US House Redistricting: New York
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:03:54 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  US House Redistricting: New York
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: New York  (Read 135247 times)
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #950 on: March 20, 2012, 04:32:39 PM »

How in the world did you plan to sell it, Muon2?  Or did you not do the Westchester and Long Island gerrymanders?  What was your Hispanic percentage for the Crowley CD?

Of course I refrained from the LI/Westchester gerrys. I'm all about county integrity. Smiley For the NYC minority districts I note that the city is 22.2% BVAP and 26.7% HVAP. This would be 2.53 and 3.04 CDs respectively. I provide for three black-majority districts by including a small part of Nassau, and it is designed to make the remainder of Hempstead Town with Long Beach exactly one CD.

I provide for three CDs with a HVAP majority. If the plan is to seriously considered for Hispanic CDs then the HVAP should be large enough to consistently elect a candidate of choice without knowledge of other electoral factors. The proposed plan has only one such CD in The Bronx, with one other CD at 52% and two in the high 40% range. Crowley's success, demonstrates that the upper 40's will not elect a candidate of choice, and Velasquez' success in a neighboring district is presumably due to other factors. My CD 13 and CD 15 are 52% and 63% similar to the court plan. My CD 7 is 57.2% and should be far more likely to elect a candidate of choice for Hispanics than the two sub-50% districts in the court plan. This effectively combines populations in those two sub-50% HVAP districts, and is not retrogression since one of those districts was not electing a candidate of choice.

Here's my original post:

I had hoped to put together a plan for submission last night, but my DRA hung at about 10:30 when I was checking the districts prior to creating a file. But I can still share my work here.

I based my plan on the same model I used in the CA exercise. I started with regions of whole counties that were nearly equal to a whole number of districts:

Southern NY (CD 1-19, +1398)
Northern NY (CD 20-22, -702)
Western NY (CD 23-27, -695)

The regions were divided based on nearly whole counties with at most one town split in a county. Splits were used to get all deviations under 0.1% at the precinct level, and all but two districts are under 300 deviation. This is the resulting map for the state:



Within the NYC area districts were grouped to fit counties as well:
LI (CD 1-4, -37,948)
Queens (CD 5-7, +77,600)
Brooklyn/SI (CD 8-11, +102,600)
Manhattan/Bronx (CD 12-15, +100,151)
Lower Hudson (CD 16-19, -241,005)

Shifts and additional county breaks were made to get 3 Black-majority districts and 3 Hispanic-majority districts. The NYC area map look like this:



Here are the demographics including VAPs over 20%. Estimated PVIs are based on the 2008 Pres using Torie's spreadsheet factor.

LONG ISLAND
CD 1 (Smithtown) W 80.1% [R+2]
CD 2 (Islip) W 66.2% [D+1]
CD 3 (Hicksville) W 71.2% [R+1]
CD 4 (Hempstead) W 64.2% [D+1]

QUEENS
CD 5 (Flushing) W 43.4%, A 33.9% [D+9]
CD 6 (S Jamaica) B 50.4% [D+33]
CD 7 (Corona) H 59.4% [D+30]

BROOKLYN/STATEN ISLAND
CD 8 (Borough Park) W 55.7% A 23.4% [R+5]
CD 9 (Staten Island) W 67.1% [R+5]
CD 10 (East NY) W 23.6%, B 50.2% [D+38]
CD 11 (Flatbush) W 30.6%, B 50.3% [D+38]

MANHATTAN/BRONX
CD 12 (Manhattan) W 64.2% [D+31]
CD 13 (Harlem) B 28.2%, H 52.1% [D+40]
CD 14 (Triboro) W 54.1%, H 23.8% [D+24]
CD 15 (South Bronx) B 29.3%, H 63.1% [D+41]

LOWER HUDSON
CD 16 (Yonkers) W 41.3%, B 29.0%, H 23.3% [D+18]
CD 17 (White Plains) W 67.9% [D+5]
CD 18 (Newburgh) W 75.1% [D+1]
CD 19 (Albany) W 77.3% [D+5]

