Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General Gerrymandering

From numerous sites ranging from Gallup, 538, 270 to win, Cook, Rothenberg, YouGov, Rasmussen, RCP, Politico, Trafalgar, Emerson, Quinnipiac, Harvard-Harris, CNN, FOX, NYT, Inside Edition, Pew Research, Wiki, Sabato’s crystal ball and more. My inbox is usually full in the AM. I subscribe to many political pundits and information sites and organizations. So most send their numbers, polls, prediction status to me and I don’t have to go looking. I just love playing with the numbers and coming up with my own forecasts to compare to the experts once all is done and over. I have seen some of those pundits and news organizations let their hearts, wishes and wants to overtake the numbers they have or available to them. 2016 was a prime example of this.

I use google a lot to get the different senate races status from local sources in the states to include local TV polls. What I do is compile, then average out. What I post is the averages from different sources. I may post for example 36 competitive districts, but other sources may have those up to 40 or as low as 30. But once I get 5 or 6 of these different competitive district’s numbers, add them up, and then divide to come out with an average. Same for safe seats. The senate seats, I’ll add all the recent polls available and once again divide to come out with an average.

Once you’ve compiled all the recent polls, it’s easy to delete old ones and add new one and draw a new average. Usually in a couple of minutes you’re done and have a new average.

Jeez I wish my methods were so simple. Between throwing the bones and reading tea leaves, dealing the Tarot deck, tracking the astrology, and gazing into this cracked crystal ball it seems I can spend days putting together forecasts!

The simplest method is just to consult the ancestors, but my ancestors were mostly scoundrels and scofflaws and aren't above lying just to laugh at me for spreading fake news.

Last Sunday the New York Times ran an article about “How Lopsided District Lines Are Deepening America’s Divide,” which heavily features GOP Rep. Dan Crenshaw. The Texas GOP has aggressively drawn partisan maps for Congress and the state legislature that drastically dilutes people of color’s political power, but sure let’s focus on the GOP’s “once-rising star.”



It's really weird how Shane Goldmacher’s article doesn’t contain the words “Latino,” “Black” or “people of color." in analyzing these "lopsided district lines." There’s also no reference to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s lawsuit over the state's hyper-partisan maps. These “lopsided district lines” apparently just fell out of the sky.

My understanding, as per Pero's research and reporting is that the Democrats have put together more lopsided districts this time around than Republicans.

But apparently, it's okay if you're a Democrat.

Although I’m adamantly against any type or form of gerrymandering. I take gerrymandering in stride. The Republicans did the same in 2010 to their great advantage. This time it seems to be the democrats turn. It’s going to happen regardless of what any of us think. Here’s the most extreme.

Illinois added 3 democratic seats, eliminate 2 GOP seats and 1 competitive seat
New Jersey added 3 democratic seats, eliminated 1 GOP seats and 2 competitive seats.
New York added 3 democratic 3 seats, eliminated 3 Republican seats and 1 competitive seat. New York lost a seat due to the 2020 census.
Oregon added 2 Democratic seats, eliminated 2 competitive seats.

Now one also needs to remember the GOP did the same as above for North Carolina and Ohio. Only those states supreme court threw out the grossly gerrymandered Republican maps making both states to redraw their maps with the supreme court of both having to approve the new maps. North Carolina’s original map eliminated 2 democratic districts and added 3 republican districts. The map North Carolina’s supreme finally approved added those 2 democratic districts back along with adding 1 competitive district. The competitive district is the new district added via the 2020 census. So, North Carolina is basically a status quo map from the old map. Ohio hasn’t yet submitted their revised map.

The two major parties took two different redistricting strategies. The Democrats wanted to add as many democratic leaning districts as possible. They did. But that also thinned their advantage in districts they currently hold. The GOP did the opposite, they strengthen the districts they now hold. They didn’t try to add new Republican leaning districts at the expense of weakening the districts they already have. You can tell by the number of competitive/switchable seats as to the difference in this strategy. 36 districts as of today with 6 states remaining to redraw their districts are in the competitive/switchable column. 24 are held by Democrats vs. 12 by Republicans. The Democrats have twice as many at risk districts than the Republicans have. So, we’ll see come November, which strategy worked out best.

It's like the Republicans have anything to offer Americans anyway. What is their platform these days anyway?

• Can't discuss the long history of racism in America, because it will make white kids be ashamed.
• Can't say the word gay in K-12 in Flor-i-duh
• Assisting a trans kid in TX is now child abuse
• Banning books from school libraries

One thing being involved in election forecasts over the years I found that the party out of power doesn’t have to stand for anything, they are just the alternative to the party in power. In our two-party electoral system, there’s only two choices. The party in power or the party out of power. Anger at or dissatisfaction with the party in power will cause them, swing voters, independents to vote for the party out of power. If they’re happy with the way things are going, they vote for the party in power.

Most folks read too much into a relatively simple thing. Do the people, especially independents, do they approve of the job the president is doing or not? If they do, they vote for the president’s party, if not, they vote for the party out of power. An angry or dissatisfied voter just wants someone else, the alternative which is the party out of power in hopes things will change. Change for the better rarely happens. But voting for the party out of power gives them hope things will get better because they made a change from the party they were unhappy and dissatisified with. The party of the president.

I agree completely. Useless as teats on a bore hog. Downright dangerous in a hand maid's tale sort of way. But somehow Democratic ineptitude keeps tossing the ball right back into the authoritarian's court.

Fortunately, just as the socialist dystopia promised by republicans never seems to happen, neither does the fascist takeover of America promised by democrats.

I think both sides are being played.

What do you suggest we do instead?
I guess "take the high road" while letting Republicans finish the job?

When gerrymandering is outlawed altogether that's when you will see me lambast Democrats trying to do it.
I'm more than willing to do whatever is in my power TO outlaw it altogether.
Till then, if they're doing it, laying down and spreading them isn't the answer.

Jeffrey, I have stated many times I’m adamantly opposed to any type of gerrymandering. But it’s going to happen and both sides will take advantage of it to no end when they can. 2010 was a GOP year, 2020 has been a Democratic year. I don’t expect either side to not gerrymandering when they can, that would be like laying down your arms before the fight began just to prove a moral point. I don’t begrudge the democrats this year for winning the gerrymandering war, they’re fighting fire with fire.

Now what I expect since both sides are going to gerrymander to the max, is to stop demonizing the other side for their gerrymandering or using gerrymandering as an excuse when either side loses a congressional election. Congress could stop gerrymandering but won’t. Way too many congressional critters owe their seats in congress to gerrymandering. They’re not about to put their own seat at risk regardless of the rhetoric spouted. That just PR propaganda.