Obama and Holder to fight Gerrymandering in post-Trump
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:30:38 PM
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)
  Obama and Holder to fight Gerrymandering in post-Trump
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Obama and Holder to fight Gerrymandering in post-Trump  (Read 1724 times)
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 17, 2016, 08:02:53 AM »

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/obama-holder-redistricting-gerrymandering-229868

Looks like anti-gerrymandering efforts are becoming quite mainstream.    It's no longer as American as apple pie,  much to the disappointment of many Republicans.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2016, 08:27:30 AM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2016, 10:47:07 AM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2016, 06:42:38 PM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.

Equal level of seats make no sense as a goal. It assumes that the population is uniformly divided between two major parties. In reality the parties and their bases will shift over time and certainly don't draw the same fraction of the vote from election to election. The right answer is to attack this nationwide and pile up wins wherever one can - Pub and Dem.

Pubs are only the bigger offender because they controlled the majority of states in 2011. That routinely changes with each decade. A long term goal based on a one decade event - that seems the more laughable to me.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 23, 2016, 08:18:06 PM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland%27s_3rd_congressional_district#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_3_(since_2013).tif

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Maryland_congressional_districts#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_2_(since_2013).tif
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 23, 2016, 08:19:25 PM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland%27s_3rd_congressional_district#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_3_(since_2013).tif

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Maryland_congressional_districts#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_2_(since_2013).tif

Should we start a list of gerrymandered districts that benefit one party over the other?
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2016, 09:09:05 PM »

Yes, Maryland is heavily gerrymandered, and I would be more than willing to give up 1 seat in Maryland for all the gerrymandered seats Democrats would net in New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 24, 2016, 09:31:40 PM »

Yes, Maryland is heavily gerrymandered, and I would be more than willing to give up 1 seat in Maryland for all the gerrymandered seats Democrats would net in New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc.

Texas, North Carolina, Michigan, Georgia, Alabama, Virginia (VA-10)...
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2016, 05:53:27 PM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland%27s_3rd_congressional_district#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_3_(since_2013).tif

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Maryland_congressional_districts#/media/File%3AMaryland_US_Congressional_District_2_(since_2013).tif
A. Individual districts are a bad way to judge an entire states plan.

B. Democrats gerrymander in Illinois(+3 or 4), Maryland(+1 or 2), Oregan(+1ish), and Massachusetts(+1).

Republicans gerrymander in many states, from Ohio(+4ish), to Virginia(+3ish), to North Carolina(+3 or 4), to Texas(+5 at least), to Pennsylvania(+5ish). Etc.

C. Ugliness of districts is a terrible measurement of how unfair a map is. You can draw a dem sweep map in Maryland that looks much less stupid then their current 7-1 map. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/1/1532608/-No-Maryland-is-not-the-most-gerrymandered-state-There-is-more-to-gerrymandering-than-ugly-shapes
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 26, 2016, 06:11:13 PM »
« Edited: October 26, 2016, 06:19:54 PM by muon2 »

C. Ugliness of districts is a terrible measurement of how unfair a map is. You can draw a dem sweep map in Maryland that looks much less stupid then their current 7-1 map. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/1/1532608/-No-Maryland-is-not-the-most-gerrymandered-state-There-is-more-to-gerrymandering-than-ugly-shapes

I agree that erosity does not tell the whole story, but MD is one of the most gerrymandered states. It's just not the most gerrymandered for purely partisan reasons. It's an incumbent gerrymander, which is still a gerrymander.

The DK 8D plan also fails neutral principles. It relies solely on compactness, but minimizing chops of political subdivisions is as important as keeping a low erosity. Together they give a better picture of whether there are gerrymandering goals. It also looks like the DK map ignores the VRA, fracturing black areas to get better partisan results, so I'm not sure it's constitutional.

nb. Erosity comes from erose meaning irregularly toothed, notched, or indented. It's usually used in botany to describe leaves, but some of us like to use it for districts, too.
Logged
Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself
omegascarlet
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,969


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2016, 09:24:53 PM »

C. Ugliness of districts is a terrible measurement of how unfair a map is. You can draw a dem sweep map in Maryland that looks much less stupid then their current 7-1 map. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/1/1532608/-No-Maryland-is-not-the-most-gerrymandered-state-There-is-more-to-gerrymandering-than-ugly-shapes

I agree that erosity does not tell the whole story, but MD is one of the most gerrymandered states. It's just not the most gerrymandered for purely partisan reasons. It's an incumbent gerrymander, which is still a gerrymander.

