Dave's Redistricting App

[12th Doctor]

Here's the map of Ohio I made.  All districts are have a deviation from the ideal population of less than 1000.  I used the new estimates for population and made 16 districts since Ohio is projected to lose 2 after the next census.



Blue: A safer district for Dreihaus-D (OH-1)
Dark Green: Schmidt-R (OH-2), Jordan-R (OH-4), and Austria-R (OH-7) are pitted against each other.  Jordan would likely move to represent the red district.  Austria defeats the reviled Schmidt in the primary
Magenta: Turner-R (OH-3) gets a slightly less friendly district and could face a stiffer challenge.
Red: As I mentioned, Jordan probably moves into this open seat.
Yellow: An open seat which Latta-R (OH-5) may move in on.  This district is more Dem friendly than the current OH-5 but is probably still around R+5 or more.
Blue-Green: This is an open seat and would probably be hotly contested despite the Republican lean.  Wilson-D (OH-6) may move in here giving the Dems a semi-incumbent advantage.
Gray: Boccieri-D (OH-16) Gets a much safer district and cruises to re-election.
Purple: Boner Boehner remains safe.
Cyan: Kaptur-D (OH-9) faces off against Latta-R (OH-5) in a contest she'd almost certainly win.  As mentioned earlier, Latta will likely move to the yellow district.
Pink: I don't think I've take the elf Kucinich out of this district.  Safe Dem regardless.
Yellow-Green: Fudge-D (OH-11) is safe but the district drops below 50% black.
Lilac: Tiberi-R (OH-12) trades most of his black constituents for suburban whites and becomes considerably safer.
Peach: Sutton-D (OH-13) sees a dramatic change in her district but remains safe
Bronze: LaTourette-R (OH-14) faces off against Ryan-D (OH-17) in what will surely be the most contested race in the state.  However, the district has a distinct Democratic tilt to it which will probably put Ryan over the top.
Orange:: I think Kilroy-D (OH-15) is still in this district and it becomes much easier for her to hold.
Neon Green: This district pits Space-D (OH-18) against Wilson-D (OH-6) but Wilson may move.  This district is much more Dem friendly than Space's current district and he should have little trouble holding it even though it probably leans Rep.

How did you get yours up here?  I've tried everything.

[12th Doctor]

Well, fellas, I had a pretty decent map, but its either not saving mine to my computer, or... I don't even have an alternative.  That could have been a good two hours I just wasted, there.

[12th Doctor]

Well, fellas, I had a pretty decent map, but its either not saving mine to my computer, or... I don't even have an alternative.  That could have been a good two hours I just wasted, there.

You have to type in a file name in the box on the left-hand side and select "save as". Your map will only come back up once you select the state it's for when you open the program. Really, this program is a perfect example of how not to design a user interface.

To save it to my computer from the internet... I have to save it there, and then reopen it there?  I really must be missing something.

[12th Doctor]

Well, fellas, I had a pretty decent map, but its either not saving mine to my computer, or... I don't even have an alternative.  That could have been a good two hours I just wasted, there.

If you clicked on the Save under the File menu it probably saved it.  It is to an application data area.  When you restart the application, you have to first select the State and then after it loads all the base data, you can use the File menu to open up your plan.  The Open option does not appear until you have loaded up the data for a State.

Alternatively, search for a file with "drf.xml" in its name and created in the past few days.

Okay, well I did all of that.  I still can' find the file on my computer... which is odd, because I am going to assume it must have saved it.

[12th Doctor]

I am searching my entire C Drive and it is coming up with absolutely nothing.

[12th Doctor]

Is there, perhaps, another way I can do this, since either I am missing a step in this process that everyone else is hitting, or as usual, Vista sucks?

[12th Doctor]

I mean, if I even has a "Documents and Settings" folder, that might help.

[12th Doctor]

Well, fellas, I had a pretty decent map, but its either not saving mine to my computer, or... I don't even have an alternative.  That could have been a good two hours I just wasted, there.

If you clicked on the Save under the File menu it probably saved it.  It is to an application data area.  When you restart the application, you have to first select the State and then after it loads all the base data, you can use the File menu to open up your plan.  The Open option does not appear until you have loaded up the data for a State.

Alternatively, search for a file with "drf.xml" in its name and created in the past few days.

