Gerrymandering is not what's wrong with American politics

[politicallefty]

I don't agree that the Midwest is necessarily biased against Democrats. I think it's just that Republican gerrymanders are able to severely exacerbate any slight partisan leaning in terms of geography.

With a fair map in place, I think Ohio would actually favour the Democrats. Democrats would surely hold a Cleveland-based district, a Columbus-based district, an Akron-based district, and a Toledo-based district. More than likely, they'd hold a Youngstown-based district and a lake-shore district between Cleveland and Toledo. The far Northeastern district and the Cincinnati district would be swing districts, as would perhaps the Appalachian district that would hug the border from south of Youngstown down to Athens. There would also be a Dayton-based district that would probably be no more than R+1. That would basically leave six safe Republican districts. I think Democrats would also have at least six to eight districts in their hands in a neutral year. A fair map in 2012 would have at least sent Betty Sutton back to Congress from the Akron-based district (and Tim Ryan from any Youngstown-based district).

[politicallefty]

Why should there be a district between Toledo and Cleveland?   And why should you divide the eastern and southeastern suburbs of Cleveland between an Akron-based district and Youngstown-based district?  And why should Cleveland be divided?

My thoughts aren't terribly different from muon's and his Ohio map. I've also drawn the state several times and I really liked the map I came up with about two and a half years ago:



I originally had a Toledo-based district similar to muon's, but I instead drew Toledo in with the remainder of the lake-shore. As you can see, I did not split Cleveland and see no reason why it should be split. Functionally, OH-10 is the district between the Cleveland one and the Toledo one that Democrats would most likely hold in all but the most disastrous of years. It's similar to Kucinich's old OH-10, but less safe by moving entirely out of Cleveland. I think it's a perfectly logical fit to combine Cleveland's western/southwestern suburbs with Lorain County.

Districts 6, 13, 14 and 16 are almost identical to muon's competitive map above (and I honestly had my map drawn before I had seen his). I don't see any problems with any of those districts.

I think my map would be something like this (with OH-03 probably more competitive on paper):

Safe D: 9, 11, 15
Lean/Likely D: 10, 13, 16
Toss-Up: 1, 6, 14
Lean/Likely R: 3
Safe R: 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 12

I was a bit cautious on the lean/likely Democratic districts, but they're probably much safer than they appear. So, in a neutral year, I think both parties would start off quite safe with six districts each, leaving three or four highly competitive districts. Either party could reasonably win up to 10 seats, but I think an even split or a 9-7 split in either direction would be most probable in a relatively neutral year.