Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 12, 2019, 06:56:56 am
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Endorsements Close today at noon

  Atlas Forum
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderator: muon2)
  Vern's Map for North Carolina
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] Print
Author Topic: Vern's Map for North Carolina  (Read 4364 times)
Farmlands
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 324


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #175 on: December 03, 2019, 04:52:07 pm »

I don’t understand why Districts 5 and 10 are drawn that way, though I’d assume the NC GOP wanted to protect their only female rep from Mark Walker’s potential carpetbagging. Railroading Virginia Foxx is bad optics for a party who’s trying to win over women.

Have we ever heard anything of the sort from the GOP? I know electing more women to the party has been one of Stefanik's goals for some time, but there have been no indication I've seen that either the voters or the party establishment wants that. Nor do they really care about the optics of it.
Logged
cvparty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,562
United States


P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #176 on: December 03, 2019, 05:18:00 pm »

I don’t understand why Districts 5 and 10 are drawn that way, though I’d assume the NC GOP wanted to protect their only female rep from Mark Walker’s potential carpetbagging. Railroading Virginia Foxx is bad optics for a party who’s trying to win over women.
where?
Logged
Mr.Phips
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #177 on: December 03, 2019, 05:52:56 pm »

I don’t understand why Districts 5 and 10 are drawn that way, though I’d assume the NC GOP wanted to protect their only female rep from Mark Walker’s potential carpetbagging. Railroading Virginia Foxx is bad optics for a party who’s trying to win over women.

Does Virginia Foxx count as a woman?
Logged
Tekken_Guy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,392
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #178 on: December 03, 2019, 07:21:57 pm »
« Edited: December 03, 2019, 07:26:27 pm by Tekken_Guy »

The voters didn’t make the districts themselves. Even if the GOP base isn’t in the mood for more female representatives, I’m assuming the politicians in Raleigh are concerned that not holding on to their state delegation’s only female Republican would make it hard to fight back charges of sexism. Especially after they elected men in both of their special elections.

We saw this same thing play out in Georgia. Brian Kemp picked a woman to be their new senator for many of the same reasons NC is trying to keep Foxx aboard.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #179 on: December 03, 2019, 07:27:33 pm »

I doubt the peculiar lines of 5 and 10 (and to a lesser extent 13) had anything to do with Foxx's gender. I suspect it had everything to do with rigging the primaries for someone - we just don't know who yet. It could be that the mappers wanted Walker to survive so they made the 13th in a way that could benefit him in a primary, and cut 13 between districts to prevent Budd from fleeing. Or the lines could be set up to prevent or facilitate the advancement of state legislators to Washington. We won't know till everyone has filed.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,392
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #180 on: December 03, 2019, 07:32:51 pm »

I doubt the peculiar lines of 5 and 10 (and to a lesser extent 13) had anything to do with Foxx's gender. I suspect it had everything to do with rigging the primaries for someone - we just don't know who yet. It could be that the mappers wanted Walker to survive so they made the 13th in a way that could benefit him in a primary, and cut 13 between districts to prevent Budd from fleeing. Or the lines could be set up to prevent or facilitate the advancement of state legislators to Washington. We won't know till everyone has filed.

Why would they want to get rid of Budd? And how do you know he wouldn’t go to the 10th instead?
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #181 on: December 03, 2019, 07:36:53 pm »

I doubt the peculiar lines of 5 and 10 (and to a lesser extent 13) had anything to do with Foxx's gender. I suspect it had everything to do with rigging the primaries for someone - we just don't know who yet. It could be that the mappers wanted Walker to survive so they made the 13th in a way that could benefit him in a primary, and cut 13 between districts to prevent Budd from fleeing. Or the lines could be set up to prevent or facilitate the advancement of state legislators to Washington. We won't know till everyone has filed.

Why would they want to get rid of Budd? And how do you know he wouldn’t go to the 10th instead?

No idea, just guessing. The fact that so much safe R territory was unnecessarily shuffled when everything could be kept compact suggests an external desire. The partisan makeup of the region implies this desire  has to do with the GOP primary. What those primary desires exactly are remain unknown.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,392
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #182 on: December 03, 2019, 07:42:42 pm »

I doubt the peculiar lines of 5 and 10 (and to a lesser extent 13) had anything to do with Foxx's gender. I suspect it had everything to do with rigging the primaries for someone - we just don't know who yet. It could be that the mappers wanted Walker to survive so they made the 13th in a way that could benefit him in a primary, and cut 13 between districts to prevent Budd from fleeing. Or the lines could be set up to prevent or facilitate the advancement of state legislators to Washington. We won't know till everyone has filed.