Okay, well I did all of that.  I still can' find the file on my computer... which is odd, because I am going to assume it must have saved it.

You might not have searched your computer in the right place.  You might have to search the whole C drive or look here.

*  On Windows XP files are saved in:
      C:\Documents and Settings\<username>\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Silverlight\is\<junkdir1>\<junkdir2>\1\s\<junkdir3>\f\DavesRedistrictingFiles\<state>
* On Windows Vista files are saved in:
      C:\Users\<username>\AppData\LocalLow\Microsoft\Silverlight\is\<junkdir1>\<junkdir2>\1\s\<junkdir3>\f\DavesRedistrictingFiles\<state>

Yeah, I just found that, and went to "Users"... oh, but what is this... I don't have an AppData Folder!

[12th Doctor]

I mean, if I even has a "Documents and Settings" folder, that might help.

* On Windows Vista files are saved in:

      C:\Users\<username>\AppData\LocalLow\Microsoft\Silverlight\is\<junkdir1>\<junkdir2>\1\s\<junkdir3>\f\DavesRedistrictingFiles\<state>

See if you can find the "Silverlight" directory.

When you were drawing the plan, did you do a Save As or a Save?  You might also have to actually type a file name in the box up by the File menu.

As I said, I don't have an AppData.

I searched for Silverlight and according to my computer it doesn't exist.  I honeslt don't know what the Hell is going on.

[12th Doctor]

I mean, if I even has a "Documents and Settings" folder, that might help.

* On Windows Vista files are saved in:

      C:\Users\<username>\AppData\LocalLow\Microsoft\Silverlight\is\<junkdir1>\<junkdir2>\1\s\<junkdir3>\f\DavesRedistrictingFiles\<state>

See if you can find the "Silverlight" directory.

When you were drawing the plan, did you do a Save As or a Save?  You might also have to actually type a file name in the box up by the File menu.

As I said, I don't have an AppData.

I get this sort of stuff at my job all the time.

Make sure you have it set up to show hidden files and folders.

Thank you.  That seems to have done it.

Remember the good old days when you had the ability to see, access, and edit all your files without jumping through hoops?

[12th Doctor]

Okay, I figured it out.  Thanks everyone, especially BRTD since there is no way I would have thought of that.

[12th Doctor]

Dammit... was anyone else having this problem where it was cutting off the bottom, or other area of your map, after you converted it to JPG?

[12th Doctor]

Dammit... was anyone else having this problem where it was cutting off the bottom, or other area of your map, after you converted it to JPG?

Did you save a "state map" eg click the check box?  Or did you try to show the whole plan and then create that as an "area map"?

No, its a state map.  The entire map shows up in the "open map" screen, and continue to stay intact until I go to open it up after I "Save Map as JPG" after which the bottom is cut off, for some reason.

[12th Doctor]

I have built this thing up so much, I fell like I can't match expectations.  HA  But I finally got it to work. 






I would do close ups for you guys, but I don't really think I need them.  Really, all I did with this map is try to make it so that it respected municipal, county, and some natural boundaries as much as possible, without it violating socioeconomic common sense, to much.

I didn't actually try to gerrymander, but for one exception...

I did everything I could to dispose of Murthaland, and its glorious leader with it.  While my 5th district looks ugly, its not nearly as ugly as Murtha's current districts and it makes for a much more clear cut Southwest, on the whole.  Murtha could never win this district, as, not only does it lean Republican, but it strips him of the majority of his base.

Beyond that, things get a little ugly near Reading, with what I call the "Reading Wrap Around" but the population in the "Wrap Around" area is surprisingly light, and it serves the function of putting that entire belt (Allentown, Reading, Bethlehem) under one roof.  I was amazed with how well the Southeast came out in general.

My estimate, is that this map contains 7 safe or near-safe Republican districts, 7 safe or near-safe Democrat districts, with the remaining 4 as possible pickups in a 50-50... and all without even trying.

[12th Doctor]

OK I uploaded the file for my Bachmann-free map here. Anyone else able to convert it into a JPEG? Not sure how.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/xurq37

I think it is wrong and childish of you to target any one elected official, in particular, for elimination.

[12th Doctor]

On a more serious note, though, looking at my map makes me kinda sad to realize how depopulated the old industrial Central part of the state has become.  Even when I was little, which is to say before the 1990 census, we had four representatives covering that area.  Now, its down to two.  Similarly, the Northwest once had two reps, and now they can barely support one.

