Dave's Redistricting App
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 04:58:06 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, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Dave's Redistricting App
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 48
Author Topic: Dave's Redistricting App  (Read 307367 times)
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #750 on: August 12, 2010, 07:20:32 AM »


I know you made some changes to the Socal map, but did you make any changes to the Norcal map? My biggest concern here is that both Mcnerney and his challenger David Harmer don't live in CD-11 as drawn above. Any CD-11 that is drawn will have to include east bay suburbs. Either it's going to be Pleasanton (Mcnerney) or San Ramon (Harmer) depending on who wins in the fall.

This version of CA was designed first to create appropriate minority districts then to minimize county fragments with equal population (within 100), then follow with compactness. No Cal doesn't have much in the way of required minority districts, so county integrity was the primary consideration there.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,583
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #751 on: August 12, 2010, 10:51:05 AM »

That map would make things much nicer for McNerney, right?
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #752 on: August 12, 2010, 10:53:52 AM »

That map would make things much nicer for McNerney, right?

Not really. He would have to choose between a primary battle with Pete Stark or moving to Stockton (already a bad idea) to run in a seat that is only marginally more Democratic than his current one.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #753 on: August 12, 2010, 09:17:36 PM »

That map would make things much nicer for McNerney, right?

If the rural areas and small towns are taken out from the district and in it's place Dublin and Pleasanton are added, I think it would be a pretty good district for Mcnerney. Probably D+3 or 4. I would add the rural areas either into Stark's district, in place of the two cities I mentioned, or add them to CD-3 while adding more democratic parts of CD-3 into one of the outer east bay districts (probably CD-10 since Garamendi is from Sacramento County).
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #754 on: August 15, 2010, 07:02:14 AM »

This is a democratic gerrymander of what could happen if California loses a seat (I know it's unlikely this time around). I was afraid I wouldn't be able to get rid of a Republican seat without endangering a few Democrats. To my surprise not only did I get rid of a Republican district (Buck Mckeon's), I also put a few other pubbie incumbents in tough seats. I also put Jane Harman in a tougher district, but any uncorrupt Democrat should be able to carry it.


Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #755 on: August 15, 2010, 07:09:27 AM »





Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #756 on: August 15, 2010, 07:18:32 AM »





Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #757 on: August 15, 2010, 07:27:37 AM »





Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #758 on: August 15, 2010, 12:02:37 PM »

This is a democratic gerrymander of what could happen if California loses a seat (I know it's unlikely this time around). I was afraid I wouldn't be able to get rid of a Republican seat without endangering a few Democrats. To my surprise not only did I get rid of a Republican district (Buck Mckeon's), I also put a few other pubbie incumbents in tough seats. I also put Jane Harman in a tougher district, but any uncorrupt Democrat should be able to carry it.




How many Hispanic-majority districts does this create?
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,047
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #759 on: August 15, 2010, 01:55:11 PM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #760 on: August 15, 2010, 02:12:29 PM »

Those are some ugly seats!
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #761 on: August 16, 2010, 05:38:04 AM »

How many Hispanic-majority districts does this create?

15 Hispanic majority districts and 6 districts where they are greater than 40% of the population.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #762 on: August 16, 2010, 05:48:21 AM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #763 on: August 16, 2010, 05:56:10 AM »
« Edited: August 16, 2010, 06:18:27 AM by sbane »

A few thoughts on how I think the districts will vote:

