 is polarized between very Dem Solano and Yuba, and the balance which is rather hyper Pub, but as in a few of the CD's, in the end the Dems tended to end up the presumptive top, and the Pubs the bottom.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2012, 07:14:58 pm by Torie »Logged

Gravis Marketing
brittain33
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12952


View Profile
« Reply #418 on: August 12, 2012, 09:35:11 am »
Ignore

The Republican convention is poised to do a 180 on its lame anti-senate-map referendum and encourage its defeat.

http://t.co/ODhK9IfT
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #419 on: August 12, 2012, 09:51:50 am »
Ignore

The Republican convention is poised to do a 180 on its lame anti-senate-map referendum and encourage its defeat.

http://t.co/ODhK9IfT
Lol.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2577


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #420 on: August 12, 2012, 12:11:46 pm »
Ignore

Quote
Republicans have feared that they could lose two of their 15 Senate seats this year, thus giving Democrats a two-thirds supermajority in the Legislature's 40-member upper house and enabling them to pass tax increase bills without GOP support.

Huff, however, told the committee that he now believes Repblicans can eke out 14 seats, thus denying Democrats a two-thirds majority, and under the new districts could pick up a seat or two in 2014. Therefore, he now wants the referendum to fail.

California Democrats will probably be able to reach 2/3+ in both chambers of the state legislature in the future, especially if that election-day voter registration bill passes this session and voter turnout (as a percentage of eligible voters, not registered) nears/hits 70% in presidential election years: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=154608.0

Tough times ahead for the California Republican party.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27416
United States


View Profile
« Reply #421 on: August 12, 2012, 02:08:09 pm »
Ignore

Quote
Republicans have feared that they could lose two of their 15 Senate seats this year, thus giving Democrats a two-thirds supermajority in the Legislature's 40-member upper house and enabling them to pass tax increase bills without GOP support.

Huff, however, told the committee that he now believes Repblicans can eke out 14 seats, thus denying Democrats a two-thirds majority, and under the new districts could pick up a seat or two in 2014. Therefore, he now wants the referendum to fail.

California Democrats will probably be able to reach 2/3+ in both chambers of the state legislature in the future, especially if that election-day voter registration bill passes this session and voter turnout (as a percentage of eligible voters, not registered) nears/hits 70% in presidential election years: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=154608.0

Tough times ahead for the California Republican party.

One might have a situation where the Dems in POTUS election years pass tax increases, and then they are repealed by referendum in off year elections. Tongue
Logged

greenforest32
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2577


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

View Profile
« Reply #422 on: August 12, 2012, 02:39:45 pm »
Ignore

Quote
Republicans have feared that they could lose two of their 15 Senate seats this year, thus giving Democrats a two-thirds supermajority in the Legislature's 40-member upper house and enabling them to pass tax increase bills without GOP support.

Huff, however, told the committee that he now believes Repblicans can eke out 14 seats, thus denying Democrats a two-thirds majority, and under the new districts could pick up a seat or two in 2014. Therefore, he now wants the referendum to fail.

California Democrats will probably be able to reach 2/3+ in both chambers of the state legislature in the future, especially if that election-day voter registration bill passes this session and voter turnout (as a percentage of eligible voters, not registered) nears/hits 70% in presidential election years: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=154608.0

Tough times ahead for the California Republican party.

One might have a situation where the Dems in POTUS election years pass tax increases, and then they are repealed by referendum in off year elections. Tongue

Maybe Republicans will get a 3/4 supermajority requirement for tax increases on the ballot. I could see that passing...

It's the law in Arkansas and Oklahoma already: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/budget/legislative-supermajority-to-raise-taxes%E2%80%942008.aspx
Logged
Sbane
sbane
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13512


View Profile
« Reply #423 on: August 12, 2012, 07:15:21 pm »
Ignore

The Republican convention is poised to do a 180 on its lame anti-senate-map referendum and encourage its defeat.

http://t.co/ODhK9IfT

LOL they must have seen the results from June and realized the map isn't actually that bad unless they get blown out of the water. And while California did vote by 24 points for Obama and by similar margins for some statewide candidates, it hasn't voted more than about 16-17 points for the Dems for assembly and senate seats. Even in 2006 and 2008.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8761


View Profile
« Reply #424 on: August 12, 2012, 07:26:20 pm »

The Republican convention is poised to do a 180 on its lame anti-senate-map referendum and encourage its defeat.

http://t.co/ODhK9IfT

LOL they must have seen the results from June and realized the map isn't actually that bad unless they get blown out of the water. And while California did vote by 24 points for Obama and by similar margins for some statewide candidates, it hasn't voted more than about 16-17 points for the Dems for assembly and senate seats. Even in 2006 and 2008.

They may evolve to be like MA where there's a tendency to elect state officials from the GOP to keep the Assembly somewhat in check.
Logged


Partial solar eclipse of April 15, 2014 with a cloud and large sunspot.
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines