Talk Elections

What is UP Atlas peeps. So the title is pretty self-explanatory, I made data based on 2020 population estimates that you can use in DRA. I made these estimates by applying the 2014-2017 rate of growth in each US county for 2017-2020. Then using Google Sheets, I edited each state’s csv file from DRA, applying each county’s estimated 2010-2020 growth uniformly for all vote districts within each county.*

Notes (important!)

• My growth model is pretty simplistic
• Growth was applied uniformly across every county, so districts drawn in very populous counties (Maricopa, Harris, etc.) will be less precise. BUT no growth differences in the country are drastic enough such that the districts will be hugely off
• *The only states where I did estimates by town/municipality are NH, MA, CT, and NJ. The vote districts in these states are actually named by their respective towns, so it was easy to apply town-level estimates.
• I didn't touch the race population data at all, sorry I didn't feel like doing it. The 2010 data is still there though, so you can still use the race view for drawing minority districts and whatnot
• I used spreadsheet formulas to calculate all these estimates so there could be some errors. If you find any populations that seem off, pls let me know and I'll look into it!!
• States without 2020 estimates are AK, WY, ND, SD, VT, and RI, since all are projected to have only one at-large district.
• I only did 2020 estimates for each state’s main data set, so don’t use any weird data sets like “special voting districts” or whatever.

Directions!

• First, find the folder named DavesRedistrictingFiles on your computer where all the current 2010 data is saved. If you’ve never loaded state(s) in DRA before, there will obviously be nothing there, so you need to have loaded all the states you want so that the data is loaded and saved onto your computer.
  *You can either use the search function or manually go through the file path. The file path for DavesRedistrictingFiles on my computer (Windows 10) is C:\Users\me\AppData\LocalLow\Microsoft\Silverlight\is\pek0eaig.kln\2gsheg05.vod\1\s\mbcuc5y11hatden4rfah5rjgwlpl3hes2ogfqs2jqmkdx103loaaadaa\f\DavesRedistrictingFiles
  *AppData is a hidden folder, so make sure you have viewing hidden files enabled.
• Mark this folder in your favorites so you can quickly access it every time you go back and forth.
• Download the data: I uploaded the 2020 data files, as well as drf template files for y’all to use as a starting point here in Google Drive (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EjrMR9n19jFjx9Flay01TwEEcAGPA0_9?usp=sharing) (it’s SAFE I promise there is nothing shady lol. also I didn’t do a template for California cuz the state kept crashing every 5 minutes and I couldn’t save a whole actual file. TX’s and IL’s files got messed up somehow too so I don’t have them)
• Copy/cut and paste the data files accordingly into each state’s folder, replacing the old data file with the same name. Then you should be good to open DRA and start drawing 2020 districts! If you already have files from 2010 redistricting (which most people do), you can actually just open that old file, and it‘ll load those shapes into the 2020 data. (drf files simply save shapes, csv files save voting district data) But you'll obviously need to adjust the 2010 district lines for 2020 population equality. For states where the number of districts will change, like TX or PA, obviously you should just start from scratch (or use my templates).
• If you ever want to go back to using 2010 data for a state, simply delete the whole state’s folder. The next time you load the state in DRA, your computer will download the original 2010 data again.

My take on 2020 districts :3

Using 2016 PVI, there are

• 205 D-leaning districts (193 with a >1 PVI)
• 223 R-leaning districts (208 with a >1 PVI)
• 7 even (34 with a <1 PVI)

mein districts
()

Trend (change from 2008 lean to 2016 PVI)
(California data wasn't available on DRA, but most districts there trended D)
()

Breakdown of (most) states:

Maine: nothing really changes. ME-01 continues to shrink toward the southwest corner of the state.
()
ME-01: Portland area
Obama +23 | Obama +22 | Clinton +12
D+7 | likely D

ME-02: The rest of Maine
Obama +11 | Obama +9 | Trump +7
R+1 | lean R

New Hampshire: NH-01 slightly outpaces NH-02 in growth
()
NH-01: urban
Obama +4 | Romney +1 | Trump +1
R+2 | tossup

NH-02: rural
Obama +15 | Obama +12 | Clinton +1
D+2 | tossup

Massachusetts: The Boston area dominates the state’s growth in contrast to the west and south
()
MA-01: west
Obama +39 | Obama +41 | Clinton +30
D+17 | solid D

MA-02: central
Obama +12 | Obama +9 | Clinton +6
D+2 | tossup

MA-03: Merrimack Valley
Obama +14 | Obama +10 | Clinton +16
D+5 | likely D

MA-04: south shore/suburbs
Obama +8 | Obama +6 | Clinton +11
D+3 | lean D

MA-05: metrowest
Obama +20 | Obama +16 | Clinton +32 (!)
D+10 | solid D

MA-06: north shore
Obama +24 | Obama +25 | Clinton +28
D+12 | solid D

MA-07: Boston suburbs
Obama +46 | Obama +47 | Clinton +56
D+24 | solid D

MA-08: Boston+Quincy+Randolph
Obama +55 | Obama +59 | Clinton +63
D+29 | solid D

MA-09: south shore
Obama +22 | Obama +18 | 2016: Clinton +12
D+6 | likely D

Connecticut: southwest is basically the only area growing.
()
CT-01: Hartford area
Obama +38 | Obama +35 | Clinton +32
D+15 | solid D

CT-02: east
Obama +19 | Obama +14 | Clinton +3
D+3 | tilt D

CT-03: New Haven/central
Obama +24 | Obama +26 | Clinton +13
D+8 | likely D

CT-04: southwest/Bridgeport
Obama +23 | Obama +15 | Clinton +28
D+9 | solid D

CT-05: northwest
Obama +9 | Obama +3 | Trump +6
R+2 | lean R

New York - loses one district (roughly current NY-22). The City is actually growing at a pretty healthy rate. It’s upstate that’s rapidly losing representation. Long Island (Nassau+Suffolk) is also stagnant.
()
()
NY-01: eastern Suffolk. R+5 | likely R
NY-02: southern shore. EVEN | tossup
NY-03: northern shore. R+1 | tossup
NY-04: Hempstead. D+10
NY-05: Jamaica. D+38 | solid D *black plurality*
NY-06: Flushing. D+17 | solid D *Asian plurality*
NY-07: Brooklyn Heights. D+41 | solid D *majority-minority*
NY-08: Flatbush. D+44 | solid D *black majority*
NY-09: Sheepshead Bay. D+1 | tossup
NY-10: Lower Manhattan. D+30
NY-11: Staten Island. R+1 | tilt R
NY-12: West Side. D+40 | solid D *majority-minority*
NY-13: Harlem. D+43 | solid D *Hispanic majority*
NY-14: Jackson Heights. D+34 | solid D *Hispanic plurality*
NY-15: Bronx. D+38 | solid D *Hispanic plurality*
NY-16: Yonkers. D+18 | solid D
NY-17: northern NYC suburbs. D+3 | likely D
NY-18: lower Hudson Valley. D+1 | tossup
NY-19: central\Catskills. R+6 | solid R
NY-20: Albany area. D+6 | likely D
NY-21: north. R+3 | likely R
NY-22: Southern Tier\Finger Lakes. R+2 | lean R
NY-23: Syracuse area. D+2 | tossup
NY-24: Rochester. D+7 | solid D
NY-25: Buffalo. D+8 | solid D
NY-26: west NY. R+12 | solid R

New Jersey: The NY area (especially the cities) is basically the only area growing. Also Ocean.
()
NJ-01: Camden/Philly suburbs.
Obama +29 | Obama +31 | Clinton +25
D+12 | solid D

NJ-02: south.
Obama +10 | Obama +10 | Trump +2
D+1 | tossup

NJ-03: central, Delaware Valley.
Obama +28 | Obama +29 | Clinton +28
D+13 | solid D

NJ-04: Jersey shore.
McCain +17 | Romney +19 | Trump +31
R+14 | solid R

NJ-05: NY suburbs.
Obama +10 | Obama +9 | Clinton +15
D+5 | likely D

NJ-06: central Jersey, northern shore.
Obama +3 | Obama +3 | Trump +2
R+1 | tossup

NJ-07: skylands.
McCain +14 | Romney +16 | Trump +18
R+10 | solid R

NJ-08: Newark. *black plurality*
Obama +63 | Obama +72 | Clinton +65
D+33 | solid D

NJ-09: Paterson. *Hispanic plurality*
Obama +30 | Obama +42 | Clinton +34
D+18 | solid D

NJ-10: Elizabeth+Jersey City. *majority-minority*
Obama +46 | Obama +56 | Clinton +50
D+25 | solid D

NJ-11: extremely educated suburbs. swung hard against Trump
Obama +3 | Romney +1 |Clinton +12
D+1 | lean D

NJ-12: central cities. *majority-minority*
Obama +30 | Obama +35 | Clinton +32
D+16 | solid D

Pennsylvania: loses one district (roughly current PA-09). The southeast is basically the only area growing. The rest of the state is generally losing population.
()
PA-01: Bucks. EVEN | tossup
PA-02: Northeast Philly+suburbs. D+15 | solid D
PA-03: North Philly. D+40 | solid D *black plurality*
PA-04: north Montco+Reading. R+1 | tilt R
PA-05: Delaware+South Philly. D+27 | solid D *black plurality*
PA-06: wealthy Philly suburbs. D+2 | lean D
PA-07: Lehigh Valley. R+1 | tossup
PA-08: Scranton+Wilkes-Barre. R+1 | lean R
PA-09: Harrisburg+York. R+6 | likely R
PA-10: Lancaster. R+13 | solid R
PA-11: Williamsport. R+18 | solid R
PA-12: south. R+23 | solid R
PA-13: southwest. R+17 | solid R
PA-14: west. R+15 | solid R
PA-15: Erie. R+9 | solid R
PA-16: Pittsburgh suburbs. R+5 | lean R
PA-17: Pittsburgh. D+12 | solid D

Maryland: The west, east, and Baltimore are lagging in growth. The Washington area leads most of the state’s growth.
()
MD-01: eastern shore. R+12 | solid R
MD-02: Baltimore suburbs. D+12 | solid D
MD-03: Baltimore suburbs (2). D+5 | likely D
MD-04: Washington suburbs. D+35 | solid D *plurality black*
MD-05: south. D+23 | solid D *majority black*
MD-06: west. R+11 | solid R
MD-07: Baltimore. D+28 | solid D *majority black*
MD-08: Washington suburbs. D+24 | solid D (2)

Virginia: growth is dominated by NOVA and the Richmond area.
()
VA-01: east. R+10 | solid R
VA-02: Virginia Beach. R+1 | tossup
VA-03: Hampton Roads. D+12 | solid D
VA-04: Richmond. D+9 | solid D
VA-05: south. R+6 | likely R
VA-06: Shenandoah Valley. R+17 | solid R
VA-07: Washington exurbs. R+1 | tossup
*I honestly didn't know where else to put Charlottesville, but it actually turned out to fit nicely
VA-08: NOVA. D+20
VA-09: southwest. R+17 | solid R
VA-10: NOVA. D+8 | solid D
VA-11: NOVA. D+13 | solid D

North Carolina: gains a seat (Raleigh-based NC-14). Charlotte and Raleigh areas in particular are growing massively.
()
NC-01: northeast. high black population. D+5 | likely D
NC-02: Raleigh suburbs/exurbs. R+5 | lean R
*very high growth/in-migration here. depending on how the suburbs trend, this could become very competitive*
NC-03: east/north coast. R+11 | solid R
NC-04: Durham. D+14 | solid D
NC-05: northwest. R+19 | solid R
NC-06: triad cities. D+11 | solid D
NC-07: southeast. R+9 | solid R
NC-08: sandhills. D+1 | tossup
NC-09: Charlotte suburbs. R+6 | likely R
NC-10: um, west of Charlotte? R+19 | solid R
NC-11: mountains. R+8 | likely R
NC-12: Charlotte. D+18 | solid D
NC-13: Charlotte/WS suburbs. R+22 | solid R
NC-14: Raleigh. D+10 | solid D

South Carolina: the coast, Greenville, and Charlotte suburbs are growing very quickly.
()
SC-01: Charleston. R+4 | lean R
*could potentially become a tossup
SC-02: Columbia. D+1 | tossup
SC-03: Piedmont. R+19 | solid R
SC-04: Greenville. R+14 | solid R
SC-05: north? R+14 | solid R
SC-06: coastal plain. D+3 | lean D
SC-07: northeast. R+9 | solid R

Georgia: Atlanta continues to skyrocket in population. Most of the rest of the state is stagnant or declining.
()
GA-01: Savannah/coast. R+7 | likely R
GA-02: southwest. D+3 | lean D *plurality black*
GA-03: Atlanta SW?? R+21 | solid R
GA-04: east burbs. D+28 | solid D *majority black*
GA-05: Atlanta. D+33 | solid D *majority black*
GA-06: north burbs. R+2 | lean D?
GA-07: most of Gwinnett
McCain +11 | Romney +11 | Clinton +4
R+3 | tossup (maybe even tilt D)

GA-08: south. R+19 | solid R
GA-09: north exurbs. R+30 | solid R
GA-10: northeast. R+24 | solid R
GA-11: 98% of Cobb.
McCain +9 | Romney +14 | Clinton +4
R+4 | tossup

GA-12: Augusta. R+6 | likely R
GA-13: south burbs. D+5 | likely D
GA-14: northwest. R+27 | solid R

Florida: gains 2 seats | the way I drew the districts, the new 28th and 29th would be based around Ocala and Sarasota. Almost all of the state is growing pretty quickly, but Miami isn’t growing very fast compared to the rest of the state. Orlando and the exurbs are growing very quickly.
()
FL-01: west panhandle. R+21 | solid R
FL-02: east panhandle. R+6 | likely R
FL-03: north central. R+12 | solid R
FL-04: Jacksonville suburbs. R+19 | solid R
FL-05: Jacksonville. D+2 | lean D
FL-06: Volusia. R+7 | solid R
FL-07: Orlando suburbs. R+2 | tossup
FL-08: space coast. R+9 | solid R
FL-09: Kissimmee. D+13 | solid D
FL-10: Orlando. D+11 | solid D
FL-11: central coast. R+14 | solid R
FL-12: Tampa suburbs. R+8 | solid R
FL-13: St. Petersburg. D+2 | tilt D
FL-14: Tampa. D+9 | solid D
FL-15: Polk. R+7 | solid R
FL-16: Bradenton/Tampa burbs. R+5 | likely R
FL-17: southwest. R+16 | solid R
FL-18: Port Lucie. R+3 | lean R
FL-19: Cape Coral. R+11 | solid R
FL-20: Fort Lauderdale. D+20 | solid D
FL-21: West Palm Beach. D+10 | solid D
FL-22: Boca Raton. D+7 | likely D
FL-23: Pembroke Pines. D+11 | solid D
FL-24: north Miami. D+27 | solid D
FL-25: Cuban-Americans lol D+1 | tossup
FL-26: south Miami. D+6 | likely D
FL-27: Miami. D+16 | solid D
FL-28: Ocala. R+12 | solid R
FL-29: Sarasota. R+8 | solid R

Ohio: loses 1 district (most of current 15th). Cincinnati is growing somewhat, and Columbus is growing very rapidly. The rest of the state is generally stagnant/declining.
()
OH-01: Cincinnati. D+4 | likely D
OH-02: south. R+17 | solid R
OH-03: Columbus. D+17 | solid D
OH-04: north central. R+16 | solid R
OH-05: west. R+23 | solid R
OH-06: Appalachia. R+13 | solid R
OH-07: east central? R+11 | solid R
OH-08: Cincinnati suburbs. R+18 | solid R
OH-09: Toledo/Erie shore. D+4 | lean D
OH-10: Dayton. R+3 | lean R
OH-11: Cleveland. D+28 | solid D
OH-12: Columbus suburbs. D+1 | lean D
OH-13: Akron. D+3 | tilt D
OH-14: northeast. R+1 | lean R
OH-15: west suburbs. D+1 | tossup

