Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 02, 2015, 07:23:21 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
| | |-+  US House Redistricting: Connecticut
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: Connecticut  (Read 7734 times)
JohnnyLongtorso
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6848


View Profile
« on: January 18, 2011, 10:49:03 pm »
Ignore

Well, if we can have a thread about Idaho...

The only problem here is redistricting apparently requires a 2/3rds vote to pass, so the Republicans will probably block any attempt to make CT-05 any less Democratic. Regardless, he's a map I came up with to make the state pretty solidly 5-0.



Adds Bristol, Southington, Berlin, and Wallingford to CT-05 and cuts out some Republican towns on the edges. Also helps out CT-04 some by adding Ansonia, Derby, and Stratford and chopping off the top of the district. CT-01 and 03 take the Republican territory shed by CT-04 and CT-05 but should remain solidly Democratic. Chris Murphy is drawn out of CT-05 but since he's probably going to run for the Senate, that shouldn't matter. CT-02 is virtually unchanged.
Logged
homelycooking
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6241
Belize


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2011, 10:22:04 pm »
Ignore

You've drawn the Farmington Valley (Simsbury, Avon, Canton, Farmington) into CT-01 and I do not think that would go over well from a non-partisan perspective. That area was represented by Nancy Johnson of CT-05 for the longest time.

DeLauro's district looks like a fusion of CT-03 and the old pre-2002 CT-06, so that is actually feasible.

This map isn't a solid 5-0, since there's really not much you can do to help out Jim Himes in his swing district.
Logged

Quote from: New York Times, September 15, 1960
Rep. Wharton says being a Congressman is a full-time job these days; there would be no time for doing television comedies.

Mr. Vidal shrugs and lets his cocker spaniel lick the Chateau Yquem off his fingers.
Napoleon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15070


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2011, 08:47:45 pm »
Ignore

There's now talk of adding Bridgeport to the 5th to make it more Democratic. Just LOL!
More realistically, Shelton will be shuffled over to the 5th, helping Caliguri and Jim Homes too.
Logged

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.


homelycooking
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6241
Belize


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2011, 03:19:22 pm »
Ignore

There's now talk of adding Bridgeport to the 5th to make it more Democratic. Just LOL!

Democrats can't really secure CT-05 without putting CT-04 into doubt, and vice versa. They might even want to consider moving Milford from CT-03 to CT-04 and shift some of the GOP-heavy Gatsby territory (Weston, Wilton, etc) to CT-05 in order to even out margins across the two districts.
Logged

Quote from: New York Times, September 15, 1960
Rep. Wharton says being a Congressman is a full-time job these days; there would be no time for doing television comedies.

Mr. Vidal shrugs and lets his cocker spaniel lick the Chateau Yquem off his fingers.
Napoleon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15070


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2011, 03:27:05 pm »
Ignore

There's now talk of adding Bridgeport to the 5th to make it more Democratic. Just LOL!

Democrats can't really secure CT-05 without putting CT-04 into doubt, and vice versa. They might even want to consider moving Milford from CT-03 to CT-04 and shift some of the GOP-heavy Gatsby territory (Weston, Wilton, etc) to CT-05 in order to even out margins across the two districts.
I don't see that happening with the 2/3 requirement, in any case.
Logged

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.


JohnnyLongtorso
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6848


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2011, 03:31:02 pm »
Ignore

Here's a map that preserves the status quo. As a bonus, I avoided splitting any municipalities (deviations are 151, -684, -697, 1,500, and -268).



According to my calculations, the 2-party vote from 2008 and 2010 is:

CT-01 - 68-32 Obama, 61-39 Blumenthal
CT-02 - 61-39 Obama, 57-43 Blumenthal
CT-03 - 61-39 Obama, 59-41 Blumenthal
CT-04 - 61-39 Obama, 53-47 Blumenthal
CT-05 - 56-44 Obama, 50-50 McMahon (50.35% McMahon, to be precise)
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2011, 05:30:32 am »
Ignore

Clearly, what Connecticut needs is this.



32.8% Hispanic, 32.3% White, 28.6% Black.
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16751


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2011, 06:58:59 am »
Ignore

And the countdown begins for when krazen will come in to tell us the Democrats are hypocrites for not advocating that map.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2011, 07:25:16 am »
Ignore

The thing is, what with just how decaying Connecticut's inner cities are and how concentrated the state's minorities are there... there'd actually be something of a point. Though, of course, the random connectors between the cities are outrageously stupid, should be replaced with whiter parts of the cities themselves for a noncontiguous seat (that would be marginally less white than this monster.)
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Verily
Cuivienen
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16751


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2011, 07:27:16 am »
Ignore

Which really shows why MMP would be a better system.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2011, 08:37:21 am »
Ignore

And more seats. (Though I suppose the argument above doesn't really hold for the federal congress anyways. Now... if CT's inner cities were dispersed among seats dominated by their democratic non-poor inner suburbs in the CT State House... we'd be onto something.)
Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
Napoleon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15070


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2011, 02:08:43 am »
Ignore

Update re: Bridgeport. Republicans are trying to move it to the 3rd, creating what would be a reasonably safe R seat in the 4th.

I don't see why they can't just go for a minimum change map. Having a shot at 2 seats is good for Republicans in a solidly blue state and the map maintains CoIs pretty decently.
Logged

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.


minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2011, 05:12:10 am »
Ignore

I drew this ages ago as what seemed most reasonable. I don't know the state well enough to be sure, but I do believe the oddities (here kinked out) of the CD1-CD5 boundary serve to help Republicans in CD5.

Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9809


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2011, 09:02:24 am »

Here's my version for the GOP.

No town is split and the deviations are within 0.2% (-545, -226, 1269, 320, -816).

