Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 11:18:56 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)
  Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Texas: CD35, CD27 found unconstitutional; "intentional racial discrimination"  (Read 4679 times)
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,798


« on: August 21, 2017, 06:10:05 PM »

So i have been messing around with the maps on DRA, and it is easily possible to get two compact districts inside Bexar, along with bits for the 23rd and the 21st. The thing is, both these districts evened out are at 55-56% Obama - probably higher for Clinton after checking to precinct maps. Drawing districts with such a low D % does not seem to be in the spirit of the TX GOP and their Dem packs so here is a question:

Is it possible/probable for one to redraw the 23rd in Bexar, in relation to the 20th and the 35th in this case? It seems dicey since the court barely held up the 23rd as it stands, and any changes would need to produce a extremely similar PVI and HVAP. However, trading precincts between the Fajitas and Bexar produces two more favorable Dem packs in Bexar and leaves the 23rd as an R leaning competitive seat.

If it is not politically feasible, it seems likely that in exchange for the expected Austin Dem pack, the new 35th will be a battleground seat with probably a slight D tilt.
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 0.023 seconds with 12 queries.