US House Redistricting: Missouri (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 10:51:39 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  US House Redistricting: Missouri (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: US House Redistricting: Missouri  (Read 21194 times)
dpmapper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 442
« on: December 21, 2010, 01:07:25 PM »
« edited: December 24, 2010, 12:07:21 AM by muon2 »

Not exactly, the gov is a Dem but the Republicans have a veto-proof majority in the State Senate and almost that in the House.  African-Americans will want to make sure Clay keeps his district (MO-01) majority black, and the only way that happens is if Carnahan's district gets chopped up.  His house will be put in MO-01, for sure, and given that white Dems have little leverage (given that black legislators can join in the veto override) and that MO-01 needs to pack as many blacks as it possibly can in order to get to 50% (I've tried drawing it; you can barely get to 50%) it probably won't be a fair fight in his new district.  
Logged
dpmapper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 442
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2010, 02:47:57 PM »
« Edited: December 24, 2010, 12:08:14 AM by muon2 »


It's not majority black right now.

But at the same time, it's at least 3-1 Dem in bad years. So I'm pretty freaking sure that it doesn't have to be majority black to be won by Clay.

Of course, there are some Dems who got treats from the Republican leadership and might vote to move the plan, but are they willing to override a veto too?

49.8%, close enough; that's about as high as I can get the new and expanded MO-01 without getting too crazy with the boundaries.  I doubt that the black pols are eager to see that number dip too much, not because they're afraid the seat will go to a Republican, but because they want to guarantee that an African-American wins the Dem primary, particularly when the seat becomes open.  This is the same racial politics that happen pretty much everywhere; is there any particular reason that Missouri is different?  

Re: the veto threat, I think the trick for the Republicans is to make a map that will get black votes (keep Clay and Cleaver safe, with black pluralities if not majorities), but not be so blatantly partisan as to back Nixon into a corner wherein he would be forced to veto it.  In that situation he might decide that it's not worth fighting an override battle just for an extra percentage point or two.  
Logged
dpmapper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 442
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2010, 03:30:09 PM »
« Edited: December 24, 2010, 12:08:49 AM by muon2 »


It's not majority black right now.

But at the same time, it's at least 3-1 Dem in bad years. So I'm pretty freaking sure that it doesn't have to be majority black to be won by Clay.

Of course, there are some Dems who got treats from the Republican leadership and might vote to move the plan, but are they willing to override a veto too?

49.8%, close enough; that's about as high as I can get the new and expanded MO-01 without getting too crazy with the boundaries.  I doubt that the black pols are eager to see that number dip too much, not because they're afraid the seat will go to a Republican, but because they want to guarantee that an African-American wins the Dem primary, particularly when the seat becomes open.  This is the same racial politics that happen pretty much everywhere; is there any particular reason that Missouri is different?  

Re: the veto threat, I think the trick for the Republicans is to make a map that will get black votes (keep Clay and Cleaver safe, with black pluralities if not majorities), but not be so blatantly partisan as to back Nixon into a corner wherein he would be forced to veto it.  In that situation he might decide that it's not worth fighting an override battle just for an extra percentage point or two.  

6-2 or 5-3 is not a fight over a percentage point or two.

6-2 is not proportional for Missouri, even if it was red.

It's not proportional as it stands, and that's not a Republican map.  It will never be proportional as long as blacks demand to have 'their' districts, and as long as Dems continue to pack themselves into urban areas.  Sorry to burst your bubble.  
Logged
dpmapper
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 442
« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2011, 09:30:59 AM »

Well, if the Republicans can get two Democrats in the House to vote for it, they can override his veto...


House plan to eliminate Carnahan just passed by a 10-1 committee vote. I don't think any of them give a damn about him at all.

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2011/04/05/house-committee-passes-redistricting-plan/

All three black Democrats on the committee are for this plan.  If Nixon vetoes it will get overridden. 
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 12 queries.