CD 1- Wh: 68%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 2%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 21%, Other: 3%
This district takes in Napa and parts of Sonoma county and then goes north through rural areas whilst picking up Willits, Ukiah, Eureka as well as Arcata. It then takes in democratic parts of Siskiyou county and then goes south picking up the college and downtown area of Chico whilst going to it’s end in Yolo county, including the hyper democratic city of Davis. It might be slightly more Republican than the current 1st district, but it can be easily held by a Democrat.
CD 2- Wh: 70%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 7%, Hisp: 17%, Other: 3%
I ended up switching CD2 and 4 so Mclintock would probably run from this district. At first I wanted to eliminate this district, but I was unable to. It ended up being much easier to draw Democratic districts in Socal. This district takes in the more conservative parts of San Joaquin County and the Sacramento suburbs. Safe R.
CD 3- Wh: 66%, Bl: 4%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 7%, Hisp: 19%, Other: 3%
Mostly conservative Sacramento county suburbs. I got rid of more minority parts of south Sacramento from the district, thus making it safer for Lungren.
CD 4: Wh: 75%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 2%, Asn: 4%, Hisp: 14%, Other: 3%
Conservative rural areas of northern California. It’s more or less the same district as before, but without the Sacramento suburbs. Safe R.
CD 5: Wh: 42%, Bl: 12%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 18%, Hisp: 24%, Other: 4%
Inner Sacramento district. Mostly the same as before and safe D.
CD 6: Wh: 68%, Bl: 4%, Nat: 2%, Asn: 6%, Hisp: 18%, Other: 3%
This district takes in more of rural California than the previous district which makes it less safe. Yet it’s still a safe D district.
CD 7: Wh: 37%, Bl: 16%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 15%, Hisp: 28%, Other: 4%
Similar to the current district, but it takes in some rural areas in northern California. Still a safe D district.
CD 8: Wh: 48%, Bl: 6%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 29%, Hisp: 14%, Other: 2%
Same district as before. Very safe D.
CD 9: Wh: 38%, Bl: 18%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 27%, Hisp: 13%, Other: 3%
For the inner east bay I tried to create as Hispanic a district as possible. This means that CA-9 is basically everybody except for the more heavily Hispanic areas. Safe D obviously.
CD 10: Wh: 59%, Bl: 5%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 12%, Hisp: 20%, Other: 3%
This district is more or less the same in Contra Costa county but it does not go into Alameda to take in Livermore. Instead I took the district into Sacramento county to take in some democratic areas there and Garamendi is from the area anyways. It also contains Vacaville and West Sacramento. It might be slightly less Democratic than the current district but can be easily held by a Democrat. Lean D.
CD 11: Wh: 47%, Bl: 6%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 30%, Other: 3%
This has been made much safer for Mcnerney. In San Joaquin county it excises the conservative rural areas as well as the non Hispanic areas of Stockton and Manteca. It becomes a lean D district as opposed to the true swing district that it is currently.
CD 12: Wh: 42%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 32%, Hisp: 20%, Other: 3%
My goal in San Mateo and Santa Clara county was to create as white a district as possible. This district got the rest of the precincts. Safe D.
CD 13: Wh: 24%, Bl: 10%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 23%, Hisp:40%, Other: 3%
So this was my attempt at creating a Hispanic majority district in Alameda county. I failed miserably. I even had to go into San Mateo county to pick up East Palo Alto and Redwood city to make it at least 40% Hispanic.  Safe D.
CD 14: Wh: 38%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 36%, Hisp: 21%, Other: 2%
I tried to make a white and Hispanic district in Santa Clara county. This is the rest of the county. Safe D .
CD 15: Wh: 23%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 17%, Hisp: 55%, Other: 2%
I suppose I could have made a Hispanic district totally within Santa Clara county, but I instead chose to go south and take in Morgan Hill, Gilroy, Salinas and small hyper Hispanic farm towns south of Monterey. Safe D.
CD 16: Wh: 70%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 11%, Other: 3%
This is my white district of the south bay. I had to go down south to take in Monterey and the Carmel valley to make it so. It’s a lean to safe D district, but if Republicans start doing better with culturally liberal whites, this district could be in play. Very unlikely though.
CD 17: Wh: 45%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 16%, Hisp: 34%, Other: 2%
Pretty crazy district stretching all the way from Fremont in the bay area to Oxnard in Ventura county. It’s major population areas are parts of the east bay and south bay, conservative parts of SLO and SB counties and democratic parts of Ventura county. It’s less safe than the current district but it should be held by a Democrat. Lean D.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #764 on: August 16, 2010, 05:59:23 AM »

