Posted on 11/04/2010 7:57:42 PM PDT by scrabblehack
I don't know if others find this as interesting as I do but let's see. On another thread there was some discussion about whether PA-12 (Critz, Murtha's successor) would be eliminated in 2012. If the estimates at census.gov are any good, let's suggest some mapping strategies for any number of states. I'm guessing there won't be enough interest to break this into state-by-state threads.
The 13th could be made more Republican (56% Dem in 2010) but it would probably be better to shore up the 7th (55%) and 8th (54%).
The southwest is a bit more problematic. Mike Doyle's 14th (69% D) could probably be made more Democrat; as I recall Rick Santorum did win it but it wasn't easy. Tim Murphy's 18th (67% R) might be able to absorb a few Democrats from the 4th (51% D) or the 12th (51% D) and he'll still be able to win easily. Mike Kelly of Butler is in the 3rd district (56% R) that stretches all the way to Erie. It was previously held by a Democrat so it's a potentially fragile seat.
In the 12th, Critz won the southwestern part of the district (Greene/Washington/Allegheny/Fayette) and the eastern part (Cambria) with Burns taking the middle (Armstrong/Westmoreland/Somerset). Critz is from Johnstown so if the district is eliminated he'd be paired against Shuster of Hollidaysburg or maybe Peterson of Bellefonte.)
In the 4th, Rothfus won the western part of the district (Butler/Allegheny/Westmoreland), with Altmire holding the eastern part (Beaver/Lawrence/Mercer). I can see this district getting eliminated instead of the 12th; Altmire of McCandless could be paired against Murphy of Upper St. Clair or Kelly of Butler. More later...
OH going to lose two seats.
Combine 9-10-11
Katpur-Kasinich-Fudge into one
Conventional Wisdom says that Wisconsin will lose one seat. However, the clean sweep by Republicans of the Governorship, the Assembly, and the State Senate probably means that my district (5) won’t be merged into Milwaukee which surely would turn a safe Republican District into a chilly, blue Dem District. I don’t know how they’ll redraw the lines, but I think we’re safe for now.
MA to lose at least one. Look for a retirement(Barney or the living fossil John Olver) or someone runs against Scott Brown(Lynch or Capuano). everyone else divvies up what’s left
It would be nice if the 10th CD lost Quincy/Weymouth and picked up some more suburbs. I wonder where in the state the population loss has been? My guess would be the West of 495 along route 2. Some of those places are really hollowed out shells of communities.
As a general comment for all of the states, the results of this election show a map that contains 1-3 urban core areas in many states surrounded by red districts. But, many of these districts were blue last week. The big exception to this trend is the Northeast and the West coast, but for the rest of the country there is an opportunity to firm up these new red districts and leave the urban core islands to the Dems. Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Texas, Ohio, Virginia, Georgia are all examples of this phenomenon and are mostly states where the Republicans will have some say in the redistricting process. Done right, these states will be pretty hard to pull into the blue column during Presidential election and without them, Dems can’t win a national election.
Scott Brown is a Senator. His seat will always be there. The question will be: who will sit in it?
I think I made a mistake with PA so I’ll redo that one in the days ahead.
MA: It looks that Western Mass has enough for its 2 districts. The current 1st has a tiny piece of Middlesex, but there should be about 166K residents in Worcester County left over. The current 3rd stretches from Worcester to Fall River. That would be the logical direction to go.
Essex County in the northeast has enough to preserve the 6th; Suffolk (Boston) has enough for the 8th.
Middlesex has enough for the bulk of their two seats, the 5th and the 7th. I hadn’t realized Barney lives there as well at the northern tip of the 4th. He could challenge Markey or Tsongas, but it would be on their turf.
It does look to me that the southeast will have to lose a seat. I’m thinking the 3rd will stretch to Worcester, as it does now, with there being a district that looks like the 10th (possibly renumbered as the 4th), and then an expanded 9th.
There will be only about 12K residents left over after cutting out 5 CD’s from Philadelphia and its collar counties. The 15th and the 6th will most likely have to take a larger chunk of Berks.
Northeast Pennsylvania will still have enough for the core of 2 CD’s (10th and 11th); they will have to extend further east, into the 5th, or south (into the 17th). Both these districts are winnable by Democrats so the 5th may be the better option.
The 19th CD of York-Adams-Cumberland will be renumbered to something.
