The Trond can't help it...
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:20:12 PM
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)
  The Trond can't help it...
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Author Topic: The Trond can't help it...  (Read 12919 times)
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: January 05, 2007, 02:56:28 PM »

Can you dig up the map of your attempt again, Nate?
Logged
WMS
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,562


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: January 05, 2007, 03:19:37 PM »
« Edited: January 05, 2007, 03:23:42 PM by WMS »

Let me see. Smiley If I can't find it I'll just post it again since I still have it on my Photobucket account. Cheesy


*edit*

From this thread:






Here's a zoomed in look at NM-1:





Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: January 05, 2007, 04:02:54 PM »

I just reread the whole thread again. Thanks! Smiley
Logged
WMS
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,562


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: January 05, 2007, 06:01:34 PM »


Yeah, it was a good one. Kiki And you're welcome! Smiley
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: January 06, 2007, 10:47:29 PM »

New Mexico
Bernalillo can't be paired with either Valencia or Sandoval (nor Santa Fe either) which means it has to extend into quite vast areas. The number of legal combinations within these constraints however is legion - districts as diverse as Bernalillo - Cibola - Catron - Sierra or Bernalillo - Torrance - San Miguel - Dem hold NM1 for ever.
I *think* this map has the lowest pop. variation, although it's right up there in Absurdistan...

1 Bernalillo, Cibola, Torrance, Guadalupe, De Baca
606,104 1.000
2 North of that and as far as Quay and Curry
606,989 1.001
3 remainder
605,953 .999

Yes, the population + county geography combination make splitting counties hard to avoid. Wink Although my old plan did quite well in minimizing that. Tongue I only split four counties: Bernalillo because you have to, Sandoval to pick up the northern Urban Area (although if I hadn't hit the population limit I would've then gone south into Valencia to pick up the southern Urban Area), Socorro to nab the Native American Reservation there for CD3, and Colfax to reduce population deviation. Cheesy

Oh, my version 2 had:
1: 606,359 1.000 Dev. -10
2: 606,421 1.001 Dev. +72
3: 606,266 .999   Dev. -83

Now that is minimal population deviation! Wink

Interesting map there...but it is absurd. Wink



It's interesting to see what happens to Trond's map if you project it to 2010. CD 1 become too large and CD 3 quite a bit to small. To correct it I had to reduce CD 1 to Bernalillo and Cibola only (projected 679.0 K in 2010). CD 2 wraps around Albuquerque and becomes Guadalupe, Los Alamos, McKinley, Mora, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, San Juan, Santa Fe, Taos, Torrance, and Valencia (678.5 K). CD 3 takes in the rest in the south and east (679.5 K).

Hmm...interesting indeed. Smiley I suspect my map isn't projectable because I split too much of Bernalillo and Sandoval and your projections are only down to the county level... Sad

I can split to smaller levels when there are census estimates. In the NE and Midwest every state is fully broken down to the town level. Elsewhere only incorporated places are estimated by the census.

Thanks to WMS for sending me his precinct files and with some rounding on my part I can make rough projections for WMS' map.

In 2010 the ideal CD is about 679 K in population.
WMS CD 1: 723 K
WMS CD 2: 638 K
WMS CD 3: 677 K
The Albuquerque district has the growth that need to shift to CD 2to then shift to CD 3. The city of Rio Rancho in CD1 in Sandoval county is seeing a growth rate of almost 5% per year.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: January 08, 2007, 07:11:51 AM »

Maine



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


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: January 08, 2007, 07:13:51 AM »

New Hampshire

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


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: January 08, 2007, 08:35:22 AM »

New York

This is a map of your second version for upstate.  I don't think I would consider Oneida and Otsego as being contiguous.  A workable rule might require that 5% or more of the total boundary of one of the two counties be with the other county.  In terms of a basically square county, this would mean 20% or more of one side of the county must abut the other county.

The downstate area illustrates one problem with the Texas rules.  When there are a number of adjacent counties entitled to one or more districts there may not any legal combinations (even with a much more liberal variation in population - 5%).  In 2000, both Jefferson and Galveston counties needed Chambers County to complete their 2nd district.  The plan passed by the House would have put Chambers with Jefferson, and then split Brazoria County 3 ways (one whole, a part with Galveston, and a major part with counties to the west).  The final version by the LRB put Chambers with Galveston, and split Orange County.