Indiana: little change. Indianapolis in particular is growing quickly.
()
IN-01: northwest. D+7 | likely D
IN-02: north central. R+13 | solid R
IN-03: northeast. R+17 | solid R
IN-04: west. R+16 | solid R
IN-05: Indianapolis suburbs. R+8 | likely R
IN-06: east-central. R+15 | solid R
IN-07: Indianapolis. D+10 | solid D
IN-08: south. R+13 | solid R
IN-09: southeast. R+17 | solid R

Michigan: loses 1 district (most of current 14th). Grand Rapids is growing considerably. Some Detroit suburbs are growing, kind of
()
MI-01: north. R+10 | solid R
MI-02: Grand Rapids. R+7 | likely R
MI-03: southwest. R+12 | solid R
MI-04: central. R+7 | solid R
MI-05: Flint. D+4 | lean D
MI-06: south. R+4 | likely R
MI-07: Ann Arbor. D+10 | solid D
MI-08: Lansing/Detroit exurbs. R+3 | lean R
MI-09: Detroit. D+14 | solid D
MI-10: thumb. R+13 | solid R
MI-11: Detroit suburbs. D+1 | tossup
MI-12: Detroit suburbs. D+8 | solid D
MI-13: Detroit. D+33 | solid D

Wisconsin: little change. Madison is growing quickly. Otherwise there isn’t very notable growth.
()
WI-01: south. EVEN | tilt R
WI-02: Madison. D+17 | solid D
WI-03: west. D+1 | tossup
WI-04: Milwaukee. D+24 | solid D
WI-05: Milwaukee suburbs. R+16 | solid R
WI-06: east. R+9 | solid R
WI-07: northwest. R+6 | solid R
WI-08: northeast. R+7 | solid R

Minnesota: loses 1 district (most of current 7th). The Twin Cities metro area is growing healthily. The rest of the state not so much.
()
MN-01: south. R+5 | likely R
MN-02: south suburbs. R+1 | tossup
MN-03: west suburbs. D+3 | likely D
MN-04: north suburbs. EVEN | tossup
MN-05: Twin Cities. D+30 | solid D
MN-06: central. R+15 | solid R
MN-07: north. R+4 | likely R

Alabama: loses 1 district (most of current 6th). Huntsville and Mobile are growing. The rest of the state is kind of meh.
()
AL-01: Mobile/south
McCain +27 | Romney +31 | Trump +35
R+18 | solid R

AL-02: black belt
Obama +6 | Obama +11 | Clinton +3
D+2 | lean D

AL-03: east
McCain +30 | Romney +31 | Trump +36
R+18 | solid R

AL-04: north central
McCain +57 | Romney +63 | Trump +69
R+34 | solid R

AL-05: Huntsville/north.
Obama +26 | Romney +30 | Trump +34
R+18 | solid R

AL-06: Birmingham
McCain +3 | Romney +5 | Clinton +0.3
R+3 | tossup

Illinois: I’m not doing this state bc the drf file isn’t working rip

Iowa: Des Moines is growing quickly. Also Iowa City and the eastern cities are growing.
()
IA-01: Des Moines. D+2 | tilt D
IA-02: rural east. R+4 | likely R
IA-03: urban east. D+5 | lean D
IA-04: west. R+13 | solid R

Kentucky: Lexington, Louisville, and northern suburbs are growing. The west and east are bleeding population. The more KY-04 becomes concentrated around Lexington, the more competitive it’ll get.
()
KY-01: west. R+21 | solid R
KY-02. Louisville. D+6 | solid D
KY-03: Ohio River suburbs. R+19 | solid R
KY-04: Lexington. R+8 | likely R
KY-05: east. R+28 | solid R
KY-06: south. R+22 | solid R

West Virginia: loses 1 district. I didn’t put much thought into this map honestly, by the 2020s I doubt there will be any actual chance of a Democrat winning one of the seats.
()
WV-01: north. R+19 | solid R
WV-02: south. (more ancestrally D) R+20 | solid R

Texas: gains 2 seats with 2016-2017-based projections. If it gains 3 then rip I have to make a new map. Most growth is happening in the triangle.
I’M NOT DOING THIS EITHER BECAUSE THE FILE GOT RUINED TOO

Montana: would gain its 2nd district with 2016-2017-based projections. If not then it just stays one at-large district.
()
MT-01: western cities. growing slightly faster than the 2nd I think. R+4 | tilt R
MT-02: east. (I don’t feel like calculating this but it’s clearly solid R)

Colorado: gains 1 district (southern Denver burbs). might be highly competitive in the 2020s considering high growth and recent trends.
()
CO-01: Adams+north Denver. D+17 | solid D *majority-minority?*
CO-02: Boulder+Fort Collins. D+11 | solid D
CO-03: west. R+7 | likely R
CO-04: east. R+14 | solid R
CO-05: Colorado Springs. R+13 | solid R
CO-06: south Denver+Aurora. D+21 | solid D
CO-07: west Denver burbs. D+2 | lean D
CO-08: south Denver burbs. R+6 | lean R

Nevada: Almost ¾ of the districts are now entirely within Clark County. The map actually turns out very fair, with 1 solid D seat, 1 solid R seat, and 2 tossups. Again, Clark County is very big so this is probably a little off.
()
NV-01: Las Vegas D+19 | solid D
NV-02: not Clarke. R+8 | solid R
NV-03: Vegas suburbs, south. D+1 | tossup
NV-04: Vegas suburbs, north. R+1 | tossup

Arizona: gains 1 district (Glendale). Growth is concentrated in the Phoenix area. Districts here won’t be precise like in New Jersey or Massachusetts, so take this with a grain of salt.
()
()
AZ-01: northeast, Indian reservations. R+2 | tilt R
AZ-02: Tucson/southeast. R+4 | tossup
AZ-03: southern border. D+9 | solid D *majority Hispanic*
AZ-04: west. R+19 | solid R
AZ-05: Gilbert. R+17 | solid R
AZ-06: Scottsdale. D+2 | likely D
AZ-07: Phoenix. D+23 | solid D *majority Hispanic*
AZ-08: northern exurbs. R+15 | solid R
AZ-09: Mesa/Chandler. R+4 | tossup
AZ-10: Glendale. R+1 | lean D

Oregon: gains 1 seat in the Portland suburbs.
This is technically a 3/3 map in terms of PVI, but half the districts are very competitive. If I’m not mistaken, Oregon’s Democratic incumbents are all pretty popular, so this could actually end up being a typically 5-1 D delegation lmao.
()
OR-01: northwest/Portland burbs. D+6 | likely D
OR-02: east. R+10 | solid R
OR-03: Portland. D+31 | solid D
OR-04: south. R+2 | lean R
OR-05: central. R+2 | tilt R
OR-06: Portland burbs. D+2 | lean D

Issue:

()

This is the projected 2020 apportionment changes. These projections show a confidence level beyond the margin of error too with regards to the difference in priority value between seat 435 and seat 436. Your projections seem to not line up with this.

2020 is still years away...different growth rates result in different apportionments

The Census Bureau produces population estimates for congressional districts based on the ACS.

How close do these match the current districts using your estimate data?

It has a pretty significant R lean that should probably be corrected.

Not going to happen. Even the Republicans don't want to combine the Twin Cities anymore.

How do you envision the post-2020 map looking like?

respectfully diagree. I actually was thinking of Ds much more than Rs when making all the maps due to their geographic disadvantage, it just shows how difficult it is to get an even breakdown. Good examples are Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Kansas, Nebraska, etc. In my OK map I put Norman with OKC instead of just doing a whole district within Oklahoma County, and even then it’s still R+4. Only Massachusetts, Washington, and New Jersey favor Ds disproportionately on the D side tbh.