The DK 8D plan also fails neutral principles. It relies solely on compactness, but minimizing chops of political subdivisions is as important as keeping a low erosity. Together they give a better picture of whether there are gerrymandering goals. It also looks like the DK map ignores the VRA, fracturing black areas to get better partisan results, so I'm not sure it's constitutional.

nb. Erosity comes from erose meaning irregularly toothed, notched, or indented. It's usually used in botany to describe leaves, but some of us like to use it for districts, too.

On the other hand, the same article talks about Indiana, which has a partisan gerrymander that contains pretty compact, relatively low erosity districts.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 26, 2016, 09:58:23 PM »

C. Ugliness of districts is a terrible measurement of how unfair a map is. You can draw a dem sweep map in Maryland that looks much less stupid then their current 7-1 map. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/6/1/1532608/-No-Maryland-is-not-the-most-gerrymandered-state-There-is-more-to-gerrymandering-than-ugly-shapes

I agree that erosity does not tell the whole story, but MD is one of the most gerrymandered states. It's just not the most gerrymandered for purely partisan reasons. It's an incumbent gerrymander, which is still a gerrymander.

The DK 8D plan also fails neutral principles. It relies solely on compactness, but minimizing chops of political subdivisions is as important as keeping a low erosity. Together they give a better picture of whether there are gerrymandering goals. It also looks like the DK map ignores the VRA, fracturing black areas to get better partisan results, so I'm not sure it's constitutional.

nb. Erosity comes from erose meaning irregularly toothed, notched, or indented. It's usually used in botany to describe leaves, but some of us like to use it for districts, too.

On the other hand, the same article talks about Indiana, which has a partisan gerrymander that contains pretty compact, relatively low erosity districts.

IN is R+5 and the rule of thumb is every point in PVI is a 2 percent shift in the delegation, so 5% becomes 10% or 60% R. The difference between the R and the D is double that (60%-40% = 20%). 20% of 9 is 1.8 or a two seat advantage for the R. That means the natural arrangement for IN should be 5R, 3D and one toss up.

They could get their gerrymander fairly easily since they only had to shift 1 full seat and make another stronger to get to a 7-2 split. That incursion along Lake Michigan from IN-1 into IN-2 instead of adding rural area was one piece of that. The choice of split in Indianapolis secured their other goal.

Here's a plan I put together last year using 2010 data. The CDs meet the population deviation 0f 0.5% that the SCOTUS upheld in the WV case this cycle when whole counties are maintained. There are only 5 safe R districts and 2 safe D districts. 2 districts are in play with one slightly leaning R and the other is a true tossup.

Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2016, 01:41:56 AM »


Republicans gerrymander in many states, [...]to Texas(+5 at least)[...]


It's Eleventy-Seven or more.
Logged
Nyvin
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2016, 08:42:26 AM »


Republicans gerrymander in many states, [...]to Texas(+5 at least)[...]


It's Eleventy-Seven or more.

If a state like California can at least "Try" for fair maps (via an independent commission) there's no excuse Texas can't do the same unless they're afraid of the vote of their people.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2016, 06:21:10 AM »

The article suggests that this will be a purely partisan attempt to eliminate gerrymandering in Pub-held states. I don't see this effort working to change the process in MD or IL. I'd rather see a well-funded campaign that went after gerrymandering on both sides.

Once the two sides gerrymander to equal levels of seats....then a bipartisan effort can be launched.

Until then the Republicans are CLEARLY the bigger offenders, to suggest otherwise is completely laughable.

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Hack is hackish. News at 11
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« 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 0.046 seconds with 12 queries.