US House Redistricting: Nevada

[minionofmidas]

I knew the outer Clark district would extend into rural Nevada, but I wouldn't have guessed it would be that far.

[minionofmidas]

I knew the outer Clark district would extend into rural Nevada, but I wouldn't have guessed it would be that far.

To be fair, there are around 12 people living in the non-Clark parts of the district.

Well yeah, but there are only 17 people in the whole of Nevada outside of Clark, Pahrump, Washoe, Carson, Douglas and Lyon - what I'd call the inhabitated parts of the state.

[minionofmidas]

I chose to split Elko county rather than Churchill county in the north. In the south I tried to keep much of CD 3 intact only dropping the parts on the west side of Las Vegas to new CD 4. I improved the Hispanic influence in CD 1 to 49%. All districts are with 100 of the ideal population using the estimates.

That CD4 is a monstrosity.

[minionofmidas]

How risky would a hypothetical 3-1 map for Democrats be?  Would such a map get into VRA trouble?

It won't get past the governor's desk, so... and such a map would have to have two Clark County-to-Reno districts, otherwise a Republican northern district and Republican exurban Clark district draw themselves.

Pretty sure a 2-1-1 map, with the northern seat the swingy one (but still a slight Republican tilt) would be very easy to draw. And would be what I'd do as a Democrat in full control.

[minionofmidas]

Yes, but northwest Nevada doesn't need to be split, and in this map it (marginally) is.

[minionofmidas]

Someone draw me a map with three Republican Reno-to-empty-to-Las-Vegas districts and a hardpacked most-Dem-possible seat in Vegas, please.

[minionofmidas]

So three competitive districts. I endorse such a plan.

[minionofmidas]

Why should they? It's not as if it could potentially end up worse than 2-2 if it goes to the court. (Okay, so I suppose it could end up 1-2-1 with the two being D leans... that then fall due to a wave election and/or weakass candidate selection.)

[minionofmidas]

This looks like it was from the first map they passed:

I did my best to draw it in DRA:

NV-01 - 59-39 Obama
NV-02 - 49-48 Obama
NV-03 - 56-42 Obama
NV-04 - 57-41 Obama

I... don't think that's going to fly with the governor.

Wow 3 D seats and 1 swing seat? That's pretty bold.

Not really. That's 3 districts on the brink of lean Dem and safe Dem, and 1 safe Rep.

[minionofmidas]

This looks like it was from the first map they passed:

I did my best to draw it in DRA:

NV-01 - 59-39 Obama
NV-02 - 49-48 Obama
NV-03 - 56-42 Obama
NV-04 - 57-41 Obama

I... don't think that's going to fly with the governor.

Wow 3 D seats and 1 swing seat? That's pretty bold.

Not really. That's 3 districts on the brink of lean Dem and safe Dem, and 1 safe Rep.

Has there been a massive reconsideration of the Northern district? I seem to remember reading that the seat was attainable to the Democrats

Well, we both know what happened to that argument. Though no advertising in Vegas obviously didn't help either.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, it's not drawn to be most-Dem-favorable-possible in that map. Quite the opposite. Not that the effect is going to be major.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, so the first district is definitely "safe".
I may have been exaggerating slightly to counterweigh the effect of the misrepresentation in the post I was replying to, you know.

[minionofmidas]

It's not as if there's any factual disagreement here, so I really have no idea what you're on about. It's a gerry. What's important is which areas in continuously built-up LV are excluded from the two districts there, of course:

[minionofmidas]

I've concluded that a district with over 50% HVAP is not possible. Given the Bartlett decision, I don't know that any section 2 claim is possible, regardless of bloc voting analysis. So I'm not sure why there is so much focus on the voting behavior if the first prong of the Gingles test can't be satisfied.

Because Sandoval doesn't have any other arguments (despite the obvious, and quite reasonable, one that it takes a fat gerrymander to make a 3-1 map, of course.)

[minionofmidas]

That article sounds like the Dems just jiggled the first and fourth' areas from their original plan around... and switched the numbers 3 and 4. In other words, still a 3-1 gerry.

[minionofmidas]

Into Lyon County? Seriously? Anybody got a map of the split?
They seem to have valued compact-look-at-first-glance over all other criteria. (You'd pretty much have to to come up with a map that doesn't have the two-fillings donut, but they went well beyond that.)

[minionofmidas]

Hehe that's awesome. Outside shot at 3 districts depending on what kind of extremist comes out of the NV-4 primary.

Uh, it is far more likely that map elects 3 Democrats than 3 Republicans. Especially if you want to talk about nominating extremists, something the Nevada Democratic Party isn't exactly known for and the Nevada GOP obviously doesn't mind doing.

Are you aware of the meaning of the phrase "outside shot"?

[minionofmidas]

Into Lyon County? Seriously? Anybody got a map of the split?
They seem to have valued compact-look-at-first-glance over all other criteria. (You'd pretty much have to to come up with a map that doesn't have the two-fillings donut, but they went well beyond that.)

The Lyon split is very reasonable. There is a natural divide due to a ridge between Yerington and Silver Spring. The state map is on page 15 of this document.

The existence of that natural divide was the reason why I asked the question.

[minionofmidas]

Had to be done.



1st 71.2% Obama, 47.5% Hispanic (41.2% VAP)
3rd 53.7% Obama, 60.6% White
4th 52.4% Obama, 58.1% White

Boundary of 4th and 2nd matches special masters map.

[minionofmidas]

NV-01: Obama 64.5, McCain 33.0, Dem 64.4, Rep 35.6
NV-02: Obama 49.5, McCain 48.2, Dem 45.3, Rep 54.7
NV-03: Obama 53.6, McCain 44.5, Dem 49.7, Rep 50.3
NV-04: Obama 56.1, McCain 41.7, Dem 54.0, Rep. 46.0

Just compare with my Dem pack just above. Quite a bit of it ends up in the 4th.