CD 18: Wh: 33%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 56%, Other: 2%
Hispanic district in the northern San Joaquin valley. This is probably a swing district with a Democratic lean. Quite similar in partisanship to the current district, I think.
CD  19: Wh: 65%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 23%, Other: 2%
White areas of the northern San Joaquin valley and also takes in the conservative suburbs of Fresno.
CD 20: Wh: 22%, Bl: 5%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 8%, Hisp: 63%, Other: 1%
A huge chunk of Fresno is in this district. It also takes in parts of Kings and Tulare counties. This is a safer Democratic district than either the current 18th or 20th CD’s.
CD 21: Wh: 29%, Bl: 5%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 3%, Hisp: 61%, Other: 1%
This is one of those safe R districts that I put into contention. It’s mostly the Hispanic areas of Kern, Kings and Tulare counties.  Although I made this into a very Hispanic district, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bush carried this district twice (narrowly). Nunes should be able to hold onto it, but a good challenger could beat him.
CD 22: Wh: 62%, Bl: 4%, Nat: 2%, Asn: 3%, Hisp: 27%, Other: 2%
Very Republican district consisting of Bakersfield, Lancaster and eastern California up to South Lake Tahoe.
CD 23: Wh: 48%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 43%, Other: 2%
Similar district to the current one. Safe D.
CD 24: Wh: 64%, Bl: 4%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 7%, Hisp: 23%, Other: 2%
Conservative parts of Ventura County + Santa Clarita + Palmdale = Safe R.
CD 25: Wh: 23%, Bl: 7%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 10%, Hisp: 58%, Other: 2%
This is the district I eliminated. I actually used this color for what is the current 51st CD. This majority Hispanic south SD district should be safely held by a Democrat.
CD 26: Wh: 35%, Bl: 7%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 8%, Hisp: 47%, Other: 2%
Another Republican district that has been put into contention. It takes in marginally Republican areas like Chino, Rancho Cucamonga and Upland and joins them with Democratic areas like parts of Pomona and Montclair. It also takes in a chunk of unincorporated Riverside county. Can’t say how this area votes but it may determine how the district votes overall. Bush probably won this district in 2004, but overall it has a slight lean towards Democrats. Drier should be able to hold onto this seat unless he gets a really good challenger. An open seat election would be won by a Democrat though.
CD 27: Wh: 44%, Bl: 4%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 11%, Hisp: 39%, Other: 2%
Central San Fernando valley district. Safe D.
CD 28: Wh: 34%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 8%, Hisp: 52%, Other: 2%
Eastern parts of the San Fernando valley as well as the city of San Fernando, Burbank and La Canada Flintridge. Safe D.
CD 29: Wh: 35%, Bl: 6%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 42%, Other: 3%
Glendale, Pasadena and out to Azusa. Safe D.
CA 30: Wh: 63%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 12%, Hisp: 20%, Other: 2%
Similar to the current district. Safe D.
CA 31: Wh: 9%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 8%, Hisp: 78%, Other: 1%
Very Hispanic  downtown/east LA district. Safe D.
CA 32: Wh: 18%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 47%, Hisp: 31%, Other: 1%
This was my attempt at a majority Asian district in the San Gabriel valley. If I tried harder I could have probably made it majority Asian. Oh well. Trying to make it more Asian also led it to become a less safe district for Democrats. It’s still a strong Democratic district though.
CA 33: Wh: 24%, Bl: 20%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 21%, Other: 2%
West LA district. Safe D.
CA 34: Wh: 3%, Bl: 32%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 59%, Other: 1%
This district has the greatest black population of the LA districts. It used to be a Hispanic heavy district in east LA. Now it’s primarily a south LA district. I put a lot of Blacks into this district so I could put Waters into a less primary friendly district. This is quite a safe D district.
CA 35: Wh: 25%, Bl: 15%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 15%, Hisp: 43%, Other: 2%
A radically different district from the old one. I created it so that Waters could be primaried. This district takes in most of the northern parts of Long Beach, Lakewood, Los Alamitos and stretches north to Paramount. It’s still a pretty safe D district but nothing close to the D+31 district that it is currently.
CA 36: Wh: 49%, Bl: 6%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 17%, Hisp: 26%, Other: 2%
A very similar district to the current one except the Republican parts of the Palos Verdes peninsula has been added into the district and parts of Culver City taken out. This makes it a more Republican district but it’s still a lean D district.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #765 on: August 16, 2010, 06:01:50 AM »
« Edited: August 16, 2010, 06:10:19 AM by sbane »