Republicans only lead by a narrow 15 seats when counting >1 PVI seats. And that’s based on 2016 PVIs! This is for the next decade and a lot will change. There are plenty of narrowly Republican districts that have trended hard D recently (TX, CA, AZ, NC, GA), while there aren’t as many on the D side. By the 2020s I’d expect this to be closer to even (it already is quite close)

I would never have them together in an 8-seat delegation but MN’s most likely dropping to 7. It just seemed to work out well that way, there’s a suburban Carver+Hennepin and a suburban Scott+Dakota+Washington county, which make sense. And Minneapolis+St. Paul kind of does make sense, it’s highly urbanized and diverse. Those two suburban seats would probably be tossup seats at worst for Democrats in the 2020s, making the general breakdown 3R-2D-2E at worst. Not too shabby considering MN leaned Republican in 2016
you’re prob not wrong about it not happening though. I’m just stating my case

um do they have 2020 estimates? i mean i just looked at the 2016 estimates for new jersey's districts, and it matches up with my 2020 estimates in terms of growth patterns - northeast areas overpopulated, southern underpopulated

The projections I found show a difference in priority values for seat 435 and 436 beyond the margin of error with just 2.75 years out. There is no way your projections should be any different unless you are using incorrect data.

there are multiple projections showing a battle between MT-02 vs. TX-39 depending on future growth

According to my calculations, AZ-10 is seat 435, and MT-02 is seat 436, with the difference between the 2 priority values beyond the margin of error.

Wonderful job!


So basically AZ is the state that is the most hostile to republicans geographically?

thank u <3 if you wanna give your own go at drawing districts imma upload the files soon today. The way I drew AZ, yes, kind of, but not necessarily cuz it wouldn't be super hard to gerrymander it for Republicans. Maricopa is likely trending D, so we'll probably see medium/light R areas shifting toward tossups/D-leaning districts. I would say MA is the worst state for Republicans, even with hard R gerrymandering you would still only get a tossup/very competitive district. And you could argue TX is becoming hostile territory with its D-trending suburbs and self-packed ultra Republican rurals (though again, you could still gerrymander)

well that's your calculation you/I could just draw a 39-district map for that situation

also everyone plz actually use the data once I upload it DKJFKSD I didn't do all this work for nothing

In my opinion, keeping Ramsey County, Minnesota whole should be high priority.

I POSTED THE FILES

then how would you draw it?

Richard Ojeda though

Gotta disagree there with MN-07/8.

()
This is a possible alternative - though it would have to be tweaked based off 2020 census numbers.
MN-01: 51-46 Obama, R+4.86
MN-02: 50-48 Obama, R+1.44
MN-03: 53-46 McCain, R+6.72
MN-04: 61-37 Obama, D+11.7
MN-05: 71-27 Obama, D+23.56
MN-06: 53-45 McCain, R+13.79
MN-07: 54-43 Obama, R+3.57

Based off 2017 census estimates...MN-01 has 769,492 people, under quota by around 27,000 people. Add Brown County in and now it's within range. this makes it R+5.22, and 50.9-46.7 Obama.
MN-02 has around 814,700 or so people. It is over quota by 17,000 people. If it cedes Cedar Lake, Helena, and Sand Creek townships in Scott County, it is within quota. It now is R+1.15, and 50.6-47.5 Obama.

read the directions in the op (basically find DRA folder on computer, download the files, then paste files into state folders)
let me know if you run into any problems

Impressive work. Regardless of any possible nitpicks, well done!

Will you be making one for Illinois?

thanks bro u inspired me

it's in the big map in the op, i just lost the drf file :( i might remake it though

Sorry, I'm a bit of a dunce with computer stuff--would it be possible to a very ELI5 tutorial with this?