Why would they want to get rid of Budd? And how do you know he wouldn’t go to the 10th instead?

No idea, just guessing. The fact that so much safe R territory was unnecessarily shuffled when everything could be kept compact suggests an external desire. The partisan makeup of the region implies this desire  has to do with the GOP primary. What those primary desires exactly are remain unknown.

I agree. It probably means they want to keep certain MOC safe from primary challenges. This configuration seems to benefit Foxx the most as it puts her district away from the 6th. A more compact split would have her district touching the new 6th.
Logged
nclib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,908
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #183 on: December 03, 2019, 10:08:11 pm »

Most of these new CDs are fair. The only exception are 7, 8, and 9 being at least Likely R, as opposed to a CD combining Fayetteville, Lumberton, and Wilmington into 1 or 2 districts, which could have produced at least a tossup CD.
Logged
Deluded retread Vice Chair LFROMNJ
lfromnj
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,244


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #184 on: December 04, 2019, 12:33:58 am »



Also just confirming the feds won't get involved.
Logged
Deluded retread Vice Chair LFROMNJ
lfromnj
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,244


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #185 on: December 04, 2019, 12:38:52 am »

Also what a garbage article by the Washington post on this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/03/north-carolinas-new-congressional-map-shifts-two-seats-toward-democrats/?arc404=true
Quote
The new 2nd has been carved out of a Democratic stronghold in Raleigh. There is little change in the 12th District, where Charlotte Democrats and minorities remain packed.

Yes two completely compact districts wholey within their counties and communities are examples of a gerrymander, not the fact that a Dem tilting region was split among 3 GOP districts.

Also uses some really garbage PVI and it claims NC 4th in the new map which is 65% Clinton only leans to Democrats by less than 5%. They must be on crack.
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 66
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #186 on: December 04, 2019, 04:10:37 am »

It's worth bearing in mind that Foxx is 76 years old, so she must be on a retirement watchlist anyway.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #187 on: December 04, 2019, 07:30:44 am »

It's worth bearing in mind that Foxx is 76 years old, so she must be on a retirement watchlist anyway.

See, heres a good reason why they might have messed with the western seats. Plenty of others her age are looking at the figures and expecting that the GOP won't take the House. The 5th could have been drawn to specifications for say another Suburban Charlotte legislator who wants to advance, couldn't previously without a primary, and is expecting Foxx to throw in the towel.
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 66
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #188 on: December 04, 2019, 09:34:25 am »

It's worth bearing in mind that Foxx is 76 years old, so she must be on a retirement watchlist anyway.

See, heres a good reason why they might have messed with the western seats. Plenty of others her age are looking at the figures and expecting that the GOP won't take the House. The 5th could have been drawn to specifications for say another Suburban Charlotte legislator who wants to advance, couldn't previously without a primary, and is expecting Foxx to throw in the towel.

Interesting. The main weirdness in the 5th is the arm it sends out to grab Cleveland and Gaston counties. I note that the speaker of the General Assembly represents a district based in Cleveland county.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,392
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #189 on: December 04, 2019, 04:48:55 pm »

It's worth bearing in mind that Foxx is 76 years old, so she must be on a retirement watchlist anyway.

See, heres a good reason why they might have messed with the western seats. Plenty of others her age are looking at the figures and expecting that the GOP won't take the House. The 5th could have been drawn to specifications for say another Suburban Charlotte legislator who wants to advance, couldn't previously without a primary, and is expecting Foxx to throw in the towel.

Kathy Harrington?
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 66
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #190 on: December 05, 2019, 06:13:35 am »

I ran up a rough outline for what the Republicans might try for in the next round of redistricting, based on a new seat being created south of Raleigh and an attempt to lock in a reasonably secure 9-5 advantage. I've aimed to minimise change with the other seats and to pay some attention to incumbent protection considerations, although given we don't know exactly who the map was drawn for I may have made mistakes.

A secure 10-4 is probably possible if you put Forsyth and Guilford counties in separate districts, but given how many maps they've had struck down, it's questionable whether they want to risk that again and get a worse map imposed on them.



I made it with 2016 population numbers, but the Clinton-Trump numbers were taken by recreating it with 2010 voting districts. They don't line up perfectly, but it should be close enough.

NC-1: Clinton +12. 48% white, 42% black on 2016 numbers, probably more like 50-40 on VAP but should still reliably elect a black Democrat. If more counties are split, you could raise the black VAP a couple of points fairly easily.

NC-2: Clinton +26. 57% white by population.

NC-3: Trump +25. Greg Murphy doesn't live in this district (he's in Greenville), but putting in an arm to catch his residence wouldn't be difficult.

NC-4: Clinton +37. Loses its outlying counties. 58% white by population.

NC-5: Trump +40.

NC-6: Clinton +29. Shrinks somewhat and becomes more strongly Democratic. 49% white, 34% black by total population, which means the Democratic primary is probably plurality black?

NC-7: Trump +7. Loses its northern tendril and gains most of Fayetteville. I figure Mike McIntyre isn't coming back, but if this is too marginal then you could always swap more of Fayetteville for Sampson County.

NC-8: Trump +35. Shifts northwards and westwards.

NC-9: Trump +10. Loses territory on both its eastern and western edges. Depending on how worried they are about south Charlotte, you could always shift more of that into NC-12 and grab territory from NC-8 to compensate.

NC-10: Trump +32. I've added back in Gaston County and I've also added northern Mecklenburg County, making it more purely suburban in exchange for the arm north.

NC-11: Trump +15. As it's no longer a realistic Democratic target, you don't need to do anything daft with the boundaries.

NC-12: Clinton +47. On 2016 numbers, white 36%, black 40%, Hispanic 15%. It would still be safe for a black Democrat even if it does have to add more of southern Mecklenburg.

NC-13: Trump +28. This is possibly slightly more cohesive than the remedial seat, but it's still a leftovers seat.

NC-14: Trump +14. Somewhat suburban, but most of it still trended R in 2016 so it ought to be reliable enough.
Logged
Skill and Chance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,736
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #191 on: December 06, 2019, 12:38:38 pm »

I ran up a rough outline for what the Republicans might try for in the next round of redistricting, based on a new seat being created south of Raleigh and an attempt to lock in a reasonably secure 9-5 advantage. I've aimed to minimise change with the other seats and to pay some attention to incumbent protection considerations, although given we don't know exactly who the map was drawn for I may have made mistakes.

A secure 10-4 is probably possible if you put Forsyth and Guilford counties in separate districts, but given how many maps they've had struck down, it's questionable whether they want to risk that again and get a worse map imposed on them.



I made it with 2016 population numbers, but the Clinton-Trump numbers were taken by recreating it with 2010 voting districts. They don't line up perfectly, but it should be close enough.

NC-1: Clinton +12. 48% white, 42% black on 2016 numbers, probably more like 50-40 on VAP but should still reliably elect a black Democrat. If more counties are split, you could raise the black VAP a couple of points fairly easily.

NC-2: Clinton +26. 57% white by population.

NC-3: Trump +25. Greg Murphy doesn't live in this district (he's in Greenville), but putting in an arm to catch his residence wouldn't be difficult.

NC-4: Clinton +37. Loses its outlying counties. 58% white by population.

NC-5: Trump +40.

NC-6: Clinton +29. Shrinks somewhat and becomes more strongly Democratic. 49% white, 34% black by total population, which means the Democratic primary is probably plurality black?

NC-7: Trump +7. Loses its northern tendril and gains most of Fayetteville. I figure Mike McIntyre isn't coming back, but if this is too marginal then you could always swap more of Fayetteville for Sampson County.

NC-8: Trump +35. Shifts northwards and westwards.

NC-9: Trump +10. Loses territory on both its eastern and western edges. Depending on how worried they are about south Charlotte, you could always shift more of that into NC-12 and grab territory from NC-8 to compensate.

NC-10: Trump +32. I've added back in Gaston County and I've also added northern Mecklenburg County, making it more purely suburban in exchange for the arm north.

NC-11: Trump +15. As it's no longer a realistic Democratic target, you don't need to do anything daft with the boundaries.

NC-12: Clinton +47. On 2016 numbers, white 36%, black 40%, Hispanic 15%. It would still be safe for a black Democrat even if it does have to add more of southern Mecklenburg.

