If you were appointed the drawer all the congressional districts for 2022...
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 03:59:33 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  If you were appointed the drawer all the congressional districts for 2022...
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: ...how would you do it?
#1
Republican gerrymander, even more so than the current one
 
#2
Slight Republican gerrymander, but not going too far
 
#3
Deliberately drawing swing districts all over the country to elect centrist Congress
 
#4
Strict ban on gerrymandering, just drawing without any racial or partisan information
 
#5
Marginal Democratic gerrymander, but not to an extreme
 
#6
Complete Democratic gerrymander, getting rid of GOP in Cali, NY, and IL
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 88

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: If you were appointed the drawer all the congressional districts for 2022...  (Read 4480 times)
progressive85
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,312
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 12, 2017, 02:15:57 PM »

me I would choose Option 3 and Option 4.

The major states that need their districts redrawn because they are so odious looking are:

Pennsylvania
NC
Ohio
Michigan
Illinois
Maryland

I don't like California's top-two system.  Third parties in the state are now completely shut out of everything.  How was that progressive?
Logged
BuckeyeNut
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,458


Political Matrix
E: -8.65, S: -7.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 12, 2017, 02:21:01 PM »

Going out of one's way to create competitive districts is still gerrymandering. Draw districts that defer to the VRA and keep communities of interest together as best as possible.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 12, 2017, 02:22:52 PM »

Anyone who votes for the first or last two options might as well admit they don't like the idea of free & fair elections.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 12, 2017, 02:25:16 PM »

Anyone who votes for the first or last two options might as well admit they don't like the idea of free & fair elections.

-The elections are still free and fair, just uncompetitive and settled via primary.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2017, 02:26:34 PM »

Anyone who votes for the first or last two options might as well admit they don't like the idea of free & fair elections.

-The elections are still free and fair, just uncompetitive and settled via primary.

Yeah, no.
Logged
MarkD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,132
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2017, 02:35:59 PM »

I would like to do option 3, but in terms of getting something popular into the Constitution, I have drafted a proposal for a constitutional amendment which (among other things) does option 4.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,934
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2017, 02:52:18 PM »

I would draw per VRA guidelines and in a non-partisan manner.
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2017, 02:59:46 PM »

The last one, for the reasons Virginia laid out.
Logged
Blackacre
Spenstar3D
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,172
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -7.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2017, 12:44:09 PM »

The sane, normal side of me prefers option 3: a congress that's as responsive to the people as possible.

However, I must admit, there is a craven, almost McConnelist part of me that would revel at option 6.
Logged
President of the civil service full of trans activists
Peebs
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,926
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2017, 12:46:29 PM »

The sane, normal side of me prefers option 3: a congress that's as responsive to the people as possible.

However, I must admit, there is a craven, almost McConnelist part of me that would revel at option 6.
This, but I wouldn't be too upset about option 4 either.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2017, 01:11:58 PM »

Uh, NOTA? I would draw the districts so there is a roughly equal (when adjusted for the recent election) number of Democratic and Republican districts, and a number of swing districts, so that each state sends roughly the "correct" number of Reps from each party based on how it voted in 2020, while allowing for enough swing to reflect the naational/state mood if there's a wave. I'd rather have MMP, but if we absolutely have to do it this way let's do it right.
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,203
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2017, 01:19:55 PM »

The sane, normal side of me prefers option 3: a congress that's as responsive to the people as possible.

However, I must admit, there is a craven, almost McConnelist part of me that would revel at option 6.
This, but I wouldn't be too upset about option 4 either.

Option 3 is just as bad as options 1 and 6, if you need proof that Moderate Hero hacks/Centrist Smiley ideologues are both real and can have some pretty awful views, look no further than smoltchanov.
Logged
Blackacre
Spenstar3D
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,172
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -7.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 13, 2017, 01:36:05 PM »

The sane, normal side of me prefers option 3: a congress that's as responsive to the people as possible.

However, I must admit, there is a craven, almost McConnelist part of me that would revel at option 6.
This, but I wouldn't be too upset about option 4 either.

Option 3 is just as bad as options 1 and 6, if you need proof that Moderate Hero hacks/Centrist Smiley ideologues are both real and can have some pretty awful views, look no further than smoltchanov.