[12th Doctor]

OK I uploaded the file for my Bachmann-free map here. Anyone else able to convert it into a JPEG? Not sure how.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/xurq37

I think it is wrong and childish of you to target any one elected official, in particular, for elimination.

You did the same thing to Murtha.

I was being quite facetious, I assure you.

[12th Doctor]

How different would a redistricted Virginia look compared to what it is now?

I'm hoping he adds Virginia eventually, because I'd like to take a stab at it. The exploding population in NoVa will probably make the 8th, 10th, and 11th districts shrink. I expect there will end up being a bipartisan incumbent protection map.

You would be surprised.  I have started maps from each separate corner of PA, and one started from the middle, and each one looks somewhat different.

The one started from the middle, especially looked so different from the map I posted that I kinda wondered if it was how they made the current map.  HA  The reason I say that is because I usually had to do funny things with the districts that I would never consider, just to make it work.

[12th Doctor]

In this map, Pitts and Platts are in the same district.

As for the rest... the rest of the incumbents stay in place. Shuster gets a weird district, the 6th looks more normal, the 13th is more compact, the City of Chester goes to the 7th..

any thoughts?

Last night, I unintentionally created a map that was maximally favorable to the Republicans, essentially by starting in the middle and working my way out.

By contrast, this map would likely produce the most favorable possible outcome for the Democrats.  I am curious, did you start out intending for that? 

[12th Doctor]

P.S.  Unfortunately, the file was corrupted, and I could post the map I created.  I am going to try to recreate it at some point, because it was a good one.

[12th Doctor]

considering that the delegation is 12-7 Dem, it's slightly hard to top that by much..

but yes.. the map would likely flip the 6th and create a 13-5 delegation, at worst.

And the York/Lancaster town results make it possible that the 16th (Pitts/Platts) could be easier to flip.

The Republican seats would be the 5th, 9th, 15th, 16th, and 18th.

Assuming that the color scheme is always the same, the 3rd (Dark Purple) would be Republican as well.  Elk county is majority Democratic, but it only votes that way under very specific circumstances.

At the same time is voted for the Democrat President, it also elected my conservative Republican friend over a moderate-left Democratic incumbent for State Rep.

Warren County is very much the same way.

[12th Doctor]

Isn't Elk County a fairly Catholic place? Dahlkemper is a pro-life Catholic, IIRC.

Plus, Erie County gave Dahlkemper the win, and Mercer (a Dahlkemper county) is completely in the 3rd.

The 12th might be a lot tougher post-Murtha, and idk how feasible it is to make a solid Republican 18th and solid Dem 12th.

Unless the 14th is made a bit more red, and the 18th gets some of those 60% McCain areas north of Pittsburgh.

Well, yes, with someone like Dahlkemper that would be a Dem seat, but that was my point.  Without a specific type of Democrat, some of those, like the your 12th, easily become Republican seats. Even with the right Democrat, its tricky.  All it would take is a good Republican year, and those areas have proven kind to Republican incumbents, just so long as they don't screw up.

A populist Republican would have no trouble taking the your 12th, even with Murtha in the saddle.  Really, even in his current district, which has been tailor made for him, the Republicans could have defeated him in any of those elections this decade if they had only found the right candidate and ran a very aggressive campaign.

[12th Doctor]

NC-01 is probably not majority-black, which runs into VRA issues. Also, NC-12 goes too far into the suburbs to be safe for Mel Watt.

I also don't know that NC-11 needs to be shored up that much for Shuler. He seems perfectly capable of holding that district, since no serious Republican seems to want to run against him.

Where can I find the VRA rules?

Basically, the rule is that you can't dilute the minority presence in a majority-minority (at least 50.1% black or Hispanic) district. Coalition districts (say, one that was 40% black and 15% Hispanic) are not protected, however.

Worst.  Law.  Ever.  BTW

By its very nature it ensures ridiculous gerrymandering, and it's positive effects for minority representation are highly questionable.  It often leads to the creation of a couple of districts with a 60 percent or greater minority presence when almost any redistricting without the rules would create several districts with 30 percent minority representation.  When you want to dilute the chances of an opposition party picking up more seats, you generally create as many districts with super-majorities of that parties voters as possible.  If your goal were to ensure the election of fewer black candidates, and lessen overall minority political power, then I couldn't think of a much better way to do so than the regulations of the VRA.