CA 37: Wh: 29%, Bl: 10%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 45%, Other: 2%
U shaped district that starts from the harbor and goes through the heart of Long Beach and into Seal Beach and then Cypress in Orange county. It then turns back into LA county taking in Artesia, Bellflower, Lynwood and east Compton. It’s a safe D district.
CA 38: Wh: 24%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 11%, Hisp: 61%, Other: 1%
Hispanic district in the San Gabriel valley and eastern LA county. Safe to lean D.
CA 39: Wh: 11%, Bl: 7%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 76%, Other: 1%
Very Hispanic district stretching from Huntington park, going through Southgate, Downey and La Mirada on the way to pick up the wealthier areas of Fullerton. Safe D.
CA 40: Wh: 55%, Bl: 3%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 9%, Hisp: 29%, Other: 2%
Safe Republican district stretching from Tustin and going through Orange, Yorba Linda, Brea, Norco, wealthier parts of Corona and down to the Temecula and Murrieta area.
CA 41: Wh: 55%, Bl: 7%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 4%, Hisp: 31%, Other: 2%
Pretty similar to the current district. It consists mostly of San Bernardino county exurbs. Safe R.
CA 42: Wh: 30%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 12%, Hisp: 54%, Other: 1%
This is a former Republican district that I have taken apart. This is a district I am definitely sure will not reelect the incumbent Republican. This is another U shaped district that takes in heavily Hispanic areas like Pico Rivera, Downey and Norwalk as well as more moderate areas like Whittier and Buena Park. It also takes in the more Hispanic parts of Fullerton and also the Republican city of Placentia. A good Republican incumbent would be able to hold this district, but not Gary Miller. Lean D.
CA 43: Wh: 21%, Bl: 10%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 4%, Hisp: 62%, Other: 2%
Very similar to the current district except it doesn’t contain a portion of San Bernardino and picks up some wealthier areas of Riverside. Safe D.
CA 44: Wh: 29%, Bl: 10%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 7%, Hisp: 51%, Other: 2%
This is a Republican district I didn’t have to tinker with too much to make majority Hispanic. I did take in Hispanic parts of Corona and all of Moreno Valley, Perris as well as most of Riverside. This is a lean Democratic district where a good Republican incumbent could easily hold on. But considering Calvert almost lost in 2008 in a much more Republican district, in this district he is toast. And considering he actually lost in the Riverside county portion of his district, which is also growing very fast, Calvert is going to be in big trouble come 2012.
CA 45: Wh: 27%, Bl: 5%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 4%, Hisp: 62%, Other: 1%
I put Bono Mack into a much tougher district. It first of all takes in a part of inner city San Bernardino, and then takes in Democratic parts of the Coachella valley including Palm Springs, Indio and Coachella. It also goes down to Imperial county and it contains a Hispanic part of Escondido. I think she could hold on, since she is a good incumbent, but against a good candidate she could lose. The mayor of Palm Springs is running against her this year and he will probably lose. But in this district he would have won.
CA 46: Wh: 50%, Bl: 1%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 25%, Hisp: 22%, Other: 2%
Coastal OC district as well as the Vietnamese parts. Safe R.
CA 47: Wh: 19%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 12%, Hisp: 67%, Other: 1%
Republicans always dream of taking back this district. Not going to happen in the district I have drawn. I took out the Vietnamese heavy parts of the district and added in some Hispanic areas of Costa Mesa as well as the UC Irvine area. Safe D.
CA 48: Wh: 68%, Bl: 1%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 13%, Hisp: 15%, Other: 2%
Safe Republican south OC district.
CA 49: Wh: 63%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 3%, Hisp: 29%, Other: 2%
This district includes exurban Riverside county, wealthy Coachella valley areas, Fallbrook, Escondido and rural parts of SD county. Safe R.
CA 50: Wh: 56%, Bl: 6%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 13%, Hisp: 25%, Other: 3%
I tried to create a third Democratic district in SD but it’s just not possible. I added in Hispanic areas in Oceanside and Vista and then stayed by the coast where more liberal whites live. This is definitely more Democratic than the current district and might be just slightly lean Democrat. But as an incumbent, Bilbray should be favored in this district.
CA 51: Wh: 41%, Bl: 9%, Nat: 1%, Asn: 12%, Hisp: 34%, Other: 3%
This is the old CD 53. It’s pretty similar to the original district, maybe just a tad more Democratic. Safe D.
CA 52: Wh: 72%, Bl: 2%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 9%, Hisp: 14%, Other: 3%
Basically the whiter and more conservative inland areas of SD are in this district. Safe R.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #766 on: August 16, 2010, 07:57:25 AM »


