US House Redistricting: Arizona

[Sbane]

How does this map look? I stayed out of Mesa and Chandler, as well as Scottsdale. Did pick up Paradise valley to make things look nice, but could have just stayed in Phoenix as well. 50-48 Mccain. And the 3rd on my map becomes basically a Mesa-Scottsdale district. And the 9th is Gilbert-Chandler and areas of Pinal.

I also tried to pick up as much Hispanic territory in Tucson as possible without picking up white liberal areas that would make the pubbies happy. About 22,000 people, but probably about 52-53% VAP. I then went down I-10 with my Tucscon district into cochise. Obama still wins the district, but with only 188 votes. 49.4-49.4.

[minionofmidas]

What was your purpose here? 4-3-2 (4 R, 3 D, 2 tossup seats)? That yellow would certainly be a pure tossup, rather than merely winnable in a good year against a weak incumbent as its predecessor was.

[Torie]

Did you change the orange Hispanic CD, which presumably is a done deal, unless of course Mathis decides the Dems need more help? Do you agree with me that anything Obama carried in AZ is a lean Dem CD or not?  An dead even CD to me would be one which McCain carried by about 4% (52-48) as a wild guess. Or 3% perhaps. The AZ bias towards McCain was pretty strong.

[Sbane]

What was your purpose here? 4-3-2 (4 R, 3 D, 2 tossup seats)? That yellow would certainly be a pure tossup, rather than merely winnable in a good year against a weak incumbent as its predecessor was.

Most of my map is just copying what has been drawn. But the current orange district, which is my 5th, goes in to pick up parts of Mesa, Gilbert and Scottsdale. That makes the district 51-47 Obama and almost lean Dem. I do want to create a swing district, but at the same time not arbitrarily splitting cities.

[minionofmidas]

Did you change the orange Hispanic CD, which presumably is a done deal, unless of course Mathis decides the Dems need more help? Do you agree with me that anything Obama carried in AZ is a lean Dem CD or not?  An dead even CD to me would be one which McCain carried by about 4% (52-48) as a wild guess. Or 3% perhaps. The AZ bias towards McCain was pretty strong.

Compared to what would have happened without him on the ballot, certainly. Compared to congressional election results, perhaps not so much - Maricopa is traditionally Republican territory, and the "McCain bias" is basically "Obama not overperforming, like he did in similar places everywhere else" rather than Obama actually underperforming. Rural (East and South) Arizona is a different matter, though.


A general thought here, one I had a long time ago but perhaps not actually posted. In the selection of the independent commission member, Republicans had one objective - preventing one particular candidate despite being the obviously qualified guy (he worked for the last commission in a leading capacity) because he was obviously an IINO. Most of the selection discussion was apparently held non-publically (I recall someone saying they felt it was actually against the rules). Seems like Pubbies had to agree to Dems' second choice with Mathis.

The other issue is, of course - what are Republicans trying to achieve with their dubious lawsuit etc? Are they perhaps actually giving up on this map and trying to prepare the ground to repeal districting-by-Commission? I assume that would require a referendum?

[Sbane]

Did you change the orange Hispanic CD, which presumably is a done deal, unless of course Mathis decides the Dems need more help? Do you agree with me that anything Obama carried in AZ is a lean Dem CD or not?  An dead even CD to me would be one which McCain carried by about 4% (52-48) as a wild guess. Or 3% perhaps. The AZ bias towards McCain was pretty strong.

I think Mccain got about 10 points due to the favorite son effect or whatever it is called. So that means a 2 point Obama district would be a 56-44 Obama district in socal. I still think it's a swing district, but on the Dem side of the ledger. The 50-48 Mccain district that I drew would be about a 54-46 Obama district in socal meaning it would be the perfect swing district. So about a 2 point Mccain district is the middle point in AZ, I think.