Tim Holden of the 17th won Dauphin and Schuykill — lost Berks, Lebanon, and Perry. Possibly the 16th or 19th could absorb some Democrat areas of Dauphin; then the 17th would have to extend further east into Republican territory. As I said in another thread, Holden was able to beat Gekas eight years ago.
The 12th is a definite candidate for elimination. Cambria could be placed into the 9th and a Republican could still win the district. I can see the 4th eliminated as well.
Ohio - I don’t think it’s realistic to stretch a district all the way from Toledo to Cleveland. I did see a story that suggested that Republicans sacrifice one of their own in Ohio because of the geography. That should be a last resort.
This might not go over well but I would suggest combining the 5th and the 9th. It would be a fair fight district. It is better to have a 50% chance of retaining a seat than a 0% chance. The other possibility I could see would be attempting to make the 17th a fair fight district. The results are a bit harder to analyze because of Traficant’s 3rd party run, but it would appear that the exurban areas of Toledo are more reliably Republican than the exurban areas around Youngstown....easier to make a fair fight district around Toledo than around Youngstown.
Cuyahoga, however, will not be quite large enough to support two CD’s. So among Fudge, Kucinich, and Sutton, one should definitely lose a seat.
Ohio should go as follows.
First, carve out something in the middle of the state from Columbus to Cincinnati, or Columbus alone. That area is D and growing, and its what caused us to lose 2 districts earlier this decade.
Kaptur’s district in the 9th needs people, so it swallows part of Sutton’ district. Renacci swallows the GOP portions of Sutton’s district. Tim Ryan gets the rest. Sutton is gone.
Kucinich and Fudge are merged into 1, but we still need to shed population. So, about 100k of that goes to the 14th (hopefully we can still hold this). Another 100k gets dumped into Tim Ryan’s Youngstown district.
Either way, it ends up 12-4 Republican. Probably need to shore up Cincinatti a bit to prevent Chabot from losing again, though.
You’re not going to win a fight in a Toledo district. And we already tried redistricting Tim Ryan last time around.
You can’t dislodge Fudge. I’m not sure if that district is VRA, but it is 85% Dem.
You pretty much have to give up a Republican incumbent with the current configuration. Boehner is going to have to decide who it is, my money is on Schmidt since she seems to always underperform.
There is no realistic way to get to 13-3 without endangering half the GOP side.
You may be right. I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations based on %vote for Latta (high 60’s in nearby counties), and came up with something like 51% R overall.
However 2010 was an unusually good Republican year, also turnout rates can differ when a seat is hotly contested.
However if a sacrifice is necessary, perhaps the odd Rep out could challenge Sherrod Brown for the Senate seat.
You can’t do that. Districts have to be the same population by law.
The GOP was too aggressive in 2001 with PA and they ended up losing 5 seats.
There’s no reason to play offense at all and try to dislodge anyone. 12-7 (soon to be 12-6) is a huge advantage in a state that normally votes slight D.
As for who gets eliminated, its almost certainly Critz. I’d just merge the 4th and 12th, personally, as best as can be done.
TX looks to be gaining one seat near Dallas (Collin County gaining 36% of a district, Tarrant 31%, Denton 27%, Dallas 6%); also one district near Houston (Harris County gaining 53% of a district, Ft. Bend 24%, Montgomery 18%, and Brazoria 6%); the third district would appear to anchored to Austin (Travis gaining 20%, Williamson gaining 20%...it could stretch to San Antonio, with Bexar gaining 19%).
Hidalgo gaining 17% will change the map some as well....it might be possible to rearrange the 15th and 28th to get one winnable seat, or at least shore up the 27th.
It might be possible to draw Gene Green out of a seat...for some reason the vote totals in his district were barely 65K (43-22)..those in the neighboring 14th and 22nd were 2.5 - 3x that amount.
But no, TPG, you’re not going to get 35-0.
Michigan - Dingell lost Monroe County - this could be transferred to the 7th. Levin won the Macomb portion of the 12th, but by a smaller margin than Dingell carried the Washtenaw portion of the 15th. So the 10th gets a bigger chunk of Macomb, and then a Detroit area seat is eliminated.
The 9th was close so it could be better to shift some territory from the 9th to the 8th or the 10th.
So if Texas gets 3 more seats, can they all be gerrymandered or are those growth areas essentially full of illegals and possible Left seats.
So if Texas gets 3 more seats, can they all be gerrymandered or are those growth areas essentially full of illegals and possible Left seats.
So if Texas gets 3 more seats, can they all be gerrymandered or are those growth areas essentially full of illegals and possible Left seats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.