CA 33: Wh: 24%, Bl: 20%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 21%, Other: 2%
West LA district. Safe D.
CA 34: Wh: 3%, Bl: 32%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 59%, Other: 1%
This district has the greatest black population of the LA districts. It used to be a Hispanic heavy district in east LA. Now it’s primarily a south LA district. I put a lot of Blacks into this district so I could put Waters into a less primary friendly district. This is quite a safe D district.
CA 35: Wh: 25%, Bl: 15%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 15%, Hisp: 43%, Other: 2%
A radically different district from the old one. I created it so that Waters could be primaried. This district takes in most of the northern parts of Long Beach, Lakewood, Los Alamitos and stretches north to Paramount. It’s still a pretty safe D district but nothing close to the D+31 district that it is currently.

Even if the Dems could draw the map to suit themselves, I don't think that they would want to invite a suit from the NAACP with this map. It dilutes Black votes too much, and since a majority-Black district is possible, the only way I would expect concurrence would be if there were two districts with strong enough Black populations to lock up up primary wins. Even then there could be VRA concerns.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,047
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #767 on: August 16, 2010, 09:20:28 AM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #768 on: August 16, 2010, 10:24:05 AM »
« Edited: August 16, 2010, 10:26:00 AM by Verily »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

Not true. You just have to be rigorous with your excision of the whites from such districts. I recently drew a map with three Hispanic districts in the Central Valley, two of which were more than 70% Hispanic! (This involved stretching a district to include San Benito County.)

CA-20 is 72% Hispanic, CA-17 is 71% Hispanic, CA-18 (northernmost) is 55% Hispanic and solidly Dem.

Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #769 on: August 16, 2010, 01:30:31 PM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

3 Hispanics will be elected from the central valley, since Nunes is a Hispanic, no? I agree the 21st CD I drew would be quite hard for a Democrat to take, especially against a good candidate like Nunes. But remember that this district is probably very poor and more likely to vote Democrat for congress as opposed to the presidency. And I am sure Obama carried the district comfortably.