[Torie]

Don't know Lewis.  They will vet the procedural irregularities, challenge the map as deviating from the statute, and perhaps go for a referendum.  Meanwhile the Commission filed a cross complaint claiming that the AG has no jurisdiction to investigate them at all. And maybe if Mathis chills out in Phoenix, they will fold, and are trying to hammer her. Or maybe they are just clueless. Pubbies in AZ often are. I don't think the Pubbies on the Commission were very effective. I would have insisted on publishing my own stuff on the site myself, for starters.

[minionofmidas]

Yeah, I don't know either. I just wanted to throw it out there.

[Torie]

Did you change the orange Hispanic CD, which presumably is a done deal, unless of course Mathis decides the Dems need more help? Do you agree with me that anything Obama carried in AZ is a lean Dem CD or not?  An dead even CD to me would be one which McCain carried by about 4% (52-48) as a wild guess. Or 3% perhaps. The AZ bias towards McCain was pretty strong.

I think Mccain got about 10 points due to the favorite son effect or whatever it is called. So that means a 2 point Obama district would be a 56-44 Obama district in socal. I still think it's a swing district, but on the Dem side of the ledger. The 50-48 Mccain district that I drew would be about a 54-46 Obama district in socal meaning it would be the perfect swing district. So about a 2 point Mccain district is the middle point in AZ, I think.

54-48 = 6.  50-46 = 4. Times 2 if that is what you meant = 8 or 12.  And here I thought Asians (particularly the Indian iteration thereof) were supposed to be good at math!    Not that I am questioning you, but how did you infer the 10% figure, or 5% swing (I assume the average of 8 and 12)?

[Sbane]

Well, I guess lawyers don't need to be so good at math? Because you are wrong!

So a 2 point Obama district would be 51-49. 56-5=51

A 2 point Mccain district would be 49-51 Obama. 54-5=49

5*2=10

And I meant a 10 point margin, just in case that was what confused you. So 5 points each from Mccain and Obama's side. Oh and the 10 point margin over performance is a guess, based off Pbrower's work so don't take it to the bank. I thought the broken clock was right at that time.

Also I was discounting the indy vote in my calculations but obviously included it when I talked about the 50-48 Mccain I drew. A 50-48 Mccain district is a 51-49 Mccain district. Does that make any sense?

[minionofmidas]

Ah, I just resolved my confusion about the "current" "orange" "Obama" district you were referring to. I hadn't looked at the link with the full map before, only the one with the partial map, though I understand it's voted down and only the outstate+South Phoenix map is tentatively approved?
It's quite the nice mean little gerry, I must say.

[Torie]

Well you changed the numbers! Different facts lead to different results!  50-48 is better for Obama than 51-49 anyway be a few basis points (2/.98 and all of that sort of thing). The two numbers are not fungible.  Moving right along, that leaves the your little inference methodology thingy.  As Reagan used to say, trust but verify.  

[Torie]

Ah, I just resolved my confusion about the "current" "orange" "Obama" district you were referring to. I hadn't looked at the link with the full map before, only the one with the partial map, though I understand it's voted down and only the outstate+South Phoenix map is tentatively approved?
It's quite the nice mean little gerry, I must say.

No, the Hispanic CD in Phoenix has been "finalized," unless and until Mathis gets further "instructions" at least.  It's not part of the "donut hole."

[Sbane]

So then assume a 2% indy vote in all those districts. My point still stands. A 10 point over performance would then lead a 50-48 Obama district to become a 55-43 Obama district in socal and a 50-48 Mccain district would become 53-45 Obama district and so on. Happy?

[Torie]

So then assume a 2% indy vote in all those districts. My point still stands. A 10 point over performance would then lead a 50-48 Obama district to become a 55-43 Obama district in socal and a 50-48 Mccain district would become 53-45 Obama district and so on. Happy?

No, because I want to know where you came up with the 10%.  The math thing was just to yank your chain for my personal pleasure. And here is the already drawn Hispanic CD to which I referred. Did you change it, the better to implement your nefarious designs?