[12th Doctor]

NC-01 is probably not majority-black, which runs into VRA issues. Also, NC-12 goes too far into the suburbs to be safe for Mel Watt.

I also don't know that NC-11 needs to be shored up that much for Shuler. He seems perfectly capable of holding that district, since no serious Republican seems to want to run against him.

Where can I find the VRA rules?

Basically, the rule is that you can't dilute the minority presence in a majority-minority (at least 50.1% black or Hispanic) district. Coalition districts (say, one that was 40% black and 15% Hispanic) are not protected, however.

Worst.  Law.  Ever.  BTW

By its very nature it ensures ridiculous gerrymandering, and it's positive effects for minority representation are highly questionable.  It often leads to the creation of a couple of districts with a 60 percent or greater minority presence when almost any redistricting without the rules would create several districts with 30 percent minority representation.  When you want to dilute the chances of an opposition party picking up more seats, you generally create as many districts with super-majorities of that parties voters as possible.  If your goal were to ensure the election of fewer black candidates, and lessen overall minority political power, then I couldn't think of a much better way to do so than the regulations of the VRA.

You'd probably still have to maintain at least a 40% black minority in order for black candidates to win in most of the South.  30% might be sufficient in some of the northern cities but Southern whites are nearly as polarized towards Republicans as blacks voters are towards Democrats.

And yet one could easily argue that this kind of segregation increases polarization by decreasing political interaction.

90% of the South never has an opportunity to take a good look at a Black candidate, while that's all 105 of the South sees.  In the meantime, by creating this black/white, liberal/conservative polemic, you insure that the most extreme candidates will be elected, especially in terms of racial issues.  It becomes an issue of the "ultra-conservative, reactionary, racist cracker" in one districts vs the "ultra-liberal, socialist, damn complaining, lazy n***er" in the other.  The perception is fed by the separation, which in turn causes a greater separation.

[12th Doctor]

Here's my new Pennsylvania:



PA-1: Basically the same, expands a bit into Delaware county. Currently has a slight black plurality, but that shouldn't be an issue until Brady retires. Come to think of it I probably should've traded some population with PA-7 to make the latter more black...
PA-2: Also basically the same. Majority black and safe D.
PA-3: Much better for Dahlkemper, as I've cleaned out the Butler county portion.
PA-4: Also most of Butler county is gone. Should be safe for Altmire, and strong for any white pro-life Democrat.
PA-5: Now has Butler county. Obviously safe Republican, Thompson would likely win though don't count out a Butler county Republican challenging him.
PA-6: District now has a sane shape. Gerlach would probably finally be toppled in this seat, as it contains all of Reading yet less of rural Berks, but contains a bit more of Chester, so not a sure thing.
PA-7: Largely the same, a bit outward expanded. Slightly more Republican but could still be won by a Democrat especially if there's an incumbent or Sestak opted to return. Could be made more Dem as noted by putting more blacks in, I should tweak that.
PA-8: Probably gets a bit more Republican, but Murphy should have no problem surviving.
PA-9: Population-wise is probably closer to the old PA-19 than the current PA-9. Shuster might be able to defeat Platts in the primary if he gets the teabaggers on his side through.
PA-10: Becomes slightly more Dem. If Carney survived so far, he'll win here.
PA-11: A bit more Republican, but if Kanjorski retires, should stay Dem.
PA-12: Shuster might have a better chance here than in PA-9 running against whoever takes Murtha's seat. Against a Dem he might be favored. Against a Republican in the primary it'd come down to areas' turnout.
PA-13: Ah, this old classic. Is now more Montco based, so Schwartz is fine.
PA-14: Little change, safe Dem.
PA-15: Now contains Stroudsburg, but Charlie Dent likely still wins.
PA-16: Safe GOP, Pitts wins easily.
PA-17: Condensed a bit more but loses the bit of Reading, Holden should win easily but not so safe if he leaves.
PA-18: Now finally has a sane shape. I don't know the exact partisan breakdown, but Murphy is much more likely to lose, as the current PA-12 was designed to take in all the Dem areas to keep him safe.

First of all, that map is inane.  Secondly, if that is supposed to be a Democrat gerrymander, then epic fail.... shows that you know almost nothing about PA politics.