Race-Based House Districts

[Antonio the Sixth]

Well, I'm glad this thread is generating so much interest all of a sudden, and I don't mind you posting your own maps in this thread, but as far as I'm concerned, I've already drawn all the districts and I'm not really interested in changing them unless a specific issue with my own maps is brought to my attention. What's left for me, and the reason this thread is going fairly slowly, is making guesses about their politics. So tbh I'd rather get input on that than on the maps themselves.

You already drew all of them? Ah, good.
I could draw them all on a map for you...

Already done that too.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Well, I'm glad this thread is generating so much interest all of a sudden, and I don't mind you posting your own maps in this thread, but as far as I'm concerned, I've already drawn all the districts and I'm not really interested in changing them unless a specific issue with my own maps is brought to my attention. What's left for me, and the reason this thread is going fairly slowly, is making guesses about their politics. So tbh I'd rather get input on that than on the maps themselves.

You already drew all of them? Ah, good.
I could draw them all on a map for you...

Already done that too.

could you plz PM me the map then? I'm extremely curious now.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Well, I'm glad this thread is generating so much interest all of a sudden, and I don't mind you posting your own maps in this thread, but as far as I'm concerned, I've already drawn all the districts and I'm not really interested in changing them unless a specific issue with my own maps is brought to my attention. What's left for me, and the reason this thread is going fairly slowly, is making guesses about their politics. So tbh I'd rather get input on that than on the maps themselves.

You already drew all of them? Ah, good.
I could draw them all on a map for you...

Already done that too.

could you plz PM me the map then? I'm extremely curious now.

Eh, tbh I'd rather keep it under wraps until we've gone through all the states. I have no way of uploading the picture otherwise than through the forum gallery, and doing that would make it easily available here, which seems a bit anticlimactic. But if you insist and people don't mind, I guess I can post it in this thread.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Well, I'm glad this thread is generating so much interest all of a sudden, and I don't mind you posting your own maps in this thread, but as far as I'm concerned, I've already drawn all the districts and I'm not really interested in changing them unless a specific issue with my own maps is brought to my attention. What's left for me, and the reason this thread is going fairly slowly, is making guesses about their politics. So tbh I'd rather get input on that than on the maps themselves.

You already drew all of them? Ah, good.
I could draw them all on a map for you...

Already done that too.

could you plz PM me the map then? I'm extremely curious now.

Eh, tbh I'd rather keep it under wraps until we've gone through all the states. I have no way of uploading the picture otherwise than through the forum gallery, and doing that would make it easily available here, which seems a bit anticlimactic. But if you insist and people don't mind, I guess I can post it in this thread.

I want to preserve the surprise for everyone else. Just imgbb it and pm the link to me alone.

[bagelman]

I made all of these back during the ides of March but didn't want to actually post them because this isn't my thread.

brb, crowning myself King.

I have a better crown that isn't pink

Well, I'm glad this thread is generating so much interest all of a sudden, and I don't mind you posting your own maps in this thread, but as far as I'm concerned, I've already drawn all the districts and I'm not really interested in changing them unless a specific issue with my own maps is brought to my attention. What's left for me, and the reason this thread is going fairly slowly, is making guesses about their politics. So tbh I'd rather get input on that than on the maps themselves.

Thanks for responding. If I could be useful in any way to this project, is to suggest not overthinking many obviously Safe R districts especially in the south. LA are OK are probably 4-0 R for example. So it's OK to just post it and call a spade a spade. I think the reason we're jumping the gun is that we're just hungry to see more maps.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Thanks for responding. If I could be useful in any way to this project, is to suggest not overthinking many obviously Safe R districts especially in the south. LA are OK are probably 4-0 R for example. So it's OK to just post it and call a spade a spade. I think the reason we're jumping the gun is that we're just hungry to see more maps.

Yeah, I realize I've repeatedly failed at keeping a consistent schedule with this project (and my other project has been on hiatus for even longer...). I'm finding it a bit hard to manage my time at the moment, but hopefully that should become easier as I settle into my new routine for this quarter. I think I could get to 3-4 states a week.

As for the amount of analysis I give, that's fair, but I do think it's is somewhat interesting to distinguish between areas that are just safe R and areas that are super-duper-Titanium-R. It wouldn't matter in terms of representation, but it does say something about US political geography just how right-wing Southern Whites are even compared to other places that are seen as Republican bastions like Wyoming. So just saying "Safe R" and moving on without giving it a numeric estimate doesn't sit well with me. But I'll try to balance this with the need of getting stuff out in due time.

And again, feel free to keep posting your own maps. I really don't take offense. Just know they won't influence the overall project.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Anyway...

Oklahoma



OK-1: The closest thing Oklahoma has to a competitive district, but that's not saying much. In its overall breakdown, it's about on par with RL OK-5, which Kendra Horn just barely won, but the thing is that she did so on the back of a significant nonwhite population. Without it, this district probably shifts to the right by 15-20 points, enough to make it beyond reach for Democrats. Safe R.

OK-2: Republicans routinely break 70% here. Safe R.

OK-3: Same here. Safe R.

OK-4: And this is, of course, the most Republican area of all. This is the kind of place the GOP always carried, even back when Democrats were competitive statewide. Nowadays, it's one of the most Republican districts outside of the Deep South. Republicans probably hover around 80% here, with McCain and T***p slightly under and Romney slightly over. Safe R.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Iowa

This one was easy. Only a few, really minor adjustments to the RL map are needed to keep population balance (which also happen to make the map more aesthetically pleasing).



IA-1: This is mostly still the old IA-1. It's also the Whitest district of all, so its overall partisan leaning is still pretty much the same. Obama-Obama-T***p district, but one where Democrats are still competitive. Finkenauer still won here, but her margin was probably closer to 2 points than 5. Lean R.

IA-2: Similar to IA-1, except a little more Republican and a little less White (interesting that these two things tend to go together in Iowa), thus even more Republican in this scenario. Still Obama-Obama-T***p. Loebsack wins fairly easily due to incumbency, but when he retires this is up for grabs for the GOP. Lean R.

IA-3: The least White Iowa district, with "just" 86%. This would have significant repercussions throughout the past decade: Obama only barely won here in 2008 and most likely lost to Romney in 2012. In 2016, T***p would have won by over 10 points. And Cindy Axne almost certainly fell short. This isn't unwinnable for Democrats, but it was an uphill battle even before T***p, and even more so nowadays. Likely R.

IA-4: Obviously this is GOP country. Steve King has nothing to worry about as long as he can survive a primary. Safe R.

[Sol]

Utah



UT-1: As you can see from the map, this district basically covers Salt Lake County. This makes it one of the first competitive districts we've seen in a long time, with Democrats having a real shot at winning it. Among all voters, it was a tie in 2008, a Romney blowout in 2012, and a 9-10 points Clinton win in 2016. Since the district is only 74% White, though, the real numbers are somewhat more Republican friendly. Reagente has the numbers for 2016, so he can let us know, but my guess would be that Clinton still narrowly won whites here. This implies that the district is significantly more Democratic than even UT-4, which was won by a Democrat in 2012 and 2018. Thus, I'm going to assume the same electoral history here: Matheson 13-15, Love 15-19, McAdams 19-present. Lean R overall.

UT-2: Not much of a chance for Democrats in this district that encompasses the Northern edge of the State. McCain probably broke 70% here, and Romney 80%. T***p didn't pull off these scores, probably hovering around 55%, but there's a good chance that McMullin, rather than Clinton, came in second. Safe R.

UT-3: Finally, the district that covers most of Utah, including the famed conservative bastion of Provo, is even more safely Republican than the other two. Even T***p probably came close to 60% here. Safe R.

FWIW, there's not much of a travel connection between Box Elder and Tooele Counties--just dirt tracks in some areas I believe. The geography of Utah is kind of crappy and forces a split of metro SLC.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh, darn. Well, I'd still want to keep UT-1 entirely within Salt Lake County regardless. So the alternative would probably be to expand UT-2 Eastward. Would that be feasible?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Louisiana

Pretty boring, I must admit. I'll be quick.



LA-1: Republicans in the 80% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

LA-2: Republicans in the 80% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

LA-3: Republicans in the 80% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

LA-4: Republicans in the 80% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

[Former President tack50]

Wouldn't the New Orleans based district be marginally more democratic than the other 3? (albeit still won in landslides; just "regular landslides of 70% instead of North Korean landslides of 85%+")

[bagelman]

Louisiana may have competitive elections via jungle primaries, and NOLA may be the most able to election more moderate Republicans. Hopeless Democratic candidates would also overpreform there. Ultimately, all seats are Safe R regardless.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Wouldn't the New Orleans based district be marginally more democratic than the other 3? (albeit still won in landslides; just "regular landslides of 70% instead of North Korean landslides of 85%+")

There just aren't that many New Orleans Whites: only 100K out of a 700K total district population. Compare to 250K for the uber-Republican Jefferson Parish. I'm fairly confident that McCain and Romney broke 80% there, but it's possible T***p narrowly fell below that, since he did underperform in the New Orleans area.

[Antonio the Sixth]

South Carolina

Sorry guys, the Deep South is boring.



SC-1: Republicans in the 70% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

SC-2: Republicans in the 70% range (probably the most likely to fall down to the 60s, but I doubt it). No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

SC-3: Republicans in the 70% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

SC-4: Republicans in the 70% range. No chance in hell a Democrat wins here. Safe R.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oregon

And finally, here's the last 4-seater. A somewhat more interesting one, thankfully.



OR-1: Basically Portland, so obviously a Democratic stronghold even with only White voters. Obama most likely broke 70% both times, and Hillary is probably not too far below it. Safe D.

OR-2: This Portland suburbs and Salem-based district is surprisingly conservative, having probably voted for both Romney and T***p even in its general electorate. White voters there might even have voted for McCain. Likely R.

OR-3: Thanks to Eugene and more left-leaning Portland suburbs, this L-shaped district usually votes Democratic. I'm confident that Obama and Hillary both carried it, I would guess by 5-10 points. Lean D.

OR-4: Basically the same seat Greg Walden represents. Romney definitely broke 60% there, although McCain and T***p might have fallen just short. Safe R.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Alabama

Sorry guys, more Deep South.



AL-1: Probably the most Democratic district in the state. Meaning that Republicans "only" win around 75%. T***p underperformed here somewhat given the Democratic suburban trend, but it's not even close to making the district competitive. Safe R.

AL-2: Republican in the 80% range - even more so in the T***p era, where the rural, Appalachian-adjacent Northern Alabama is more Republican than ever. Safe R.

AL-3: I think Romney and McCain might have been under 80% here, but T***p almost certainly cracked that. Safe R.

AL-4: Uber-conservative Alabama coastline. >80% GOP. Safe R.

AL-5: Basically the Black Belt without the Blacks. Definitely >80% GOP. Safe R.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Colorado

I admit, this could be considered a mild gerrymander, as CO-3 tries to ratchet up as much of the Dem-leaning areas West of Denver as possible and leaves CO-5 with a pretty awkward shape. I do think it makes sense from a CoI perspective (and doesn't really advantage one party over another, as 3 and 5 should balance each other out), but I could see opposing arguments. The rest I think is pretty inarguable.



CO-1: Denver's suburban ring, centered around Arapahoe County and including chunks of Douglas and Jefferson. Most of it overlaps with Jason Crow's district. Despite being such an inner-ring suburb, and even despite the big Democratic trend in 2016, this is still clearly a Republican district. Judging by the heavy nonwhite population, McCain probably won this district by a couple points. Romney should have done even better, winning by 5-6, while T***p probably narrowed the margin back to 2-3. This is the sort of margin that would make it winnable for Democrats, and since Crow won by 11 points IRL, it's certainly possible to see this eke it out. I'd call this a pure tossup in 2018, but overall, Likely R.

CO-2: Denver proper, along with more left-leaning suburbs in Adams and Jefferson counties and Broomfield. This is a very minotiry-heavy area, so the Democratic total is probably inflated by a lot, but at the same time, Whites in this area seem plenty progressive of their own. My guess is that Obama was just over 60% there both times, and Hillary slightly below that (but with a wider margin over T***p, since Johnson took a lot of votes). Likely D, almost safe.

CO-3: As mentioned above, this district encompasses Boulder and much of Democratic central Colorado. It's similar in makeup (if not in shape) to Joe Neguse's CO-2, though Neguse would obviously not be representing it. This area is very White to begin with, so it would stay Democratic even under this system. I'm guessing Obama won it by around 20 points in 2008 and around 15 in 2012, with Hillary somewhere in between. Likely D.

CO-4: Easily the most Republican district in the state, encompassing Colorado Springs and the uber-conservative rural Eastern Colorado. Romney might actually have broken 70% here, though McCain and T***p were probably in the 60% range. Safe R.

CO-5: This is basically Tipton's district, except more Republican given the pretty heavy Hispanic presence in the area. Still not crazy Republican, especially for such a rural district. McCain and Romney probably won it by double-digits, but T***p might have widened the margin to 20 points or so. Safe R, but just barely.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Arizona

I hate Arizona redistricting. You always have a bunch of districts crammed into Maricopa and a big void outside. And guessing partisanship is a mess because I don't have access to within-county estimates. Oh well, I'll do my best. If you have disagreements on my ratings, by all means correct me.



AZ-1: Probably the closest Arizona has to a competitive district, as Pima County Whites seem to be somewhat more friendly to Democrats than anywhere else in Arizona. Still, all three Republicans won it easily, probably by 15 points or so. Likely R.

AZ-2: A very conservative district to begin with, this vast area covering two thirds of the state's territory is probably the only one that swung to the right in 2016. Both Romney and T***p polled in the high 60s there, and McCain was not so far below. Safe R.

AZ-3: Based on 2008 results, this looks pretty hopeless for Democrats. Republicans normally get over 60% of the vote here, although T***p probably fell below that. Safe R.

AZ-4: Same as AZ-3, even more Republican since it's even less White. Safe R.

AZ-5: This one might be a tad Democratic-friendly, but it's hard to tell given how much the overall results are skewed. I'd still expect it to fall in the same rough range as the two previous ones. Safe R.

[bagelman]

A map underlay would really help for states like AZ.

[Antonio the Sixth]

A map underlay would really help for states like AZ.

What do you mean by that?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sorry for the long hiatus. Life is kinda busy right now, and I don't think I can keep anything close to a daily schedule, but I'll try my best to keep updating this when I can.


Kentucky

It's not the Deep South, but it's definitely the South. Sorry folks but there's nothing very interesting going on here.



KY-1: Louisville makes this probably the most Democratic district but, and you're used to me saying it, that really doesn't mean much. McCain won it by at least 15 points, and both Romney and T***p were easily over 60%. Safe R.

KY-2: Western KY has some residual Democratic strength among Whites compared to almost any other rural area in the South, but again, we're speaking very relatively here. McCain and Romney broke 60%, and T***p probably crossed 70%. Safe R.

KY-3: This was a historically Republican area even before the current political alignment, and it has only become more so. McCain was already close to 70% there and Romney and T***p broke it easily. Safe R.

KY-4: Probably the second most Democratic district at this point thanks to Democrats' suburban swing, meaning that T***p was still in the 60% range. McCain was already teetering on the brink of that threshold (more likely above than below, I'd guess) and Romney was squarely above. So once again, not much competition to see here. Safe R.

KY-5: And finally, of course, you have the Eastern KY coal country district. This one would have been swingy in days of yore, but these days are long gone. McCain's results were close to those you see in the picture (since the district is 96% White), and from there you see Romney probably breaking 70% and T***p bringing it into the high 70s (the swing was massive there). Safe R.

[bagelman]

A map underlay would really help for states like AZ.

What do you mean by that?

I meant that for some states like AZ, NY, CA where there are a lot of seats in urban areas, it would be helpful to see the map. The one that shows city names, roads etc.

[Antonio the Sixth]

A map underlay would really help for states like AZ.

What do you mean by that?

I meant that for some states like AZ, NY, CA where there are a lot of seats in urban areas, it would be helpful to see the map. The one that shows city names, roads etc.

Ah. I really wish I could do that, but I don't actually have the shapefile for most of those maps (I started this project before I realized you could save shapefiles on DRA). Sorry.

In other bad news, I don't expect to have time for another update for at least a week. Sorry again guys, but I have some busy days ahead.

[Antonio the Sixth]

All right folks, time to end the long hiatus. Still don't expect frequent updates, but I'll try to be more consistent.


Minnesota



MN-1: Minneapolis-based district, so probably Democratic territory, but probably not overwhelmingly so. Likely D.

MN-2: Ditto for the St. Paul based one. Probably a little less so since St. Paul is smaller and the district extends further into the suburbs. Still, Likely D.

MN-3: This would have been a competitive district until recently. Obama almost certainly won it in 2008, and it was very close in 2012 either way. In 2016, though, it went for T***p by over 10 points, and that's probably the new normal. If Nolan held the seat until 2018, then it would easily have flipped when he retired. Collin Peterson also lives within that district, though, so if he's the incumbent he'd probably win. Likely R.

MN-4: These northern Twin Cities suburbs/exurbs have always been conservative, and haven't really moved left ever since. This is Tom Emmer's seat. Safe R.

MN-5: Probably the most Republican district at this point. I'm pretty sure T***p won over 60% here. I'm not sure who would represent it, but barring a particularly strong local Democrat, this seat has been in GOP hands for a while. Safe R.

MN-6: This is probably the most competitive of the non-Twin Cities seats. McCain, Romney and T***p all won it, and probably by increasing margins, but the trend hasn't been quite as strong as elsewhere owing to the D-trending suburban areas to the North. Angie Craig might have won there, but it would have been a close race. Likely R.