NORTHERN NY
CD 20 (Schenectady) W 90.0% [R+1]
CD 21 (Utica) W 90.2% [R+2]
CD 22 (Syracuse) W 85.8% [D+3]

WESTERN NY
CD 23 (Binghampton) W 88.9% [D+0]
CD 24 (Niagara Falls) W 91.6% [R+6]
CD 25 (Rochester) W 76.0% [D+6]
CD 26 (Elmira) W 93.1% [R+8]
CD 27 (Buffalo) W 76.5% [D+9]
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #951 on: March 20, 2012, 04:44:39 PM »

Pity you guys picked up on the Orthodox Jewish submission. I was going to put up a poll, with all the usual suspects listed, from myself to BRTD to Muon2 to Sbane to NY Jew to Lewis to Brittain33 and so on, and ask who do you think would like the map best. But now the answer has been given away. Sad

Here is their entire map.

Wow, that Staten Island-Ozone Park district is really something else.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #952 on: March 20, 2012, 04:48:06 PM »

Pity you guys picked up on the Orthodox Jewish submission. I was going to put up a poll, with all the usual suspects listed, from myself to BRTD to Muon2 to Sbane to NY Jew to Lewis to Brittain33 and so on, and ask who do you think would like the map best. But now the answer has been given away. Sad

Here is their entire map.

Wow, that Staten Island-Ozone Park district is really something else.

It is no problem. Most folks know how to swim these days. Bridges are just for the physically challenged.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #953 on: March 20, 2012, 07:54:53 PM »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #954 on: March 20, 2012, 09:38:48 PM »

Pity you guys picked up on the Orthodox Jewish submission. I was going to put up a poll, with all the usual suspects listed, from myself to BRTD to Muon2 to Sbane to NY Jew to Lewis to Brittain33 and so on, and ask who do you think would like the map best. But now the answer has been given away. Sad

Here is their entire map.

Wow, that Staten Island-Ozone Park district is really something else.

It is no problem. Most folks know how to swim these days. Bridges are just for the physically challenged.

NY had a Rockland-Richmond-Kings district at one time.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #955 on: March 20, 2012, 10:17:14 PM »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).

The question I don't understand is how they make a case. To appeal to the federal court they would have to argue that they are a racial or language minority. Religion is not covered by the 15th amendment, and probably by the 1st amendment it can't be used.
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #956 on: March 20, 2012, 10:22:27 PM »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).

Do you really think that the Orthodox Jews would elect (Catholic) Turner if it were up to them? He'd loose a primary in any Orthodox-majority district before you can say "Jesus".

Partisan arguments can't be a problem: the courts have repeatedly ruled that it's ok to gerrymander for partisan ends. The problem is dilution of a racial/ethnic/other minority group for the purposes of preventing it from electing the candidate of their choice. It is hard to see how a district that maximizes the concentration of the target group (Orthodox Jews) could be wrong here. It is also hard to see how reducing the proportion of that group in the district (as would be the case in the South Brooklyn district as compared w/ the North-Central Brooklyn district) could help the Orthodox Jews elect the candidate of their choice that would not also be supported by some other major group. Of course, it is simply impossible to get a district in Brooklyn where Orthodox Jews would be able to elect candidate of their choice without them happening to coincide with some other, not Orthodox community - there are simply not enough of them (especially, if we just look at the voting age population).

That's why, any proposed "Orthodox Jewish" district would have to rely at least as strongly on other, non-Orthodox, or even non-Jewish groups to do the trick - the Russians, the Irish, the Italians or whatever. But at that point it becomes a matter of coalition building, not of electing a candidate of the Orthodox Jewish choice. In as much as "candidate of choice" seems to be an euthemism for "one of their own", this is going to fail outright - a proper Hasid won't get elected in such a district (many Russians would, probably, rather vote Dem, as would many of the other elements of this "Republican coalition"). Turner is certainly not one of them, and would not have been their choice if they could decide on their own.

