US House Redistricting: Utah

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Putting BS Bob on ignore is the quickest step to a more pleasant forum experience.

[Senator Napoleon]

Roll Call came up with the numbers for the proposed map:

UT-01: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-02: McCain: 58; Bush 67
UT-03: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-04: McCain: 56; Bush: 66

"
Seems inefficient if true. Even if they want to give Matheson his own seat to deter him from embarking on a statewide run, why not distribute PVI more equally among the three other districts?

More important local factors are at work. PVI doesn't matter much at these levels of safe seats anyway ignoring Mathewson.

[Vasall des Midas]

Attempt at a fair map of Utah. West Jordan is the only split municipality. (Bingham Canyon in the rural district is presumably quite unfortunate - alternatives involved splitting off one precinct of either Provo or Alpine, pulling the first district into Salt Lake County, or just living with a district undersized by about 2000 people. Maximum deviation in this map is just 136.)
Can someone with a better grasp of party strength in the Wasatch Front tell me just how Democratic that 2nd district is?

And an alternative of sorts.

[BigSkyBob]

I simply have not "attacked you." I have pointed out that you are making an assumption that a certain posters was a "very right wing" Republicans simply because he claimed it. People engage in false-flag tactics on the internet all the time. There is absolutely nothing personal in my noting that. If you take it personally, that is not my fault. On the other hand, claiming that I have "attacked you" when I haven't is an attack against me.

If you wish to have "amicable" relationships with folks whom have significant policy differences from you, then, I suggest you eschew certain tactics. When you try to pass off someone whom acts like a bad caricature as an authentic Republican you should expect a reply of, "How stupid do you think I am?"

A few things:

FINE; I'll admit that my original comment was based off of a pretty cursory look at the comments.
Can you just let this die now!!? Jeez, its not like I insulted your mother or anything. (cough, cough, kinda like what you did to Nathan...)

1) I presumed that Nathan's mother was a decent and virtuous woman whom attempted to instill proper moral training in Nathan.

2) You have just attacked me a second and third time. This is hardly the behavior of someone whom wants to "let it die."

Yes, I do take these things quite personally because I try to keep good relations with everyone on this forum. When others, chiefly yourself most of the time, are unrelentingly presumptuous and curt in their demeanor, it really bugs me.

Fourth attack.

would put you on my ignore list, like most of the forum community has done, but I find your seemly arbitrarily-motivated rants to be somewhat amusing.

Fifth attack.

'Come to think of it,I really haven't seen you write any positive comments on this forum; it seems like all you do on here is bring others down while you practice using vocabulary words.

Sixth attack.

Again, I think it is important that political debate be conducted in a manner is which all sides are able to present their viewpoint, and the reader can sort it all out. When members of one side of a debate presume to speak for the other side that detracts from the debate. And, when a poster states something that is false, and reacts to his falsehood being exposed by unloading a series of ad hominem attacks that creates a chilling effect on open and free debate.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

So what's worse, a process like Ohio or Illinois where a map is created and passed without any public commentary, or a situation like this where there's the illusion of openness (draw your own maps and submit them for consideration!) but in the end the legislature ignores the strong public sentiment to keep SLC together in one district and instead cracks the map to eliminate Matheson?

[Padfoot]

So what's worse, a process like Ohio or Illinois where a map is created and passed without any public commentary, or a situation like this where there's the illusion of openness (draw your own maps and submit them for consideration!) but in the end the legislature ignores the strong public sentiment to keep SLC together in one district and instead cracks the map to eliminate Matheson?

I don't think either one is better because in the end the power is still in the hands of a single political party.  That's not a how a multiparty democracy is supposed to work.  In order to have an unbiased electoral process all parties must have an equal say in creating that process.  For every step of the way that a particular party or group is given complete control, the voters become more and more disenfranchised.

I suppose if forced to pick which one is worse I'd pick the Ohio/Illinois method just because at least the Utah method allows for some degree of public input even if it is largely ignored.  When there is public input there's always the slim chance that a group of conscientious lawmakers will step forward to promote a reasonable and publicly supported option.

[nclib]

Roll Call came up with the numbers for the proposed map:

UT-01: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-02: McCain: 58; Bush 67
UT-03: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-04: McCain: 56; Bush: 66

Which of UT-2 and UT-4 is better for Matheson? It's hard to tell the population distribution by looking at the land area because of the concentration of the population in western states.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Roll Call came up with the numbers for the proposed map:

UT-01: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-02: McCain: 58; Bush 67
UT-03: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-04: McCain: 56; Bush: 66

Which of UT-2 and UT-4 is better for Matheson? It's hard to tell the population distribution by looking at the land area because of the concentration of the population in western states.

UT-4 not only has downtown SLC but the only rural areas remaining in Utah that still are willing to vote for Democrats besides the ski and Sundance country.

[Vasall des Midas]

Roll Call came up with the numbers for the proposed map:

UT-01: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-02: McCain: 58; Bush 67
UT-03: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-04: McCain: 56; Bush: 66

Seems inefficient if true. Even if they want to give Matheson his own seat to deter him from embarking on a statewide run, why not distribute PVI more equally among the three other districts?

Because the 1st and 3rd have Republican incumbents and the 4th does not, and incumbents have clout?

Roll Call came up with the numbers for the proposed map:

UT-01: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-02: McCain: 58; Bush 67
UT-03: McCain: 67; Bush: 76
UT-04: McCain: 56; Bush: 66

Which of UT-2 and UT-4 is better for Matheson? It's hard to tell the population distribution by looking at the land area because of the concentration of the population in western states.

UT-4 not only has downtown SLC but the only rural areas remaining in Utah that still are willing to vote for Democrats besides the ski and Sundance country.

UT-2, you mean. UT-4 is western Salt Lake County and Tooele.

[MilesC56]

I just lost a lot of respect for Herbert:

"I find that the Legislature followed the law, and the outcome, although not entirely satisfactory to everyone, is reasonable," Herbert said. "Let us remember, in the final analysis, our representatives are not chosen by lines drawn on a map; they are elected by the people of Utah.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705392874/Herbert-signs-redistricting-bills.html

So, under that logic, it seems like the way the lines are drawn shouldn't matter at all....

[BigSkyBob]

I just lost a lot of respect for Herbert:

"I find that the Legislature followed the law, and the outcome, although not entirely satisfactory to everyone, is reasonable," Herbert said. "Let us remember, in the final analysis, our representatives are not chosen by lines drawn on a map; they are elected by the people of Utah.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705392874/Herbert-signs-redistricting-bills.html

So, under that logic, it seems like the way the lines are drawn shouldn't matter at all....

1) I gained respect for Herbert because he didn't selfishly try to duck a race against a sitting Democratic Congressman. This is in contrast to Ohio in 2000 where the Republican governor saved the seat of a Democrat Congressman just to avoid a race against him in 2002.

2) Herbert said the outcome was "reasonable." By that logic, it does matter where the lines are drawn.

[MilesC56]

I just lost a lot of respect for Herbert:

"I find that the Legislature followed the law, and the outcome, although not entirely satisfactory to everyone, is reasonable," Herbert said. "Let us remember, in the final analysis, our representatives are not chosen by lines drawn on a map; they are elected by the people of Utah.”

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705392874/Herbert-signs-redistricting-bills.html

So, under that logic, it seems like the way the lines are drawn shouldn't matter at all....

1) I gained respect for Herbert because he didn't selfishly try to duck a race against a sitting Democratic Congressman. This is in contrast to Ohio in 2000 where the Republican governor saved the seat of a Democrat Congressman just to avoid a race against him in 2002.

2) Herbert said the outcome was "reasonable." By that logic, it does matter where the lines are drawn.

I knew you'd have something to say about that! You always have to take an arbitrarily contrary position to whatever I post.

No, thats not how I see it. Just reading the last sentence, it sounds like he's implying that as long Congressmen are elected by the people of Utah, it almost doesn't matter where the lines are drawn.