Option 3 isn't about a centrist congress, it's about an elastic one. It creates a level playing field. I couldn't care less about moderate hacks and I'm sure as heck not a moderate myself
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 13, 2017, 02:43:13 PM »
« Edited: February 13, 2017, 05:57:05 PM by Chickenhawk »

last option with no apologies or shame.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,222
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 13, 2017, 10:40:24 PM »

Abolish districts and use proportional representation instead
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2017, 10:50:15 PM »

All I know is the MA-01/MA-02 boundary and the MA-07/MA-08 boundary would be history.
Logged
Figueira
84285
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,175


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2017, 11:00:30 PM »

All I know is the MA-01/MA-02 boundary and the MA-07/MA-08 boundary would be history.

Would you put the boundary between Springfield and Wilbraham, and then through the Quabbin? I think that's the least terrible way to do it.
Logged
smoltchanov
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,376
Russian Federation


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2017, 03:17:08 AM »

"Strict ban on gerrymandering, just drawing without any racial or partisan information", obviously.

Extremely tired of excessive partisanship and gerrymandering in general, but recognize that there are large enough liberal and conservative areas, which must have their representation.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2017, 07:15:45 AM »

Option 4 is good, except that ignoring racial information would violate the VRA, as it should (for a host of reasons). So all the options are a fail.
Logged
136or142
Adam T
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,434
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2017, 07:29:28 AM »

Option 4 is good, except that ignoring racial information would violate the VRA, as it should (for a host of reasons). So all the options are a fail.

Not necessarily.  Non partisan drawings of boundaries are usually based on geography and communities of interest, so the 'communities of interest' part might ensure majority minority districts.

Of course, the VRA has been abused by Republicans to make districts far more majority minority than they need to be in order to pack the minorities into as few districts as possible, unfortunately, frequently with the consent (and sometimes the assistance) of the Democratic Representatives of those districts.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2017, 07:37:17 AM »

Option 4 is good, except that ignoring racial information would violate the VRA, as it should (for a host of reasons). So all the options are a fail.

Not necessarily.  Non partisan drawings of boundaries are usually based on geography and communities of interest, so the 'communities of interest' part might ensure majority minority districts.

Of course, the VRA has been abused by Republicans to make districts far more majority minority than they need to be in order to pack the minorities into as few districts as possible, unfortunately, frequently with the consent (and sometimes the assistance) of the Democratic Representatives of those districts.

The option 4 says you don't have any racial information, and many contiguous minority communities span jurisdictional lines, so as I say, it is a fail. You draw minority CD's when otherwise required by law, and do so in a way that otherwise hews to good redistricting principles. See the Muon2 rules for details. As a practical political matter, more minority CD's will be drawn than required by law, and the way to do that, is draw the additional minority CD's, if, and only if, both major parties agree to do so, and again, it is done in a way that otherwise hews to the maximum extent possible to good redistricting principles.
Logged
136or142
Adam T
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,434
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2017, 08:03:26 AM »

Option 4 is good, except that ignoring racial information would violate the VRA, as it should (for a host of reasons). So all the options are a fail.

Not necessarily.  Non partisan drawings of boundaries are usually based on geography and communities of interest, so the 'communities of interest' part might ensure majority minority districts.

Of course, the VRA has been abused by Republicans to make districts far more majority minority than they need to be in order to pack the minorities into as few districts as possible, unfortunately, frequently with the consent (and sometimes the assistance) of the Democratic Representatives of those districts.

The option 4 says you don't have any racial information, and many contiguous minority communities span jurisdictional lines, so as I say, it is a fail. You draw minority CD's when otherwise required by law, and do so in a way that otherwise hews to good redistricting principles. See the Muon2 rules for details. As a practical political matter, more minority CD's will be drawn than required by law, and the way to do that, is draw the additional minority CD's, if, and only if, both major parties agree to do so, and again, it is done in a way that otherwise hews to the maximum extent possible to good redistricting principles.

Fair point.  Option four is still the best option of those presented but clearly 'communities of interest' can not be determined if the racial make up of the communities aren't known.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2017, 09:31:14 AM »

S I N G L E

T R A N S F E R A B L E

V O T E
Logged
Blackacre
Spenstar3D
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,172
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -7.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2017, 09:35:10 AM »

S I N G L E

T R A N S F E R A B L E

V O T E

^^^^^^^
This really is the best option. Preferably with districts that ignore state boundaries (at least on the continental US) and a roughly proportional Senate that also follows STV rules and gives DC a single Senator.
Logged
Wiz in Wis
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,711


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2017, 10:28:42 AM »

Going out of one's way to create competitive districts is still gerrymandering. Draw districts that defer to the VRA and keep communities of interest together as best as possible.


THIS
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« 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 0.059 seconds with 15 queries.