[minionofmidas]

Ah, I just resolved my confusion about the "current" "orange" "Obama" district you were referring to. I hadn't looked at the link with the full map before, only the one with the partial map, though I understand it's voted down and only the outstate+South Phoenix map is tentatively approved?
It's quite the nice mean little gerry, I must say.

No, the Hispanic CD in Phoenix has been "finalized," unless and until Mathis gets further "instructions" at least.  It's not part of the "donut hole."

Details might still get changed at the end. If a transfer of a couple of Glendale precincts for a couple of Phoenix precincts makes it possible to avoid another municipal split, for instance. IIRC it happened last time too (though maybe they only actually did it with the state lege districts?)

[krazen1211]

How does this map look? I stayed out of Mesa and Chandler, as well as Scottsdale. Did pick up Paradise valley to make things look nice, but could have just stayed in Phoenix as well. 50-48 Mccain. And the 3rd on my map becomes basically a Mesa-Scottsdale district. And the 9th is Gilbert-Chandler and areas of Pinal.

I also tried to pick up as much Hispanic territory in Tucson as possible without picking up white liberal areas that would make the pubbies happy. About 22,000 people, but probably about 52-53% VAP. I then went down I-10 with my Tucscon district into cochise. Obama still wins the district, but with only 188 votes. 49.4-49.4.

Much more reasonable. It seems a slightly better and cleaner look would be to move those areas of south phoenix into the Chandler/Gilbert district.

[Sbane]

So then assume a 2% indy vote in all those districts. My point still stands. A 10 point over performance would then lead a 50-48 Obama district to become a 55-43 Obama district in socal and a 50-48 Mccain district would become 53-45 Obama district and so on. Happy?

No, because I want to know where you came up with the 10%.  The math thing was just to yank your chain for my personal pleasure. And here is the already drawn Hispanic CD to which I referred. Did you change it, the better to implement your nefarious designs?

Nah, I drew it the best I could. If you are referring to the northwest corner, it seems like they split precincts there. Otherwise it's the same.

And like I said, I got the number from Pbrower's "analysis". If you think it's complete sh**t, that's fine. But then I would ask you how much you think Mccain overperformed in AZ as compared to Socal or the country in general.

[Torie]

I am not in the habit of reading Pbrower's prolixity. It is sort of like panning for gold in a river where that particular gleaming metal was last espied sometime around the invention of the telegraph. I want more immediate satisfaction. I only have so much time left!  

Where is it?

[Sbane]

Oh man, that was a long time ago. If you feel like browsing his posting history, go for it. You are a masochist, aren't you?

I think he did repeat this a few times, that the favorite son effect is worth 10 points. Probably pulled it out of his ass, but it seemed right to me. Considering Obama won NV by double digits, AZ should have been about even, if not an Obama state in 2008 with a different nominee but same results.

[Torie]

Oh man, that was a long time ago. If you feel like browsing his posting history, go for it. You are a masochist, aren't you?

I think he did repeat this a few times, that the favorite son effect is worth 10 points. Probably pulled it out of his ass, but it seemed right to me. Considering Obama won NV by double digits, AZ should have been about even, if not an Obama state in 2008 with a different nominee but same results.

I am going to have to do the analysis myself eh?  That sucks. I was counting on you to have done this little chore for me, and you failed me!  Yes, the number does not seem out of the box ludicrous. But that doesn't mean it's right. Pbrower was just using some universal favorite son national number, eh, that you plug in like the speed of light?  If so, that bit is ludicrous - and lazy.

[Sbane]

Oh man, that was a long time ago. If you feel like browsing his posting history, go for it. You are a masochist, aren't you?

I think he did repeat this a few times, that the favorite son effect is worth 10 points. Probably pulled it out of his ass, but it seemed right to me. Considering Obama won NV by double digits, AZ should have been about even, if not an Obama state in 2008 with a different nominee but same results.

I am going to have to do the analysis myself eh?  That sucks. I was counting on you to have done this little chore for me, and you failed me!  Yes, the number does not seem out of the box ludicrous. But that doesn't mean it's right. Pbrower was just using some universal favorite son national number, eh, that you plug in like the speed of light?  If so, that bit is ludicrous - and lazy.

Yeah, it might be lazy, but he seems to have pulled out the right number. Broken clock is right sometimes. In the national environment of 2008, a close win for Obama in AZ, or a close loss, seems about right. What do you think?

[Torie]

Oh man, that was a long time ago. If you feel like browsing his posting history, go for it. You are a masochist, aren't you?

I think he did repeat this a few times, that the favorite son effect is worth 10 points. Probably pulled it out of his ass, but it seemed right to me. Considering Obama won NV by double digits, AZ should have been about even, if not an Obama state in 2008 with a different nominee but same results.

I am going to have to do the analysis myself eh?  That sucks. I was counting on you to have done this little chore for me, and you failed me!  Yes, the number does not seem out of the box ludicrous. But that doesn't mean it's right. Pbrower was just using some universal favorite son national number, eh, that you plug in like the speed of light?  If so, that bit is ludicrous - and lazy.

Yeah, it might be lazy, but he seems to have pulled out the right number. Broken clock is right sometimes. In the national environment of 2008, a close win for Obama in AZ, or a close loss, seems about right. What do you think?

Using POTUS numbers for 2000, 2004, and 2008, 10% seems right on the money. Pubbie plus 8%, 7% and 17% respectively. But one would need to look at more neutral statewide office runs to get a better fix on it. In particular, did McCain run particularly well among Hispanics in AZ vis a vis Pubbie normal, just like Bush?  It may be a bit higher than a 5% swing, but probably no higher than 6% or so, 7% max. The reason why it might be higher than 5% is the trend thing. Nevada was about even to the national vote in 2004, and 5% more Dem in 2008, a trend replicated across the red rock zone. So that might up the favorite son number by one or two points (half of 5%, except less because Obama worked Nevada like it was a Chicago ward). If I had a gun to my head, I would say 6%, rather than 5%. The Pubs have a Hispanic problem, muted in AZ no doubt, but a negative trend nevertheless.

I suspect in 2012 however, a lot of Hispanics won't be voting at all. The ying and the yang.

So you made me work sbane. Happy now? 

[phk]

Interesting.. exploring the favorite son effect from 1996 to 2008. Favorite son effects are heavily dependent upon the individual in question and probably exhibit diminishing marginal returns.  The effect would be stronger if you haven't had a President from the state as well.

Gore's went from 47% to 42% from 2000 to 2004 with a 3% GOP swing is only a 2% effect.

Clinton, had Arkansas going for him with 53%, Dole 36%. In 2000 it was Bush 51% and Gore just shy of 46%. So like a 14% effect.

Texas went from R+5 in 1996 to R+21 in 2000, Bush had a 8% effect. As Bush did not run in 2008 we had Texas going from R+24 to R+12, with a D+10 movement so a 2% effect?

[Torie]

Interesting.. exploring the favorite son effect from 1996 to 2008. Favorite son effects are heavily dependent upon the individual in question and probably exhibit diminishing marginal returns.  The effect would be stronger if you haven't had a President from the state as well.

Gore's went from 47% to 42% from 2000 to 2004 with a 3% GOP swing is only a 2% effect.

Clinton, had Arkansas going for him with 53%, Dole 36%. In 2000 it was Bush 51% and Gore just shy of 46%. So like a 14% effect.

Texas went from R+5 in 1996 to R+21 in 2000, Bush had a 8% effect. As Bush did not run in 2008 we had Texas going from R+24 to R+12, with a D+10 movement so a 2% effect?

Yes, and/but McCain has a peculiar hold on AZ. He's almost etched into the landscape like one of those mesas in Monument Valley. And even though the Pubbies are very conservative in AZ, he flushes  the socons down the drain there like they were feces. Well Hayworth sort of was like fecal matter, but that is just my little biased opinion.  And Dems kind of admire him for doing it.