NC-13: Trump +28. This is possibly slightly more cohesive than the remedial seat, but it's still a leftovers seat.

NC-14: Trump +14. Somewhat suburban, but most of it still trended R in 2016 so it ought to be reliable enough.

I actually think NC-11 is the best Dem target of the outstate districts, particularly if it has to shrink and gets pushed more up against the mountains and out of the blood red counties just west of Charlotte.  Asheville is racing left in a PVI sense, while the entire Sandhills area is racing right (there's even been a trend right in Cumberland, which was basically unheard of for urban centers in 2016-18).

There's also a decent chance the court imposes an all mountains district for the 2021 redraw that would include Boone, in which case it starts out Lean R at most.   
Logged
Tintrlvr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,822
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #192 on: December 06, 2019, 03:02:22 pm »
« Edited: December 06, 2019, 03:44:39 pm by Tintrlvr »

I got bored and drew this map, which is what I think the Democrats would/should draw post-2020 if they controlled redistricting somehow (deeply unlikely). It uses 2016 data so doesn't have the most recent partisanship, but it's pretty clear where each district sits. I think this could also pass state constitutional muster. I think the map actually has favorable trends for the Democrats overall, and population changes from 2016 to 2020 would probably allow the Democrats to squeeze a bit more utility out of the map as well. Summary below.

NC-01 (Rocky Mount): Safe D, minority opportunity (46W-45B-6H)
NC-02 (New Bern-Outer Banks): Safe R
NC-03 (Wilmington): Safe R
NC-04 (Fayetteville): Likely D, minority opportunity (44W-32B-9H-9N)
NC-05 (Durham): Safe D
NC-06 (Raleigh): Safe D
NC-07 (Cary-Chapel Hill): Likely D
NC-08 (Asheboro): Safe R
NC-09 (Charlotte North-Concord): Safe D, minority opportunity (47W-35B-11H)
NC-10 (Charlotte South-Monroe): Toss-up/Tilt D*
NC-11 (Gastonia): Safe R
NC-12 (Greensboro-Winston-Salem): Safe D, minority opportunity (49W-34B-10H)**
NC-13 (Wilkesboro): Safe R
NC-14 (Asheville-Boone): Lean R***

*This could have been drawn much safer, but I was trying to preserve NC-09 as a minority district. As it is, NC-10 takes about as many white Democrats from Mecklenburg County as possible. Obama only won it by 300 votes in 2008, but it's also an area trending solidly towards the Democrats, so I am reasonably confident it's a good decision for the Democrats.
**I know others have advocated for splitting Greensboro and Winston-Salem into two districts, but I couldn't create an Obama seat based on Winston-Salem alone, so I decided the whole project wasn't worth it. Also, keeping the two together creates another minority-opportunity district, which I think is important for passing constitutional muster and ensuring unity in the state legislative caucus. This is actually the most Obama-08 seat on the map.
***This was closer than I was expecting in 2008 (47-51 McCain). Maybe Lean R is an aggressive rating for the Democrats, but it is at least potentially winnable dependent on turnout differentials. And why not draw it; there's nothing else to do for the Democrats in this part of the state.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #193 on: December 06, 2019, 04:21:11 pm »
« Edited: December 06, 2019, 06:23:40 pm by Oryxslayer »

If this is going to be the thread for NC next decade Redistricting as well, then I suggest we change the title. If so, then I will post two maps.



NC Gerry 2020. Essentially if the GOP are allowed to work unmolested then this is likely the type of map to emerge. They kinda tipped their hat in two ways with the current map, which is receives an 'decent' using 2010 data. But if they try to preserve it using 2020 data the gerrymander really emerges. NC-06 becomes a tight pack for all the dems in that region. The Sandhills remain cracked to bits, only Fayetteville now needs to be carved up because the county weighs more under 14 districts with 2020 pops. Raleigh is reworked to make one of the new Safe Dem seats into a AA opportunity seat, which makes NC02/04 into a Yin-Yang of Safe Dem packs. I kept the oddities in the west because I am now fully expecting a Gaston/Cleveland Republican to be making preparations to succeed Foxx. NC-13 also could allow Walker a chance back if he wins the primary. These Asheville lines are the Safest the GOP can get while still making the seat look sane. NC-09, as before, is the weak link on the  map and could potentially be vulnerable if the Republicans didn't have favorable trends  with the Lumbees. NC-14 could be vulnerable by the end of the decade if Wake keeps up it's current growth. Only real improvement is that NC-07 is now fully in the Wilmington region, but that happens on any 2020 map.

