@knassre.bsky.social
Software engineer, electoral geography hobbyist, and puggle-lover.
Basically, all of these people are on the "DO NOT PRIMARY" list, unless they just suck TOO MUCH. Golden was getting there, but he's not running again anyways.
November 13, 2025 at 11:30 AM
Basically, all of these people are on the "DO NOT PRIMARY" list, unless they just suck TOO MUCH. Golden was getting there, but he's not running again anyways.
Besides VLADAMIR GOD DAMN PUTIN? Let's not forget this gem of a photo:
November 12, 2025 at 7:18 AM
Besides VLADAMIR GOD DAMN PUTIN? Let's not forget this gem of a photo:
Not exactly. There have been proposal maps circulated which are 10-1, but still have 2 districts that reliably elect an African American (in this map, the 3rd/4th).
Also, the VRA is gonezo next year anyways.
Also, the VRA is gonezo next year anyways.
November 9, 2025 at 4:10 AM
Not exactly. There have been proposal maps circulated which are 10-1, but still have 2 districts that reliably elect an African American (in this map, the 3rd/4th).
Also, the VRA is gonezo next year anyways.
Also, the VRA is gonezo next year anyways.
Can go even crazier if the VRA is out the window...
November 5, 2025 at 8:44 AM
Can go even crazier if the VRA is out the window...
Latest count, Spanaberger did a bit better. Its just that polling in New Jersey continues a recent tradition of being ATROCIOUSLY wrong.
November 5, 2025 at 5:49 AM
Latest count, Spanaberger did a bit better. Its just that polling in New Jersey continues a recent tradition of being ATROCIOUSLY wrong.
CA-11 is one of the easier ones: it is all of SF except for two chunks:
- Oceanview
- Everything beneath the intersection of 280 and 101.
Also, anyone can look up 'what district am I in'.
- Oceanview
- Everything beneath the intersection of 280 and 101.
Also, anyone can look up 'what district am I in'.
November 1, 2025 at 7:29 PM
CA-11 is one of the easier ones: it is all of SF except for two chunks:
- Oceanview
- Everything beneath the intersection of 280 and 101.
Also, anyone can look up 'what district am I in'.
- Oceanview
- Everything beneath the intersection of 280 and 101.
Also, anyone can look up 'what district am I in'.
In the name of minimizing eye-bleeding, here is a variant of that same map but with some of the borders between 3/4/5/7/10 adjusted to make the shapes marginally less heinous, and also to have slightly more logical groupings of communities. 3/5 get a bit less safe, but it's marginal.
October 31, 2025 at 7:57 AM
In the name of minimizing eye-bleeding, here is a variant of that same map but with some of the borders between 3/4/5/7/10 adjusted to make the shapes marginally less heinous, and also to have slightly more logical groupings of communities. 3/5 get a bit less safe, but it's marginal.
This is what I've drawn. Its ugly as sin (could be a lot worse), but it's a very robust 9-2 Dem. All 9 seats voted D in 2021, and only 4 of them were close (1, 2, 5, 7, which are all red or swing districts in the current map), though another 3. Partisanship shown in 2020 vs 2021.
October 31, 2025 at 7:37 AM
This is what I've drawn. Its ugly as sin (could be a lot worse), but it's a very robust 9-2 Dem. All 9 seats voted D in 2021, and only 4 of them were close (1, 2, 5, 7, which are all red or swing districts in the current map), though another 3. Partisanship shown in 2020 vs 2021.
But that kind of regional political identity is kinda dead in this era. Back then, rurals/cities/suburbs regularly voted pretty uniformly for the same candidate. For example:
October 28, 2025 at 6:29 AM
But that kind of regional political identity is kinda dead in this era. Back then, rurals/cities/suburbs regularly voted pretty uniformly for the same candidate. For example:
Ehh... I can do a bit better:
October 24, 2025 at 1:45 AM
Ehh... I can do a bit better:
Yeah, when I have a go at VA, mine are a lot uglier, but then again mine are also probably more robust:
October 24, 2025 at 1:29 AM
Yeah, when I have a go at VA, mine are a lot uglier, but then again mine are also probably more robust:
A hypothetical example (district map, county lines, municipal borders)
October 17, 2025 at 3:38 AM
A hypothetical example (district map, county lines, municipal borders)
If the VRA is gone, you can do a lot better than that:
October 16, 2025 at 3:21 PM
If the VRA is gone, you can do a lot better than that:
We have that in a few cities/states for local elections For example:
- New York City uses that for the mayoral PRIMARY elections
- San Francisco uses it for the mayoral general election
- Alaska & Maine use it statewide for everything (general election)
- Some others have it, some states BAN it
- New York City uses that for the mayoral PRIMARY elections
- San Francisco uses it for the mayoral general election
- Alaska & Maine use it statewide for everything (general election)
- Some others have it, some states BAN it
October 12, 2025 at 3:14 PM
We have that in a few cities/states for local elections For example:
- New York City uses that for the mayoral PRIMARY elections
- San Francisco uses it for the mayoral general election
- Alaska & Maine use it statewide for everything (general election)
- Some others have it, some states BAN it
- New York City uses that for the mayoral PRIMARY elections
- San Francisco uses it for the mayoral general election
- Alaska & Maine use it statewide for everything (general election)
- Some others have it, some states BAN it
Really, where in this clause does it say "The Senate cannot table nominations."
October 12, 2025 at 3:06 PM
Really, where in this clause does it say "The Senate cannot table nominations."