I just added separate 2012 and 2016 prez results to New Jersey and Massachusetts >:3 more states to come soon. I might integrate it with the data to see in DRA if I can figure that out

ik the process is kinda cumbersome, i'll try to add pics to the directions if that would help

Do you have breakdowns of your WA map?

No, the ACS is based on a (large) sample. For a single year it is based on around a 3% sample, so they would have household size for every 30th address. For a congressional district that is around 10,000 households, so it should be relative close to a 100% count.

You should be able to compare a projection of the growth from the 2010 Census to the 2016 ACS projected to 2020 - and compare with your alternate projection.

Incidentally, the 2017 ACS will be released on September 1.

Where'd u get 2012 and 2016 result estimates for your districts?

They're in DRA now for most states (maybe all of them?)

How do I access them? All I see right now is a vague 2012/2016 PVI tab.

no i used daily kos data for 2016 and then reverse calculated for 2012

how did u put DK data for 2016 into the DRA files/datasets? looks complicated.

i didn’t, i used google sheets and found the corresponding town/precinct names

Just copy and pasting isn't working for me, I'm still seeing the 2010 data

Hello? anyone able to help here?

i'll try 2 post a tutorial sometime soon

Did you try re-starting DRA? Be sure to close your browser and then re-load it after replacing the file. That may be an obvious thing, but just in case you didn't do that, try that.

dude can you add pictures im hella confused

I haven't even got DRA open when I do it, I open it up after I change the files.

maybe over the weekend i have like 9 hours of skewlwork to do tonight :(

Hey so I figured out how to use this, but some of the precincts in NC are blank, with no data or population. Why would this be so? I redid it twice.

cv, any progress on a guide?

Still waiting :P

im applying to college pls hold

No problem dude

Pretty good but a couple of the states need improvement.  AZ is probably the one most needing change, waaaay too many swing districts.  1 or 2 would be appropriate but 5?  AZ should have at minimum 5 solidly R seats and 3 or 4 solidly D seats.  Most likely giving the state a 5-5 or 6R-4D delegation depending on the year.  Also, 3 swing seats in the north Atlanta suburbs are way too much, basically a gerrymander that will result in greater Atlanta being represented by 6 Dems in Congress.  Atlanta metro should have 4 solidly Democratic seats (3 being black) and 3 Republican seats in the suburbs.  That would be representative of the overall Democratic lean of metro Atlanta without a potential 6-0 or 5-1 blowout.   Oregon is actually gerrymandered for Republicans, no way a Dem leaning state should have half R leaning districts. Even if they are competitive.  OR should have 3 soldiy D seats, 2 solidly R, and 1 even seat that would likely be won by Dem considering both of Oregon's "swing" seats have gone Dem every cycle.  The resulting 4D-2R delegation would be representative of the state.  Finally, Clark county should be divided into 1 safe Dem seat (around D+20), a likely Dem seat (around D+8) and a lean Rep seat (around R+6).  Since the county generally votes Dem 55-45, or 60-40, having 2 Dems in the city and a Republican in the outer ring suburbs would represent Vegas area well, resulting in a split delegation from NV. Which is the fairest possible delegation for a state that is pretty 50-50.

What's wrong with swing seats? At least they're competitive.

I never said we shouldn't have them, but having 5/10 swing seats is absurd and would end up being a Democratic gerrymander.  AZ is trending blue, so it would result in a 7 D- 3 R delegation by the end of the decade, maybe sooner.  If AZ had a Dem trifecta, that would make sense.  If you control the process, you get to draw.  But AZ has a nonpartisan commission.  No way should they draw a Dem gerrymander that brazen.  AZ currently has 4 red seats, after gaining a seat in 2022, that number shouldn't go down. 

I really hope that the 7th becomes a Clarksville-based district instead of being largely based around Williamson County.

Looks like WV could not be competitive. This is my first map.

http://dra.indirect.cc/join/c4c72833-204a-4b3b-8cd0-c5cf1a3b02b8

WV will have 2 seats in 2020, just fyi :)

http://dra.indirect.cc/join/414d0d03-3b42-414f-8a37-fc0252d69b65