Hence the difficulty with defining the "protected group". The Orthodox Jews simply are not numerous or concentrated enough for a district (unless one finds a way of linking Borough Park and Rockland county in one district Smiley) ). Protecting Jews as such - a group that less than 4 years ago voted, what, 70% for Obama - would not seem to require drawing a Republican district; if anything, that would prevent the Jews at large from electing representatives of their choice. So NY Jew and his kind have invented a new "protected group": Republican Jews - which includes the Orthodox and the Russians (especially the first-generation immigrants among those), but excludes the bulk of the Jews in Manhattan, Park Slope, Brooklyn Heights, etc. For their purposes Bob Turner is a member of this group, while Woody Allen isn't. Fine by me - but they'd have to pursuade Justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Kagan Smiley)))
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #957 on: March 20, 2012, 10:30:04 PM »
« Edited: March 20, 2012, 10:37:26 PM by ag »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).

The question I don't understand is how they make a case. To appeal to the federal court they would have to argue that they are a racial or language minority. Religion is not covered by the 15th amendment, and probably by the 1st amendment it can't be used.

Racial minority. Hm.... has a nasty tinge when applied to Jews, don't you think so? Are Jews a race? Linguistic minority sounds better. It would work for the Hassidim - many of them, especially the Satmars, I believe, are still largely Yiddish-speaking. Might be more trouble w/ other Orthodox, though, (do they still speak much Yiddish in Lithuanian yeshivas? I don't know), if we take the current linguistic situation, but, probably, could be argued by descent for most Ashkenazic Jews in Brooklyn, including almost all the ex-Soviets (the Bukharans and the Georgians, whose ancestors have never been Yiddish-speaking, are, mostly, in Queens). It would, of course, exclude the Sephardim, unless that common language is defined as Hebrew - which would, in all frankness, exclude the Russians Smiley) But Sephardim are not so big in Brooklyn (though, of course, present), so, I guess, it is fine. So, the ultimate irony: the despised "jargon" would, probably, serve best as the identifier for the group to be protected Smiley))) As somebody who has a fair deal of sentimental attachment for the language of Sholom Aleykhem, I'd be thrilled Smiley)))  

Of course, the problem then would be how to avoid including all those liberal Manhattan/Park Slope Jews, who would be as much part of the same community (you can't exclude them by only considering current Yiddish-speakers, as that would exclude the Russians as well). If you include them, it becomes unclear why the protected group should be electing a Republican, if it is, mostly, Democratic Smiley) But then the same problem would be even more acute if the racial argument were to be used. Tough....
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #958 on: March 20, 2012, 10:34:20 PM »
« Edited: March 20, 2012, 10:49:23 PM by ag »

The question I don't understand is how they make a case. To appeal to the federal court they would have to argue that they are a racial or language minority. Religion is not covered by the 15th amendment, and probably by the 1st amendment it can't be used.

Imagine getting it up to the Supreme Court and arguing it in front of the current roster of the Justices Smiley))

Justice Ginsburg: "Would, say, some of us present here be considered a part of the same protected minority".

NY Jew: "With all due respect, justice, I would say that this minority is defined not merely in terms of ancestral usage of Yiddish, but in terms of current cultural practice and personal identification".

Justice Kagan "Are you suggesting that myself and Justice Ginsburg are not Jewish?"

NY Jew: "I wouldn't say that. But, the self-hating Jews might as well be considered anti-semites, and, so, definitely, would not be part of the protected minority. Then, of course, come to think about this, as the example of Bob Turner shows, Justice Scalia might well be part of it".

I just can imagine it. It would be a great show Smiley)
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #959 on: March 20, 2012, 10:39:04 PM »

Pity you guys picked up on the Orthodox Jewish submission. I was going to put up a poll, with all the usual suspects listed, from myself to BRTD to Muon2 to Sbane to NY Jew to Lewis to Brittain33 and so on, and ask who do you think would like the map best. But now the answer has been given away. Sad

Here is their entire map.

Wow, that Staten Island-Ozone Park district is really something else.

It is no problem. Most folks know how to swim these days. Bridges are just for the physically challenged.

NY had a Rockland-Richmond-Kings district at one time.

That could be great for the Orthodox Jews! Well, I guess, it would have to be drawn along the Hudson, because if it takes any significant population on Manhattan, there is a way of making it Jewish, but no way of making it Republican Smiley))
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #960 on: March 20, 2012, 11:40:27 PM »

During what period was that district drawn like that?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #961 on: March 21, 2012, 12:28:13 AM »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).

The question I don't understand is how they make a case. To appeal to the federal court they would have to argue that they are a racial or language minority. Religion is not covered by the 15th amendment, and probably by the 1st amendment it can't be used.
European languages are not covered, so they would have to claim that they speak Hebrew at home, rather than Yiddish, and then encourage people to say they can only speak English "well" (the census found that too many people were saying they could speak English "well", so that the language test is less than "very well").  Since the standard is based on both numbers 10,000 or a percentage, they could start by getting Hebrew-language ballots in Brooklyn.
Logged
danny
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,768
Israel


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #962 on: March 21, 2012, 06:27:08 AM »

Might be more trouble w/ other Orthodox, though, (do they still speak much Yiddish in Lithuanian yeshivas? I don't know)

I checked and the best I came up with were http://www.mla.org/map_data_results&state_id=34&place_id=38580&cty_id=(home to the Beth Medrash Govoha.
So that would probably be an English majority with significant Yiddish and Hebrew minorities amongst the Litvishers. Does that count as a linguistic minority?
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #963 on: March 21, 2012, 08:10:16 AM »

Might be more trouble w/ other Orthodox, though, (do they still speak much Yiddish in Lithuanian yeshivas? I don't know)

I checked and the best I came up with were http://www.mla.org/map_data_results&state_id=34&place_id=38580&cty_id=(home to the Beth Medrash Govoha.
So that would probably be an English majority with significant Yiddish and Hebrew minorities amongst the Litvishers. Does that count as a linguistic minority?

According to the site there are less than 200K Yiddish and Hebrew speakers throughout NY. They would not reach the 50% of a CD required for VRA section 2 status, assuming they were a recognized minority.

There are certainly enough for legislative districts, however. If they are shown to vote as a bloc differently than the rest of the population in their area, then they would meet the Gingles test. That still leaves the question as to whether they could be recognized as such. It's perhaps useful to note that Hispanics as a language minority were not in the original VRA but were added later.
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #964 on: March 21, 2012, 08:16:32 AM »

Claiming they speak Hebrew at home won't cut it for some of the Hassidim: they make a point not to Smiley) It's loshn koydesh vs. mama loshn, and you don't use the former to talk about chickens.

But then, if Scottish Gaelic is not a European language by Australian law, what would prevent Yiddish from not being a European language by American law? For that matter, there are almost no speakers left in Europe Smiley)
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #965 on: March 21, 2012, 09:51:21 AM »

Man, Hasids love No True Scotsman more than any other group.
Logged
danny
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,768
Israel


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #966 on: March 21, 2012, 12:04:51 PM »

If Yiddish is a problem because it originated in Europe, than wouldn't Spanish have the same problem?
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #967 on: March 21, 2012, 01:28:09 PM »

5 districts? NY Jew, have you seen what they did to Austin?

A better example is Will County, Illinois, which has the distinction of being chopped into 6 districts. I think that might be a record!
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #968 on: March 21, 2012, 01:28:31 PM »

During what period was that district drawn like that?
From 1792 to 1796 there was a Richmond-Westchester district (The Bronx was not set off until much later), but in mid-decade redistricting, Richmond was added back to the Long Island district.

Then 1822-1840 Kings, Richmond, and Rockland (New York City only included Manhattan)

Then Richmond was with Queens and Suffolk (Nassau wasn't created until later).