NC-01: 56/41.8 Clinton
NC-02: 62/32.4 Clinton
NC-03: 59.7/37.2 Trump
NC-04: 66.3/29.4 Clinton
NC-05: 65/31.2 Trump
NC-06: 61.8/31.4 Clinton
NC-07: 57.9/38.2 Trump
NC-08: 57.1/39.2 Trump
NC-09: 52.9/42.7 Trump
NC-10: 68.6/27.7 Trump
NC-11: 55.2/40.1 Trump
NC-12: 70.8/24.7 Clinton
NC-13: 64.8/31.8 Trump
NC-14: 55.3/40.5 Trump



NC Dem-tilting map. This is the type of map that the 6-1 (likely less in 2020, but still blue) courts would pass if given the option. This could be because the GOP tried to pass the previous map, and a citizens suit is fast-tracked to slap the map down. Or perhaps the dems take the State House (lean R under new lines) and force the courts to get involved. Either way, something like this is what may rise up: a map that gives both parties opportunities at control. NC-02 and NC-14 are both Wake based seats, though radically different. NC-14 is suburban and a swing seat (voting for Trump and Cooper by slim margins), whereas NC-02 gets all of Raleigh and the Northern white suburbs. NC-06 Loses High Point to become a more natural seat whose goal isn't to pack every democrat in the region. NC-09 is the Sandhills s eat everyone deserves, which while a Likely Dem pickup now is probably fated to slide to tossup by the end of the decade thanks to AAs leaving the belt for the cities. NC-03's community is the counties between the two AA seats, but it also has to reach up and grab the blood red counties north of Kitty Hawk. NC-08 could be competitive by the end of the decade, as long as the Charlotte white precincts keep moving left. The best community for NC-11 under 14 seats is actually based around the mountains and reaching up to Boone, whereas under 13, it should leave Boone for NC-05. This produces a weird seat t hat could be competitive depending on the candidates, Cooper only lost this NC-11 by 2%!

Overall, the map starts at 5 Safe Dem, 1 Lean/Likely Dem, 1 Tossup, 6 Safe Rep, and 1 usually Rep but weird (NC-11).

NC-01: 56.3/41.2 Clinton
NC-02: 59.1/36 Clinton
NC-03: 60.3/36.5 Trump
NC-04: 63.2/32.7 Clinton
NC-05: 71/25.7 Trump
NC-06: 58.4/37.4 Clinton
NC-07: 59.4/36.7 Trump
NC-08: 53.6/41.6 Trump
NC-09: 51.6/45.3 Clinton
NC-10: 66.5/29.9 Trump
NC-11: 53.7/41.3 Trump
NC-12: 68.7/26.8 Clinton
NC-13: 66.8/29.9 Trump
NC-14: 48.1/47 Trump

Wake and Charlotte are both at a position in 2020 where they cannot fully support 2 seats, that happens in 2030 if growth continues. Right now, the numbers are that each can support 1 seat, with pop to loan and top off other seats. In 2020, both are in the awkward position where they can either support 1 and have the county cut up a lot (like Charlotte and Wake in Gerry), support 1 and then share the second with other large counties (Charlotte Courts), or cut the county and base two seats in it but both seats need external support (Wake Courts).
Logged
Deluded retread Vice Chair LFROMNJ
lfromnj
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,244


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #194 on: December 06, 2019, 10:46:15 pm »

The court map splitting guilford 4 times?

I know it doesn't really affect the partisanship of the map but its just flat out ugly.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #195 on: December 06, 2019, 11:02:10 pm »

The court map splitting guilford 4 times?

I know it doesn't really affect the partisanship of the map but its just flat out ugly.

Which do you prefer: cutting four counties 1 time each, or cutting one county four times? I prefer the latter since it keeps more counties, the easiest agreeable Community of interest, intact. However, this is just a cast of preferences,  and everyone has their own opinion on them.

For example I find preferable to keep counties whole when desirable, and every county cut needs to be justified. Random cuts that pop up just because you already finished one district and refuse to adjust said district to better accommodate others look ugly to me. This is just preferences after all.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC