Help needed for 2012 National Congressional Map (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 11:33:44 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, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Help needed for 2012 National Congressional Map (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Help needed for 2012 National Congressional Map  (Read 29452 times)
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« on: December 30, 2011, 12:13:30 PM »


Added MA.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2011, 02:05:23 AM »
« Edited: December 31, 2011, 02:07:03 AM by Nathan »
Maryland and Texas. And we have all the finalized or semi-finalized ones, unless I'm mistaken.

New York, Virginia, and Florida are the only 'big states' left, unless Arizona counts these days.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2012, 06:21:43 PM »
Can we get a version of the map including TN (and NM, I guess) without the Presidential colors, for use as a base? I mean, we can easily make them ourselves with the bucket tool in MS Paint, but it might be nice to keep the addition to the base consistent in the thread.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #3 on: January 07, 2012, 12:48:20 AM »
Quote from: jimrtex on January 07, 2012, 12:14:42 AM
Quote from: Nathan on December 31, 2011, 02:05:23 AM
Maryland and Texas. And we have all the finalized or semi-finalized ones, unless I'm mistaken.

Texas doesn't have any congressional districts.


It doesn't? I thought a court ordered interim use of these districts.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2012, 07:00:34 AM »
Quote from: jimrtex on January 07, 2012, 05:56:05 AM
Quote from: Nathan on January 07, 2012, 12:48:20 AM
Quote from: jimrtex on January 07, 2012, 12:14:42 AM
Texas doesn't have any congressional districts.


It doesn't? I thought a court ordered interim use of these districts.
The Supreme Court has stayed the order by the San Antonio district court.  After that happened, the district court extended the filing deadline, and said that candidates could specify which map they were filing under.

Is it known when the Supreme Court will make its decision?
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2012, 10:01:14 PM »
When are we going to be considering Arizona and New Mexico final?
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2012, 12:20:36 AM »
What about VA?
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2012, 01:13:03 AM »

I'll do VA.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2012, 01:52:56 AM »
Virginia added.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2012, 01:59:05 AM »
Within ten days or so I should think we'll be able to say we've at least tentatively filled in everything south of Raritan Bay and west of Lake Erie.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2012, 02:46:38 PM »
« Edited: February 22, 2012, 02:53:18 PM by Nathan »
I count 21 tossups on Miles's map.

I agree on WI-07. All of the Lake Superior districts are pretty competitive this year (I personally tend to think Cravaack will lose and Duffy will hold on; not sure about Benishek).
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2012, 05:52:21 AM »
Quote from: MilesC56 on February 24, 2012, 04:07:10 AM
I heard that Giffords' district was now an Obama district, but I found the official map in DRA and it had McCain ahead. Can anyone clarify that?

What I heard was that it was very nearly tied and absent an Arizona Republican candidate might be thought more likely than not to go for Obama relative to the rest of Arizona.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #12 on: April 13, 2012, 02:47:47 PM »
Quote from: Antonio V on April 13, 2012, 05:01:16 AM
Maybe it's just my impression, but NY (or at least upstate) seems exceptionally "clean" to me. Did they actually get a sound bipartisan compromise ?

Sort of. A court drew the map.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,419
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2012, 08:47:47 PM »
Why is the Delta district in Mississippi not the red one?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.