Logged

I'm on my road trip to the Pac NW. Red is an overnight stay; blue is a point of interest; cyan is a stop; green is just a drive through.

krazen1211
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6076


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2011, 05:37:01 pm »
Ignore

Putting Bridgeport in with New Haven would give a non white a chance at winning a New England Congressional district.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9809


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2011, 07:54:42 pm »

Putting Bridgeport in with New Haven would give a non white a chance at winning a New England Congressional district.

The district is still 62.3% WVAP. BVAP is 16.3% and HVAP is 15.7%. The Hartford district is actually less white (barely). It has 62.2% WVAP, 14.8% BVAP, and 16.9% HVAP.
Logged

I'm on my road trip to the Pac NW. Red is an overnight stay; blue is a point of interest; cyan is a stop; green is just a drive through.

nclib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9001
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2011, 09:01:36 pm »
Ignore

Update re: Bridgeport. Republicans are trying to move it to the 3rd, creating what would be a reasonably safe R seat in the 4th.

I don't see why they can't just go for a minimum change map. Having a shot at 2 seats is good for Republicans in a solidly blue state and the map maintains CoIs pretty decently.

The Dems should not compromise to this, especially with the GOP being so aggressive in their states. Dem trifecta in a Dem state, there's no reason it can't be at least status quo, or shore up CT-4 or CT-5, preferably the latter since it's open.
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

JohnnyLongtorso
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6848


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2011, 09:18:23 pm »
Ignore

It's going to the courts anyway.
Logged
smoltchanov
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1559
Russian Federation
View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2011, 05:28:07 am »
Ignore

Quite natural behavior on Republican's part. They have 0-5 plan now, and they are basically offered to prolonge the same plan for next 10 years. Naturally - they refuse. What can they lose? Nothing, it can't get worse then 0-5. So they "gamble" hoping that Court plan (especially if Court is "activist" enough and will try to create "minority-heavy" district) will give them at least 1 winnable district. All is very natural. Democrats would do the same if situation would be reversed.
Logged

Raging moderate. Big fan of "mavericks" (in all parties) and big non-lover of "reliable foot soldiers" (in all parties as well). Very much "anti-tea party". Political Matrix - E: -0.26, S: -3.48. Like to collect bans on partisan sites (4-5 on DKE (+ SSP) and on RRH).
muon2
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9809


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2011, 08:07:05 am »

Quite natural behavior on Republican's part. They have 0-5 plan now, and they are basically offered to prolonge the same plan for next 10 years. Naturally - they refuse. What can they lose? Nothing, it can't get worse then 0-5. So they "gamble" hoping that Court plan (especially if Court is "activist" enough and will try to create "minority-heavy" district) will give them at least 1 winnable district. All is very natural. Democrats would do the same if situation would be reversed.

Minority heavy congressional districts are hard to produce if town lines are generally followed. The minority populations aren't as dense as in other states and the towns they are in are separated by towns with low minority populations. Using whole towns a string that connects New Haven, Waterbury, Meriden, New Brittain, and Hartford is still just over 50% WVAP, and no court would find the justification to do that.

I think my map is about as far as anyone could push on the grounds of creating minority opportunities. Waterbury is the only town with significant minority population, but connecting it to either the Hartford or New Haven districts creates an ugly map with district 5 stretching to the Sound or wrapping east over the top of Hartford.
 
Putting Bridgeport in with New Haven would give a non white a chance at winning a New England Congressional district.

The district is still 62.3% WVAP. BVAP is 16.3% and HVAP is 15.7%. The Hartford district is actually less white (barely). It has 62.2% WVAP, 14.8% BVAP, and 16.9% HVAP.

Logged

I'm on my road trip to the Pac NW. Red is an overnight stay; blue is a point of interest; cyan is a stop; green is just a drive through.

Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13437


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2011, 08:22:25 am »
Ignore

I'm not sure why people should respond to the suggestion seriously given that the VRA is about the community electing someone of their choice, not the race of the person elected; that New England, while no racism-free Eden, doesn't have the racial polarization in voting that other states do; that in any case, Massachusetts just created a majority-minority district; that Connecticut has elected a minority Republican to Congress in living memory from an overwhelmingly white district; and that the only motivation here is a fantasy about creating more Republican districts.
Logged
BigSkyBob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2291
View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2011, 11:12:58 am »
Ignore

I'm not sure why people should respond to the suggestion seriously given that the VRA is about the community electing someone of their choice, not the race of the person elected;


No, the VRA states no such thing. A Black politician gerrymandered out of a mixed district would be a violation of the "regression" clause, while a White politician who was gerrymandered out the same district would have no standing even if in the primary the majority of Blacks voted for him, while the majority of Whites voted against him.
Logged

The real scandal in Washington is not the bribery, corruption, or sex. It is how poorly we are governed.
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29685
Samoa


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: December 22, 2011, 01:15:19 pm »
Ignore


To be drawn by five Dem judges. Tongue
Logged
Napoleon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15070


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: December 22, 2011, 03:26:32 pm »
Ignore


I wouldn't expect it to be much different from the current map, which is what Democrats were willing to go for anyway. More Republican obstruction, that's all this is.
Logged

Yeah, after four years of being a non-disruptive poster on the forum, never considered a troublemaker, even someone who was liked well enough to be elected Atlasian President, Napoleon should be allowed to stay.


Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29685
Samoa


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: December 22, 2011, 11:00:07 pm »
Ignore

So what would a fair court draw, that is the question. Then we can measure what they do draw against that. What really interests me is just hard it is for both sides of the ledger to agree on what is a fair map, even if presumably acting in good faith. That has been my experience on this very site in fact, which is kind of sobering. If we can't do it here, where can it be done?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines