Skip to main content

With the 2012 election over, many people have noticed that the Democrats picked up some key legislative chambers. Minnesota, Colorado, Oregon, and New York (possible) now all have Democratic Legislatures and Democratic Governors.

In 2003, Republicans in Georgia and Texas gained control of the governors mansion and legislature, respectively. In both states, Republicans were ruthless and took the court-drawn map in Texas and Democratic-drawn map in Georgia and turned them into partisan Republican gerrymanders. While Texas Democrats courageously fled the state to avoid a quorum, we all know what happened in the end, and in 2004 Democrats in each of these two states were decimated.

To be sure, and to be clear, Democrats are better than this. I am personally not suggesting Democrats follow the lead of Republicans 10 years later. In fact, I am personally opposed to them doing this, because this sort of partisanship in bluish-purple, good government states is not going to fly with the public. Still, I thought this would be a fun exercise in the event that some out there want to get even.

The 2010 wave crashed hard in Minnesota, turning the legislature Republican for the first time in awhile. However, Mark Dayton gained the governorship, turning that from Republican to Democrat. With this split, a compromise court-drawn map was implemented and things were left pretty status quo. In the spirit of Texas and Georgia Republicans, let’s see what an extreme Democratic partisan gerrymander could look like.

Despite my desire to split Minneapolis and St. Paul, and I have shown how doing that really helps Democrats, I have heard the voices of our other Minnesota posters and have not split either city. Otherwise though, I did not adhere to any rules. This means I split plenty of counties. My objective is to elect as many Democrats as possible, even if that means electing moderates or blue dog Democrats. I did not pay attention to where current congresspeople live.

Minnesota Statewide Map

1st District (Blue)

Southern Minnesota

Mankato and Rochester anchor this district, and I have kept all of Northfield (which crosses Rice and Dakota counties) in this district. I kept the two counties covered by the South Dakota media market out of here. Tim Walz is a good fit for this district and fairly easily survived 2010, and the district did not change much with the court-drawn map. Walz got 58% in 2012 but he had a weak opponent. Obama got 51% in the court-drawn district and 52% in this district. Rochester, the main population center, is trending blue. Likely D with Walz, probably Lean D in an open seat situation, given Rochester’s trend.

2nd District (Green)

Southern Twin Cities Suburbs

This district contains court counties as well as a small area (to make it bluer) of Hennepin County: blue Richfield and blue east Bloomington. The court-drawn map made this district bluer in 2011, but John Kline is fairly well entrenched here. District went from 48% Obama to 52% Obama in the court-drawn map. In this map, Obama also got 52% and Dem performance is 52%. Kline got 54% in 2012 but Dems didn’t put resources here and given the demographics of the district, we could put all of the resources we throw away trying to get rid of Bachmann into this district instead. It’s probably Lean R with Kline, but with resources invested and a great candidate, even with Kline this could be Tossup.

Twin Cities area up to St. Cloud

3rd District (Purple)

Western Hennepin County, Carver County, Western Wright County, St. Cloud

This is the first district that is dramatically different from the court map. Unfortunately, Erik Paulsen is a strong candidate and we’d need a wave to boot him. The court map made this district redder, going from 52% Obama to 51% Obama. Obama only got 51% in this map, so it’s redder still. Since Paulsen is so strong, and got 58% in 2012, this is Safe R.  If this was an open seat, Tossup.

4th District (Red)

Saint Paul, Maplewood, Washington, Chisago, Isanti Counties, extreme northern Anoka County

Betty McCollum would be kicking and screaming how screwed she got with this district, given her complaints that her district went from 64% Obama to 63% Obama in the court-drawn map. But I kept St. Paul whole and don’t really care for her self-interest. Even with all of that red added to the district in the northern parts, this is still 60% Obama and 59% Dem performance. This is still Safe D.

Minneapolis, St. Paul, & Inner Suburbs

5th District (Yellow)

Minneapolis, Robbinsdale, Maple Grove, Rogers, northeastern Wright County

Keith Ellison has been more willing to give up some Dem votes to help us out. I kept Minneapolis whole but went out to the northwest to grab some very red populated areas. The court-drawn map dropped Obama performance from 74% to 73% but this map drops it to 67%.  Dem performance is 66%. This is still Safe D.

6th District (Teal)

Northern Ramsey County, most of Anoka County, Brooklyn Park and Brooklyn Center in Hennepin County

Bye bye Michele Bachmann. This stays a northern Twin Cities Suburbs district, but takes in blue suburbs that aren’t really exurbs. The court-drawn map actually made this district redder, from 45% Obama to 43% Obama. Despite that, I was surprised that Bachmann barely scrapped by in 2012, winning by only around 4000 votes. This district is 52% Obama and 52% Dem performance. With Bachmann this is Likely D given her under-performance. Without her, it’s probably Lean D.

7th District (Grey)

Western Minnesota

Collin Peterson is undefeatable. He survived 2010 easily and got over 60% in this 47% Obama district in 2012. I’ve kept St. Cloud out of this district. The district actually is redder than it currently is, at 46% Obama. Dem performance is 47%. Peterson is safe here but should he retire this decade (which is probably likely), as long as the Dem candidate is from the more rural areas rather than the Fargo or Grand Forks suburbs in Minnesota, we’d have a fighting chance. Safe D with Peterson, Tossup otherwise.

8th District (Slate Blue)

Iron Range district, going west to pick up some bluer parts in the northwest.

Rick Nolan is a good fit for the district, and he’ll probably be here to stay through the decade despite being a bit old. This is a district that may be getting away from Democrats over time, so I’ve put some Indian Reservations in the northwest in here while trying to keep red areas out. The current district went for Obama by 53% in 2008. It’s actually 54% Obama now (because we took out Isanti and Chisago Counties, no doubt) and Rick Nolan easily beat Chip Cravaack in 2012 by 9 points. The district might give us trouble down the road in an open seat situation but for now it’s Safe D.

By my count:

Current Delegation is 5-3. This map would be 6-1-1 with the current delegation. MN-3 is the Republican district and MN-2 is the swing district. If all seats were open seats, we’re at 5-0-3.

County Splits:
Stearns (2 ways)
Dakota (2 ways)
Wright (2 ways)
Hennepin (4 ways)
Ramsey (2 ways)
Anoka (2 ways)
Sherburne (3 ways)

Update

So based on feedback about rules in MN, I've made some changes.

Statewide Redo

Metro Redo

1st: 51% O, 46% M, Likely D with Walz
2nd: 51% O, 47% M, Likely R with Kline, Toss-Up otherwise
3rd: 54% O, 44% M, Tilt (Lean?) D with Paulsen, Likely D otherwise
4th: 62% O, 36% M, Safe D
5th: 69% O, 29% M, Safe D
6th: 44% O, 54% M, Tilt R (Toss-up?) with Bachmann, Likely R otherwise
7th: 48% O, 50% M, Safe D with Petersen, Toss-Up otherwise
8th: 53% O, 45% M, Safe D with Nolan, Lean D otherwise

2nd contains Northfield and southern Washington County now
3rd contains all of Carver but also the bluest suburbs (Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center)
4th contains all of Ramsey and northern half of Washington County and southern parts of Chisago
5th grabs Minneapolis, a single Bloomington precint for population equity, red northwestern suburbs, and red parts of Blaine
6th has all of Wright, Isanti, and northern Chisago counties, St. Cloud area
Gave Alexandria and Douglas County to the 8th while giving the reservations back to the seventh.

County splits: Wadena, Stearns, Benton, Anoka, Chisago, Rice, Washington, Hennepin (twice)

6-2 Dem

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  In Colorado (0+ / 0-)

    I'm thinking the same thing.  Obama carried CO by almost 5%, yet congressional split remains 4-3 Republican.  Democrats took over state House, so now unified government.  Why not a little action here, specifically beefing up CO 6 with a few more Democrats from deep blue CO 1?  Coffman only won CO 6 by a little over 3%.

    I fear CO Dems are just too nice to do this.

    "A very popular error: having the courage of one's convictions; rather it is a matter of having the courage for an attack on one's convictions." -- Friedrich Nietzsche

    by John R on Sat Nov 17, 2012 at 04:03:56 PM PST

    •  Nah, there's a law against it. (0+ / 0-)
    •  The GOP tried it and failed (0+ / 0-)

      The CO Supreme Court ruled that under the state constitution redistricting can only happen once per decade despite the legislature's argument that a court-drawn map wasn't official without legislative approval. While things were a little fuzzy with Ken Salazar as the Dem AG refusing to defend the redistricting and instead suing the SoS, we'd be in the same position now with a Repub AG.

      Colorado's congressional map is about as good as it can get without some extremely weird looking district boundaries or some blowback from the mostly independent electorate. We used to have two safe Dem districts, two reliably conservative swing districts, one split as evenly as possible, and two safe GOP. Now Perlmutter owns his demographically swingy district, we still have two safe Dems and one safe GOP district is now a tossup. Of the two conservative swing districts, both have historically been GOP-held more often than not and the 4th will likely stay in Republican hands for a long time while Tipton in the 3rd is enough of a dipstick that we can potentially win with the right candidate.

      We're better off now than we used to be, so that's good enough for me.

  •  Either way, lets micro target Bachmann in 2014. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bill warnick

    Get 250 Kossacks quielty organized and boost them Dem turnout by 5%.

    She is a disgrace to the great state of MN.

  •  I don't think we need to re-gerrymander to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bill warnick

    get things to work in our favor.  The secret of Republican gerrymanders is that they count on low voter turnout and result in more purple (less Republican) districts.  In 2004 we were able to put Tom Delay's district into the Democratic column because of his own gerrymandering.  Sure, Republican gerrymander prevents us from winning when we get a slim 51% of the vote in an area, but if we can crank up turnout on our side and win say, 55% of the vote, we can defeat any Republican gerrymander.  To conclude, while gerrymanders do count as a headwind against us, all we need to do is convince an extra 4-5% of the voters to go to the polls and vote for us.  When the dust finally settles on the 2012 campaign, we will probably discover that what separates these results from a Democratic majority in the House is less than 100,000 votes across the entire country.

    The secret to our side in 2014 will not be about redrawing districts.  Instead we just need to campaign a little harder.

  •  Comments. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bumiputera

    You should have put those suburbs next-door to Minneapolis in the 2nd, and then put ruby-red Scott County in to your 3rd. that would improve our chances in the 2nd. Also, you might consider putting the city of Saint Cloud into the 8th, and putting more red territory into the 3rd from the 8th.

    Otherwise, not bad.

    Farm boy, 20, who hit the city to go to college, WI-03 (home, voting), WI-02 (college), -6.75, -3.18, "Everyone's better when everyone's better"- Paul Wellstone

    by WisJohn on Sun Nov 18, 2012 at 08:39:18 AM PST

  •  I appreciate your work (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WisJohn, bumiputera

    But I hate this map with a passion. On a deep, deep level.

    Too many unnecessary county Splits, and COIs are completely thrown out the window. Also, you are far to generous to the Democrats in your rankings.

    District 1: I don't mind taking the Rock/Pipestone areas out of the district, but they are so incredibly small they don't matter. Overall this is probably your "best" district. But if your goal is to capture district 2, you should have gotten Northfield in the district, instead of trying to protect Walz, who is perfectly fine in his current district.

    District 2: First, this district will never cross into Hennepin County. It simply would not even be a remote possibility in a Democratic gerrymander situation. As I said above, Northfield would be better than Wabasha in order to keep the PVI where it is. And Kline is not going to lose under the current lines, or these lines. He is just too popular

    District 3: This district is hideously ugly, and St. Louis Park and St. Cloud shouldn't be in the same sentence let alone the same district. Paulsen would probably do better in this district than his current district. He is safe either way. Plus, adding Wright and Carver Counties to the district increased the Republican bench exponentially. Getting way too cute here, it's best to keep MN-3 within Hennepin County and get rid of Paulsen than to try and get greedy to get a shot at 7 districts. Oh, Generic R would beat Generic D in this district.

    District 4: McCollum didn't complain about losing a percent in redistrict, she was livid about the fact that (blue) Stillwater was put in her district after she went on a 1-woman tirade against the bridge they are building there. McCollum will never show her face in that part of her district, and it has nothing to do with PVI. Also, Ramnsey County has NEVER been split in Minnesota's history, and it won't start now

    District 5: Ellison would be in serious trouble in this district. Not in a general election, but in a primary. He has tepid (at best) approval within Minneapolis, and outside of the city, he is viewed with antipathy. He also didn't gain any fans by being a complete a***e in his debate with Fields. Had this been in a less blue district, he would have lose because of his debate antics. Again, this is a case of making unnecessarily ugly districts for a faint hope of getting 7 districts

    District 6: Ramsey County won't be split, and no part of Hennepin County would ever be put with St. Paul suburbs. It's just a taboo, as there is a district Minneapolis vs. St. Paul mentality, even among those that live in the surrounding suburbs, as they identify with one city over the other. This is the same reason that Minneapolis and St. Paul would never be combined.

    District 7: Peterson would be fine, but I don't know why you found it pertinent to weaken this district to help out Walz. It wouldn't be toss-up if Peterson retires. In it's current form it wouldn't be a toss-up, and this version is more Republican

    District 8: Messing with district 8 isn't really necessary, as Cravaack's win was an anomaly. But if you wanted to "help" MN-8, adding the reservations near North Dakota isn't the way to do it. Essentially adding Beltrami + Reservations dooms MN-7 if Peterson retires. The better option is to pick up St. Cloud from the current MN-6 to toss out Isanti and Chisago Counties. This would probably require some jockying in MN-6 and MN-7 to make the population balance, but you can keep MN-8 safe while not throwing MN-7 under the bus by packing the 6th.

    Again, I know how much time and effort goes into this sort of thing, and we all appreciate the work you've done. I just can't see this map ending well for the DFL.

    •  thanks for your substantive comments (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bumiputera

      I very much appreciate you slamming the whole diary district by district in a very nice and substantive way :) Not being snarky at all here...do appreciate your feedback and will take it into account whenever I'm in the mood to do this again.

      But I'd just like to briefly use this to complain again about how the so-called rules in Minnesota hurt Democrats more than Republicans. Laying them out as I understand them:

      1) Not splitting Minneapolis or Saint Paul
      2) Furthermore, not even splitting Ramsey County
      3) District 2 cannot go into Hennepin County (though I can agree with you that this isn't a huge biggie since we can easily put Northfield here and the suburbs in northern Dakota County are growing and getting bluer)
      4) St. Cloud makes the most sense in MN-08 instead of MN-07. I don't know about that. MN-07 is more of a farm district and St. Cloud is surrounded by farming so it seems like all of the surrounding area really belows in MN-07 if anything. Most diaries I've seen have said MN-08 should have St. Cloud.

      •  Sorry if it came off as harsh (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        It really wasn't my intent. Here are some rules that 100% won't be broken, and some guidelines that will be followed as closely as possible. Minnesota just has a long history of good governance, and gerrymandering is, by definition, bad government.

        Rules:
        1. Rochester anchors the 1st
        2. Ramsey County (all) anchors the 4th
        3. Minneapolis (all) anchors the 5th
        4. Duluth/Iron Range anchors the 8th

        Guidelines:
        1. Metro/Outstate divides are respected to the best of mathematical ability
        2. Iron Range is incompatible with farmland
        3. Minimum county splits, and no more than 3 splits for county (and only 1 county split 3 ways max)
        4. Districts are visibly compact
        5. North Metro and South Metro are not to be in the same district (i.e. no Chisago to Dakota County districts)

      •  Oh, one more thought to point 4 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bumiputera

        If we are being honest with ourselves, St. Cloud belongs in MN-7. St. Cloud has much more in common with the western part of the state than the northeastern part of the state. It's just that putting in the 8th is advantageous for the Democrats, politically speaking. From a COI standpoint, it clearly belongs in MN-7.

        •  thanks for these points (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          OGGoldy

          It will be interesting to see how well these rules hold up if/when the state loses a seat in 2020. Your points and suggestions are very well taken. I attempted a re-do that should mostly pass this test.

          •  I look forward to seeing it. (0+ / 0-)
              •  Interesting (0+ / 0-)

                You did some things that I have never seen any one do before with their redistricting aps.

                District 1: This is very similar to the old version of the first district we saw pre-2002 in the :four corners" configuration. Walz wouldn't mind this district, although introducing himself to new voters would be a hassle. He wouldn't lose.

                District 2: You're being too generous with the Democratic rankings here. Dakota County is very marginal, as is southern Washington County, but words cannot describe how impenetrably red Scott County is. Any version of MN-2 with Scott County in it will start off as Lean R, even though the presidential numbers suggest an EVEN PVI, it's not that way down ballot, yet. I say "yet" because the south metro is one of the few areas in the state with a noticeable trend politically, and this one is in our favor. If you want to make MN-2 more competitive, perhaps include all of Washington County and dump Scott?

                3: You are underestimating Paulsen's strength, and Carver's staunch Republicanism. Paulsen won't be losing anything less than about a 57 or 58% Obama district. He really is that strong of an incumbent. His conservatism is well masked behind his nerdy persona, and Jim Ramstad's (his predecessor, and true moderate) full throated support. Also, none of the legislative Democrats in the blue areas you put in MN-3 (You put at least a dozen new ones) would ever vote to be in with Carver County. But even if it happened, Paulsen is Safe, and if he retires, this would be a toss-up at best. The area overall is much more Republican downballot than up ballot.

                4: I don't really see the leg up to Chisago County as necessary for anything. But I do like the overall compactness, just not the thumb in the eye of COIs

                5: This is the one area I have a huge issue with, and I would not be alone in that. Everything about this district is wrong. You split no fewer than 5 cities in Anoka County for no real reason. Maple Grove shouldn't be in with Minneapolis, and you'd get every Minneapolis representative (all 15 DFLers) to vote against that move.

                6: I see you really have a thing for getting rid of Bachmann. This district might do it, but what's the point? We would lose the district to ANY other Republican after 2 years. This seems to be the source of a lot of the ugliness in the other districts, and I don't see a 2 year rental as worth it. Plus, Bachmann's existence really is a HUGE fundraising boon to the DFL, and it keeps a lot of squishy voters in the fold by having her as a "boogie man".

                7: Geographically speaking, this district is huge. Fortunately Peterson is a licensed pilot and flies himself around his district to campaign. Peterson wouldn't lose the district, but by adding the SW corner of the state, it does dim the prospects of retaining it slightly when he retires. I am 99.99% sure you didn't do this intentionally, but it appears as though this district was modified specifically for Lyle Koenen. It'd be interesting if he ran for such a district, as he would be very strong. That being said, the groans the furthest left activists have for Peterson would be 10 times as loud for Koenen, trust me.

                8: I know what you're trying to do here, it's just that it isn't necessary. I know that you're doing everything in your power to move Chisago and Isanti Counties out of MN-8. But you probably actually hurt the Democrats by doing it this way. You added a BUNCH of farm land in with the Iron Range, and those two groups HATE eachother. This may not break out a civil war among the DFL, but it would be darn close. Also, the areas you added in Stearns County, Benton County and Todd County are as Republican if not more than Isanti and Chisago Counties.

                Overall, this is a much better map than the initial one, though.

                •  thanks for your observations (0+ / 0-)

                  My only nitpick is CD-05. This is the most democratic district in the state. Ideally I'd love to split Minneapolis but I get why that's not an option. But that means if we're going to spread some democratic votes, we have to get some red areas absorbed into the 5th. I tried to take the geographically closest red areas to Minneapolis and put it in the district.

                  But from what you say, and I have no reason to doubt you're wrong, all of the Democratic legislators would be completely against the 5th getting more Republican, whether it's getting those votes in NW Hennepin, straight north into Blaine, or SW Hennepin. So it seems like what you're saying is that we're really limited in what we can do because Democrats aren't willing to take on more Republican voters, even if they're in a 70% Obama district. That's really unfortunate.

                  I get that there's a good government concept here in the state and partisanship is frowned upon, but I suspect if we had an R trifect in the state, they'd minimally try to get Minneapolis and St. Paul in the same district as much as possible or take the Iron Range district and send it all the way to the western border instead of south. You might argue neither of those would fly, but given what the Rs did in Wisconsin, which is also a good governance state in general, I really would put it past the Rs in Minnesota.

                  •  The Republican legislature in Minnesota (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Glenn Magus Harvey

                    We should learn from their mistakes. The Republicans put.partisanship and pet projects in front of putting forth a budget and shut down the state. That did not end well for the Republican legislature next time they came up for reelection. And remember the backlash in Wisconsin when Republicans put up their pet projects instead of good governance, their majority got recalled. I really don't want to experience that from the other end.

                    One point I should add is not the partisan aspect of the maps, because most voters couldn't tell you if one particular suburb is Democratic or Republican. What they CAN tell is the cities that are similar culturally and economically. This plays into the socioeconomic communities of interest noteworthy than partisanship in the eye of the average Minnesotan. Putting Minnetonka with Plymouth makes sense to the average voter because they are seen as afluent suburbs. It doesn't matter that Minnetonka is fairly Democratic and Plymouth is fairly Republican. I hope that made sense, because I don't have a better way if explaining it.

                    One last note about redistricting, aesthetics matter for a cartographer. If you wanted to add some Republicans to MN-5, it may be more successful to keep the district geographically compact. Columbia Heights and Fridley make up the southern tail of Anoka County, but if you did something like extend the 5th straight north through spring lake park and blaine that would keep an overall rectangular shape, which is more palatable to voters looking at the map?

                    •  agreed (0+ / 0-)

                      Yes, so I just want to reiterate that this is simply an excersize and not something I'd personally push for because of the backlash. Completely agree with you Democrats would be out of power if they did this.

                      Yes, look at what happened in Wisconsin last year. But also look at what happened this year. They gerrymandered the districts on all three levels. They lost the senate for a few months (and the senate was out of session most of that time) and then got it back in November. And Sean Duffy is safer...even though he's a complete douch, his seat will probably always start out at Lean R instead of Tossup because of redistricting.

                      So my point is there is backlash, yes, but WI Republicans only really lost complete control for a few months at the expense of now having control, at least in the legislature and majority of CDs, until 2022.

                    •  Nobody really cares about gerrymandering though. (0+ / 0-)

                      As long as the DFL got everything else done, there wouldn't be any backlash just because they re-drew the district lines. It's definitely possible to fit redistricting and the budget into the same session so the DFL could easily avoid the 'pet projects before good government' label.

                      Also, I don't understand why there is always so much talk of these unwritten rules of MN district drawing. The fact is, we have no idea how the DFL would actually draw the districts if given the chance because we've had court drawn maps for 60 years. The reason for all of these rules is because that's what the court decided to do. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the DFL broke at least some of these rules if given the chance simply because the average voter doesn't base their vote on gerrymandering. In general, the only people who would care about gerrymandering are strong partisans and they mostly have already made up their minds about who to vote for.

                      22, Progressive Democrat, MN-08 (home), MN-05 (college)

                      by JonathanMN on Tue Nov 20, 2012 at 10:10:27 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

  •  People in northern (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OGGoldy

    Hennepin country  would absolutely hate being in a Minneapolis based district especially one with Keith Ellison being the representative. I can't imagine a single legislator (democrat or republican) from that area voting for this map. Its dead in the water because of that.

    •  The same goes (0+ / 0-)

      for the part of Wright county you put in the district. Minnesota isn't Pennsylvania or North Carolina. There is no history of gerrymandering in the state and legislators probably wouldn't start now because the gains wouldn't be all that great and they'd fear a backlash.

  •  If you want a remash of the state, (0+ / 0-)

    I think 6-2 is a better aim, eliminating Paulsen while saving Peterson's district.

    My most recent iteration:
    Photobucket

    This dramatically refigures all districts, with generally positive results. Walz retains most of his territory while taking in Kline's Dem territory. Ramsey and Minneapolis are kept whole and Paulsen gets his conservative territory taken away. Bachmann gets kicked out of the inner suburbs, taking in rural voters who might just boot her in a primary. This aims to help the 7th, which loses its worst territory; this reformation could cause Peterson to retire, and this iteration might just elect another Dem. Nolan is given a sizable boost. Kline's district is obliterated, but he is given a suburbs district where he would have a 4:1 current territory advantage over Paulsen in a primary.

    The Obama 08 %s (vs 2000s districts, vs 2010s districts):
    1: 52.4% (+1.4%,+1.6%)
    2: 44.6% (-3.7%,-5.9%)
    3: 57.3% (+5.1%,+6.3%)
    4: 62.9% (-1.5%,+0.3%)
    5: 68.2% (-5.9%,-5.3%)
    6: 41.0% (-3.7%,-2.3%)
    7: 50.3% (+2.9%,+3.2%)
    8: 55.0% (+1.9%,+1.9%)

    While I don't think this is politically feasible, I think it would work, and is a fairly clean map, only splitting 6 counties (Stearns and Sherburne are split solely for the purpose of keeping St. Cloud whole). I think Paulsen is doomed, either in his 57% Obama district, or against Kline in a primary; this could force a gubernatorial/senatorial run, though Kline might be so inclined as well and leave the seat open (who knows, maybe Bachmann too). My guess as to the primary objections: 1st going into Dakota, too much farm in 8th and sprawling 7th.

    ME-01 (college) ID-01 (home) -9.85, -3.85

    by GoUBears on Mon Nov 19, 2012 at 07:28:37 PM PST

    •  wow-that is different (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GoUBears

      Another objection is that you split Hennepin into 3 districts when it can be done in 2, I think.

      I think Eden Prairie is located in your purple district, and that's where Paulsen lives. It would be tough for him but from other comments I get, he's not a guaranteed goner in your 3rd. Probably toss-up with him and lean D without him.

      But I do like seeing new ideas and this is a very interesting take

    •  The biggest issue with this map (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GoUBears

      Is that fact that you really only have 1 true outstate district. (8). The metro/outstate divide is huge culturally, and snaking 1 and 7 into the suburbs would tick off a lot of people.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site