On the other hand I made CA-20 safe, as opposed to the slightly Democratic leaning district it is today.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #770 on: August 16, 2010, 01:50:22 PM »


CA 33: Wh: 24%, Bl: 20%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 14%, Hisp: 21%, Other: 2%
West LA district. Safe D.
CA 34: Wh: 3%, Bl: 32%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 5%, Hisp: 59%, Other: 1%
This district has the greatest black population of the LA districts. It used to be a Hispanic heavy district in east LA. Now it’s primarily a south LA district. I put a lot of Blacks into this district so I could put Waters into a less primary friendly district. This is quite a safe D district.
CA 35: Wh: 25%, Bl: 15%, Nat: 0%, Asn: 15%, Hisp: 43%, Other: 2%
A radically different district from the old one. I created it so that Waters could be primaried. This district takes in most of the northern parts of Long Beach, Lakewood, Los Alamitos and stretches north to Paramount. It’s still a pretty safe D district but nothing close to the D+31 district that it is currently.

Even if the Dems could draw the map to suit themselves, I don't think that they would want to invite a suit from the NAACP with this map. It dilutes Black votes too much, and since a majority-Black district is possible, the only way I would expect concurrence would be if there were two districts with strong enough Black populations to lock up up primary wins. Even then there could be VRA concerns.

My goal here was to specifically put Waters is a district she would lose her primary in. I don't think diluting the black vote helped the Democrats. I could easily move people around in West LA to make two 30% black districts and still keep every Democrat safe and keep all the Republicans I put in tough districts in such districts.
Logged
muon2
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #771 on: August 16, 2010, 10:58:17 PM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

I find it interesting that the three most Hispanic districts in the Central Valley are represented by members of Portuguese descent - Cardoza, Costa, and Nunes. Do their names help them? What percentage would it take to elect an Hispanic in that region?
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #772 on: August 17, 2010, 12:29:15 AM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

I find it interesting that the three most Hispanic districts in the Central Valley are represented by members of Portuguese descent - Cardoza, Costa, and Nunes. Do their names help them? What percentage would it take to elect an Hispanic in that region?

Hmm, should have done a little research before I assumed they were hispanic. I am fairly sure their names help them rather than hurt them. I wouldn't be surprised if a large portion of the electorate think they are hispanic.
Logged
phk
phknrocket1k
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,906


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #773 on: August 17, 2010, 03:13:02 AM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

I find it interesting that the three most Hispanic districts in the Central Valley are represented by members of Portuguese descent - Cardoza, Costa, and Nunes. Do their names help them? What percentage would it take to elect an Hispanic in that region?

Hmm, should have done a little research before I assumed they were hispanic. I am fairly sure their names help them rather than hurt them. I wouldn't be surprised if a large portion of the electorate think they are hispanic.

They look like Whites.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,302


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #774 on: August 17, 2010, 04:02:05 AM »

Nice maps sbane. Too bad if the redistricting initiative passes (I can't imagine that it will not), it all will be totally illegal. Tongue  Plus, even if it does not pass, Governor Whitman would veto it. Smiley

Hmm, I don't see what's so wrong with my gerrymandering at all, besides not being visually pleasing enough for Xahar. I mean a district that includes both Long Beach and Compton makes a lot of sense doesn't it? Of course it also contains Seal Beach and Cypress. Tongue Or the district that joins Sunny hills in Fullerton to Huntington park. There's a lot of epic gerrymandering in there. I'm particularly fond of the central valley districts. I didn't know 3 Hispanic districts could be created there.

3 Hispanics won't be elected though in the central valley. The most Hispanic county in California, Tulare, votes GOP like clockwork.

I find it interesting that the three most Hispanic districts in the Central Valley are represented by members of Portuguese descent - Cardoza, Costa, and Nunes. Do their names help them? What percentage would it take to elect an Hispanic in that region?

Hmm, should have done a little research before I assumed they were hispanic. I am fairly sure their names help them rather than hurt them. I wouldn't be surprised if a large portion of the electorate think they are hispanic.

They look like Whites.

They look Hispanic to me...Nunes especially.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 48  
« 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 0.075 seconds with 12 queries.