I mean come on...that's only ONE THIRD of the population eligible to vote in the Democratic primary, and she one with ONE THIRD of the vote.
People stayed home, and those who turned out were divided so she won. There was no malicious candidate choice here, just voters being bad at their job:
People stayed home, and those who turned out were divided so she won. There was no malicious candidate choice here, just voters being bad at their job:
October 1, 2025 at 11:27 PM
I mean come on...that's only ONE THIRD of the population eligible to vote in the Democratic primary, and she one with ONE THIRD of the vote.
People stayed home, and those who turned out were divided so she won. There was no malicious candidate choice here, just voters being bad at their job:
People stayed home, and those who turned out were divided so she won. There was no malicious candidate choice here, just voters being bad at their job:
It's sadly not even that hard to do :(
Partisanship is shown using presedential 2024 numbers, though other races tell similar stories. If you use gubernatorial races, then Democrats start winning some more & making the rest competitive, but that's not a realistic benchmark to use.
Partisanship is shown using presedential 2024 numbers, though other races tell similar stories. If you use gubernatorial races, then Democrats start winning some more & making the rest competitive, but that's not a realistic benchmark to use.
September 27, 2025 at 3:18 AM
It's sadly not even that hard to do :(
Partisanship is shown using presedential 2024 numbers, though other races tell similar stories. If you use gubernatorial races, then Democrats start winning some more & making the rest competitive, but that's not a realistic benchmark to use.
Partisanship is shown using presedential 2024 numbers, though other races tell similar stories. If you use gubernatorial races, then Democrats start winning some more & making the rest competitive, but that's not a realistic benchmark to use.
Since there is talk of pressure on NH governor to gerrymander for the GOP, I wondered what's the worst they can do. The answer: pretty freaking bad. Yes, this is contiguous. The red district voted for Trump by 11% in '24, and by 6.2% in '20. A Democrat would struggle to win this even in a blue wave.
September 20, 2025 at 12:11 AM
Since there is talk of pressure on NH governor to gerrymander for the GOP, I wondered what's the worst they can do. The answer: pretty freaking bad. Yes, this is contiguous. The red district voted for Trump by 11% in '24, and by 6.2% in '20. A Democrat would struggle to win this even in a blue wave.
This makes sense. It is a part of California that has a lot of down-ballot red history, so it makes sense it would be less elastic and prone to big swings. It's literally at the core of the new Kim/Calvert district used as a GOP vote sink in the CA gerrymander plan.
August 27, 2025 at 5:58 AM
This makes sense. It is a part of California that has a lot of down-ballot red history, so it makes sense it would be less elastic and prone to big swings. It's literally at the core of the new Kim/Calvert district used as a GOP vote sink in the CA gerrymander plan.
Here's an example that adds SIX blue seats (instead of 5), and makes ALL the blue seats (existing, vulnerable, and new) non-competitive. However, this violates the VRA in more ways than I can count (only 10 districts are majority-Latino, and NONE are majority-black or majority-asian).
August 22, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Here's an example that adds SIX blue seats (instead of 5), and makes ALL the blue seats (existing, vulnerable, and new) non-competitive. However, this violates the VRA in more ways than I can count (only 10 districts are majority-Latino, and NONE are majority-black or majority-asian).
Ugh... I just submitted a revised version of their draft map where I moved around the boundary between #1/#2, #18/#22, and #48#/50/#51/#52, and #40/#47 to make the 1st, 22nd and 48th easier flips and 47th an easier hold. I feel dirty, but if we're doin this we might as well do it RIGHT.
August 19, 2025 at 1:07 PM
Ugh... I just submitted a revised version of their draft map where I moved around the boundary between #1/#2, #18/#22, and #48#/50/#51/#52, and #40/#47 to make the 1st, 22nd and 48th easier flips and 47th an easier hold. I feel dirty, but if we're doin this we might as well do it RIGHT.
It's a ragebait article. Read this key detail:
August 18, 2025 at 12:55 PM
It's a ragebait article. Read this key detail:
It's a ragebait headline. Read this key detail:
August 18, 2025 at 12:55 PM
It's a ragebait headline. Read this key detail:
This configuration is a bit of a better balance between considerations. Its MUCH more compact, but the 2nd blue district is extremely competitive and only fits under a looser interpretation of the VRA section 2:
- 44.7% AA, 45.5% white
- Clinton +4.4
- Biden +5.4
- Harris +1.4
- 44.7% AA, 45.5% white
- Clinton +4.4
- Biden +5.4
- Harris +1.4
August 17, 2025 at 6:09 PM
This configuration is a bit of a better balance between considerations. Its MUCH more compact, but the 2nd blue district is extremely competitive and only fits under a looser interpretation of the VRA section 2:
- 44.7% AA, 45.5% white
- Clinton +4.4
- Biden +5.4
- Harris +1.4
- 44.7% AA, 45.5% white
- Clinton +4.4
- Biden +5.4
- Harris +1.4
There's even a mathematical way to describe point #1: declination. Here is one map drew for California (it's MUCH uglier than the new map, but its much more aggressive as well), and the partisanship of every single seat (using CA Gov 2022 as a proxy for pres 2024)
August 16, 2025 at 7:52 PM
There's even a mathematical way to describe point #1: declination. Here is one map drew for California (it's MUCH uglier than the new map, but its much more aggressive as well), and the partisanship of every single seat (using CA Gov 2022 as a proxy for pres 2024)