It was in 1892 that Richmond started being placed with Manhattan.  In the 1950s it was moved to Brooklyn.  The 1960s district was Richmond and SE Brooklyn, and in the 1970s back to Manhattan.
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #969 on: March 21, 2012, 06:44:14 PM »

Anyway, it is not hard to draw a district that would include the entire Borough Park, Park Slope, Brooklyn Heights, Midwood Jewish parts of Williamsburg, Crown Heights, Flatbush, etc. - I even got the entire Gravesend and half the Homecrest in (Ocean Parkway is in all the way through to the Belt Parkway) that would be 66.5% Obama (72.1% Dem on average). It's only 9% black - no concern there. 12.9% Hispanic and 11.3% Asian - but you can't draw a Hispanic district from those parts anyway. There is still a lot of stuff I've included for no good reason to pad the Dem margin (such as Red Hook) that could be removed to replace w/ Jewish neighborhoods without making it less than 60% Obama. Of course, once you insist on including Brighton and Manhattan Beach, it would change - but why include those atheist ex-Commies Smiley)?
there are way more Orthodox shuls in Brighton Beach then in Park Slope
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #970 on: March 21, 2012, 06:52:12 PM »

One quick point I would like to make here in the Orthodox Jewish seat argument is that if such a seat is drawn to grant representation specifically to the Orthodox Jewish minority is that for such a seat to do just that, the main premise would be that the seat needs to be drawn so that the Orthodox community is able to elect the representative of their choice. It does not need to be majority Orthodox Jewish. We often use this standard with other minority groups throughout the country in redistricting. Note, I am not arguing that the Orthodox Jewish community is large enough that representation should be legally required, but if it is, the district needs to be drawn so that other groups will not drown out the Orthodox vote. This means that the other groups cannot be too heavily partisan against the Orthodox prefered candidate (which right now seems to be Turner).

Do you really think that the Orthodox Jews would elect (Catholic) Turner if it were up to them? He'd loose a primary in any Orthodox-majority district before you can say "Jesus".

Partisan arguments can't be a problem: the courts have repeatedly ruled that it's ok to gerrymander for partisan ends. The problem is dilution of a racial/ethnic/other minority group for the purposes of preventing it from electing the candidate of their choice. It is hard to see how a district that maximizes the concentration of the target group (Orthodox Jews) could be wrong here. It is also hard to see how reducing the proportion of that group in the district (as would be the case in the South Brooklyn district as compared w/ the North-Central Brooklyn district) could help the Orthodox Jews elect the candidate of their choice that would not also be supported by some other major group. Of course, it is simply impossible to get a district in Brooklyn where Orthodox Jews would be able to elect candidate of their choice without them happening to coincide with some other, not Orthodox community - there are simply not enough of them (especially, if we just look at the voting age population).

That's why, any proposed "Orthodox Jewish" district would have to rely at least as strongly on other, non-Orthodox, or even non-Jewish groups to do the trick - the Russians, the Irish, the Italians or whatever. But at that point it becomes a matter of coalition building, not of electing a candidate of the Orthodox Jewish choice. In as much as "candidate of choice" seems to be an euthemism for "one of their own", this is going to fail outright - a proper Hasid won't get elected in such a district (many Russians would, probably, rather vote Dem, as would many of the other elements of this "Republican coalition"). Turner is certainly not one of them, and would not have been their choice if they could decide on their own.

Hence the difficulty with defining the "protected group". The Orthodox Jews simply are not numerous or concentrated enough for a district (unless one finds a way of linking Borough Park and Rockland county in one district Smiley) ). Protecting Jews as such - a group that less than 4 years ago voted, what, 70% for Obama - would not seem to require drawing a Republican district; if anything, that would prevent the Jews at large from electing representatives of their choice. So NY Jew and his kind have invented a new "protected group": Republican Jews - which includes the Orthodox and the Russians (especially the first-generation immigrants among those), but excludes the bulk of the Jews in Manhattan, Park Slope, Brooklyn Heights, etc. For their purposes Bob Turner is a member of this group, while Woody Allen isn't. Fine by me - but they'd have to pursuade Justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Kagan Smiley)))
1 this was a great map I would have moved more of Bensenhurst into it. besides Orthodox + Russian Jews are around 60% of NYC Jewish population.
Logged
Cliff Racer
Newbie
*
Posts: 12


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #971 on: March 21, 2012, 07:00:34 PM »

5 districts? NY Jew, have you seen what they did to Austin?

A better example is Will County, Illinois, which has the distinction of being chopped into 6 districts. I think that might be a record!
Gonna need a lot more chopping than that to keep up with California's huge counties. Of course thats not so much gerrymandering as it is LA county having a ton of people.
Logged
Cliff Racer
Newbie
*
Posts: 12


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #972 on: March 21, 2012, 07:06:46 PM »

edit: Ah heck, dp
Logged
NY Jew
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 538


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #973 on: March 21, 2012, 07:19:58 PM »

But Sephardim are not so big in Brooklyn (though, of course, present), so, I guess, it is fine. So, the ultimate irony: the despised "jargon" would, probably, serve best as the identifier for the group to be protected Smiley)))

you do know that south of Jewish Flatbush is mostly Syrian.
 Brooklyn probably has more sefradiem then any other place outside of Israel
Syrian shuls in  Brooklyn (there are other sefardi groups) according to wikapedia (I think this missed a few)

    * Ahaba Ve Ahva, at 1744 Ocean Parkway between Kings Highway and Quentin Road, for Egyptian Jews. - Rabbi Shimon Alouf (Rosh Yeshiba of the Sephardic Rabbinical College).
    * Ahaba Ve Ahva Congregation and Yeshiva, at 2001 East 7th Street.
    * Ahi Ezer Congregation, at 1885 Ocean Parkway. The synagogue generally serves the Damascus or (Shami) Syrian community. - Rabbi Shaul Maslaton
    * Ahi Ezer Torah Center, at 1950 East 7th Street.
    * Ahi Ezer Yeshiva, a synagogue housed on the ground floor of the Ahi Ezer Elementary School, at 2433 Ocean Parkway. Originally built as an extension for Damascus (Shami) Jews, it currently has a mostly Egyptian attendance. - Rabbi Hanania Elbaz
    * Ateret Torah, at 901 Quentin Road, for Haredim. - Rabbi Yosef Harari Raful
    * Avenue O Synagogue or Ohel Yeshua VeSarah, at 808 Avenue O. - Rabbi Shemuel Beyda
    * Avenue U Synagogue, at 400 Avenue U.
    * Congregation Beth El, at 2181 East 3rd Street between Avenue U and Avenue V.
    * Bet Shaul U'Miriam, at 2208 Avenue S (Madison Neighborhood). - Rabbi David Cohen
    * Beth Torah, at 1061 Ocean Parkway (Midwood Neighborhood), founded by Albert Shalom. - Rabbi Yehuda A. Azancot
    * Bet Yaakob, now situated in the former Ahaba Ve Ahva synagogue, at 1801 Ocean Parkway. - Rabbi Eli Mansour
    * Beth Yosef, also known as Beth Levy, at 2108 Ocean Parkway (Gravesend Neighborhood).
    * Congregation Bnai Yosef, the Sitt Shul, at 1616 Ocean Parkway, on the corner of Avenue P. - Rabbi Haim Benoliel
    * Bnei Binyamin Torah Center, at 727 Avenue O. - Rabbi Solomon Seruya
    * Bnei Yitzhak, at 730 Avenue S. - Rabbi Harold Sutton (Rosh Yeshiba of the Magen David Yeshiva, and Rosh Kollel of the Sephardic Rabbinical College).
    * Bnei Yitzhak Annex, at 718 Avenue S.
    * Hesed Avraham, at 59 Gravesend Neck Road.
    * Har Halebanon, at 820 Avenue S. - Rabbi David Jemal and Rabbi Clem Harari
    * Hayim Shaal Congregation, at 1123 Avenue N (Midwood Neighborhood). - Rabbi Mordechai Maslaton
    * Keter Sion, at 1914 East 8th Street. - Rabbi Max Maslaton (son of Rabbi Sion Maslaton)
    * Kol Israel Congregation, at 3211 Bedford Avenue. - Rabbi Dr. Raymond Harari (Rosh Yeshiva of the Yeshiva of Flatbush).
    * Kollel Ohel Moshe, also known as Rabbi Lankry's Synagogue, at 1848 East 7th Street between Avenue R and Kings Highway, for Moroccan Jews. - Rabbi Shlomo Lankry
    * Madison Torah Center, at 2221 Avenue R. - Rabbi Danny Tawil and Rabbi Shmuel Aini
    * Magen Abraham, housed in the former Torah Academy of Brooklyn high school, at 2066 East 9th Street.
    * Magen David Synagogue, housed in the Magen David Yeshivah, at 2130 McDonald Avenue. - Rabbi Joey Haber, Rabbi Haim Shaul and Rabbi Ikey Tawil
    * Netivot Israel Congregation, at 1617 Ocean Parkway, for Moroccan Jews. - Rabbi Gad Bouskila
    * Ohel Moshe, at Avenue P and East 16th Street. - Rabbi Moshe Levy
    * Ohr Hachaim, at 2286 Coney Island Avenue.
    * Rabbi Yehouda Ben Betera Congregation, at 2296 Coney Island Avenue, for Qamishli Jews. - Rabbi Marco Nakash
    * Sephardic Center of Mill Basin, at 6208 Strickland Avenue (Mill Basin Neighborhood). - Rabbi Abraham Levy
    * Sephardic Lebanese Congregation, at 805 Avenue T. - Rabbi Eliyahu Elbaz
    * Sephardic Synagogue, housed in the former Sephardic Institute, at 511 Avenue R. - Rabbi Moshe Shamah and Rabbi Ronald Barry
    * Shaare Rahamim, at 1244 East 7th Street (Midwood Neighborhood). - Rabbi Shlomo Churba
    * Shaare Shalom, at 2021 Avenue S (Madison Neighborhood). - Rabbi Joe Dweck (Rosh Yeshiba of Barkai Yeshiva)
    * Shaare Torah, at 1680 Coney Island Avenue (Midwood Neighborhood).
    * Shevet Achim Congregation, at 708 Avenue T, for Damascus (Shami) Jews. - Rabbi Yosheyahu Shammah and Rabbi Yosef Hamra
    * Shevet Achim Youth Congregation, at 706 Avenue T. - Cantor Chaim Leviov
    * Shuva Israel, at 2015 Avenue R.
    * Sukkat Daveed Congregation, at 807 Avenue T.
    * Tiferet Torah Congregation, on East 3rd Street between Avenue P and Quentin Road. - Rabbi Michael Haber
    * Congregation Torat Israel, at 710 Shore Boulevard (Manhattan Beach Neighborhood). - Rabbi Jacob Farhi
    * Congregation Yam Hatorah, at 1573 East 10th Street.
    * Yad Yosef Torah Center, at 1032 Ocean Parkway (Midwood Neighborhood). - Rabbi David Ozeri and Rabbi David Sutton
Logged
ag
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #974 on: March 21, 2012, 11:18:43 PM »

Well, if there are lots of Sefardim in the Orthodox block, that makes it worse: they can't be part of the same linguistic minority, as they don't speak Yiddish. They can't be part of the same religious minority, because it is not protectable. That leaves the racial designation, which is both borderline anti-semitic and not even very certain to succeed, as it is pretty hard to identify them w/ the Ashkenazim in any way that is not reliant on religion. Tough - I guess, any arguments relying on the joint numbers of Sefardim and Ashkenazim might not be allowable.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41  
« previous next »
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 0.079 seconds with 13 queries.