A workable rule might treats all adjacent multi-seat counties as a super-county for the initial apportionment purposes.  Richmond would be included because of its isolation, and counties north of Westchester as needed for overall population balance.  The super-county would be divided into 2 or more super-counties if possible (for example if Queens+Nassau+Suffolk were close to 7 complete districts, then they would be districted separately from Richmond+Kings+New York+Bronx+Westchester+Putnam).

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


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: January 08, 2007, 08:46:44 AM »

I've decided that Suffolk is adjacent to Westchester

In what Bizzaro reality is this happening?  Suffolk is in no way adjacent to Westchester, even if you account for water boundries.
However Queens is adjacent to Richmond, and Nassau to Westchester and Bronx.
Logged
WMS
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,562


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: January 08, 2007, 07:06:52 PM »

New Mexico
Bernalillo can't be paired with either Valencia or Sandoval (nor Santa Fe either) which means it has to extend into quite vast areas. The number of legal combinations within these constraints however is legion - districts as diverse as Bernalillo - Cibola - Catron - Sierra or Bernalillo - Torrance - San Miguel - Dem hold NM1 for ever.
I *think* this map has the lowest pop. variation, although it's right up there in Absurdistan...

1 Bernalillo, Cibola, Torrance, Guadalupe, De Baca
606,104 1.000
2 North of that and as far as Quay and Curry
606,989 1.001
3 remainder
605,953 .999

Yes, the population + county geography combination make splitting counties hard to avoid. Wink Although my old plan did quite well in minimizing that. Tongue I only split four counties: Bernalillo because you have to, Sandoval to pick up the northern Urban Area (although if I hadn't hit the population limit I would've then gone south into Valencia to pick up the southern Urban Area), Socorro to nab the Native American Reservation there for CD3, and Colfax to reduce population deviation. Cheesy

Oh, my version 2 had:
1: 606,359 1.000 Dev. -10
2: 606,421 1.001 Dev. +72
3: 606,266 .999   Dev. -83

Now that is minimal population deviation! Wink

Interesting map there...but it is absurd. Wink



It's interesting to see what happens to Trond's map if you project it to 2010. CD 1 become too large and CD 3 quite a bit to small. To correct it I had to reduce CD 1 to Bernalillo and Cibola only (projected 679.0 K in 2010). CD 2 wraps around Albuquerque and becomes Guadalupe, Los Alamos, McKinley, Mora, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, San Juan, Santa Fe, Taos, Torrance, and Valencia (678.5 K). CD 3 takes in the rest in the south and east (679.5 K).

Hmm...interesting indeed. Smiley I suspect my map isn't projectable because I split too much of Bernalillo and Sandoval and your projections are only down to the county level... Sad

I can split to smaller levels when there are census estimates. In the NE and Midwest every state is fully broken down to the town level. Elsewhere only incorporated places are estimated by the census.

Thanks to WMS for sending me his precinct files and with some rounding on my part I can make rough projections for WMS' map.

In 2010 the ideal CD is about 679 K in population.
WMS CD 1: 723 K
WMS CD 2: 638 K
WMS CD 3: 677 K
The Albuquerque district has the growth that need to shift to CD 2to then shift to CD 3. The city of Rio Rancho in CD1 in Sandoval county is seeing a growth rate of almost 5% per year.

Oh, cool. Cool Hmm...let's see...I'd trim off the communities of Placitas, Bernalillo, Algodones (currently split for population reasons in my map) and Sandia Pueblo (W00T! Only one Indian Reservation not in CD3 Kiki) for starters. Then after that it all depends on how partisan I was feeling. Grin Cut off Rio Rancho...or cut off the South Valley? Decisions, decisions. Cheesy

And for the transfer to CD2...the rest of Colfax County, for starters. Smiley Then, perhaps, Torrance County if needed, or maybe Mora County. It would all depend on the numbers. Wink
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  
« 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 0.035 seconds with 11 queries.