Alternate Electoral Maps III

[Nicky99]

2019 USA General Election

Big fan of these kind of UK US combos, so much so I made some maps like yours for previous elections in the past 10 years. Hope you don't mind, though imitation is the sincerest form of flattery .

2017:

2015:

and 2010:

Again, hope you're fine with it, just had a bit of free time on my hands and thought it'll be interesting to see how your idea could be developed on.

 

[Amateur Psephologist]

here's my take

 

[EYates]

My take on USA as UK:

I used a d’hondy calculator to work out who what have how many seats:

UK Party	UK Seats	USA Party	USA Seats
Conservative	365	Conservative	247
Labour	202	Progressive	137
SNP	48	Dixie	32
Liberal Democratic	11	Liberal	7
DUP	8	Hispanic Unionist	5
Sinn Fein	7	Mexican Unionist	4
Plaid Cymru	4	New England Independence	2
SDLP	2	Democratic Hispanic Union	1

 

[eadmund]

Does anyone have updated demographic (economics, education, etc.) data for the new North Carolina districts? I've been searching but all sites I can find (including the U.S. census website) are using the old districts or the new districts with old data.

 

[Amateur Psephologist]

Does anyone have updated demographic (economics, education, etc.) data for the new North Carolina districts? I've been searching but all sites I can find (including the U.S. census website) are using the old districts or the new districts with old data.

davesredistricting.org has some demographic information for the new north carolina districts

 

[eadmund]

davesredistricting.org has some demographic information for the new north carolina districts

Unfortunately it appears to only cover ethnicity.

 

[Oliver]

If England used party-list PR to elect its members to the House of Commons, with ceremonial counties serving as multi-seat constituencies (except for the Isle of Wight which only elects a single member). I used the D'Hondt method of seat distribution, with a 5% threshold on the constituency level.

The seat distribution would be as follows (changes compared to OTL):
Conservative: 281 (–64)
Labour: 193 (+13)
LibDem: 53 (+46)
Brexit: 5 (+5)
Green: 1 (=)

The Gallagher index of this distribution would be 5.1, down from 14.9 in OTL, which means it would be significantly more proportional. But then, that's the whole point of PR.

 

[King Jasper]

If England used party-list PR to elect its members to the House of Commons, with ceremonial counties serving as multi-seat constituencies (except for the Isle of Wight which only elects a single member). I used the D'Hondt method of seat distribution, with a 5% threshold on the constituency level.

View attachment 602475

The seat distribution would be as follows (changes compared to OTL):
Conservative: 281 (–64)
Labour: 193 (+13)
LibDem: 53 (+46)
Brexit: 5 (+5)
Green: 1 (=)

The Gallagher index of this distribution would be 5.1, down from 14.9 in OTL, which means it would be significantly more proportional. But then, that's the whole point of PR.

What about the entire UK?

 

[Oliver]

What about the entire UK?

I wasn't sure about how to carve Scotland, Wales and NI up into multi-seat constituencies since their constituencies aren't neatly grouped in ideally-sized counties as those in England are.

 

[EYates]

Wales and Scotland you could use the devolved Parliment list areas, Northern Ireland you can kinda group a few seats together, Belfast, down, Antrim, are the easiest but the reat is all a bit muddled

 

[CobaltChloride]

Wales and Scotland you could use the devolved Parliment list areas, Northern Ireland you can kinda group a few seats together, Belfast, down, Antrim, are the easiest but the reat is all a bit muddled

I'd imagine if a PR system were to be adopted, the UK government would probably consider keeping all Northern Ireland as one multi-member constituency. Not to mention it'd be easier.

 

[Oliver]

Here's Wales, with constituencies based on (groups of) preserved counties.

Labour: 18 (–4)
Conservative: 16 (+2)
Plaid Cymru: 3 (–1)
Brexit: 2 (+2)
LibDem: 1 (+1)

 

[eadmund]

Democratic-Farmer-Labor — 231 seats, 48.4%
Leader: David Bonior (Warren)
Ideology: Social democracy, democratic socialism, labor unionism, populism

Liberal-Conservative — 201 seats, 46.0%
Leader: Rodney Frelinghuysen (Morristown—Parsippany)
Ideology: Conservatism, liberal conservatism, conservative liberalism, classical liberalism

Parti Louisianais — 3 seats, 0.6%
Leader: Edwin Edwards (Lafayette—Lake Charles)
Ideology: Louisianan Francophone interests, pork barrel-ism

Feel free to ask any questions you may have.

full version here

 

[Pokemon Master]

I'm having a hard time believing cities like Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle would vote for conservatives.

 

[Paraiba]

I'm having a hard time believing cities like Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle would vote for conservatives.

For me, it's mainly Chicago due to it being a industrial-ish city.

 

[eadmund]

I'm having a hard time believing cities like Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle would vote for conservatives.

The way Chicago is gerrymandered leaves Chicago with only two lower-income districts. San Francisco (and the surrounding area) and Seattle are both very wealthy and therefore under the criteria I used for determining party affiliation are conservative.

This Labor party is not so much the UK Labour Party transplanted to America as it is a (farmer-)labor party within an American context. It’s very populist - I’m imagining OTL Washington Republican Linda Smith as a former leader here - and in the tradition of the paranoid style.

edit: swapped Illinois's 7th following a quick review of Illinois district demographics, but otherwise for Chicago I think my choices hold up.

 

[EYates]

Jessie Jackson wins the Democratic 1988 primaries

 

[HorizonFalling]

View attachment 602730

Sorry, what exactly is this supposed to be of and what are your criteria?

 

[eadmund]

Sorry, what exactly is this supposed to be of and what are your criteria?

It's a parliamentary U.S. with a different party system.

For the most part it can be summed up as affluent districts go Conservative (in some areas this is 'more affluent than the regional average'), poorer ones go Labor.

 

[HorizonFalling]

It's a parliamentary U.S. with a different party system.

For the most part it can be summed up as affluent districts go Conservative (in some areas this is 'more affluent than the regional average'), poorer ones go Labor.

Hmm. Maybe I just don't think it's realistic that the parties are divided exactly on class lines and every single other issue is entirely glossed over. With parties that have these ideologies I agree that you would see a stronger force from the rural left and more urban liberals breaking for the LibCons, but that just overgeneralises how people vote.
Although I don't want to get into current politics, I need examples so here goes. You have the district of Ilhan Omar, one of the most recognisable figures in the OTL Democratic Party's left-wing and an anathema to the broad right of US politics being won by a LibCon member, but the district of rep-elect Lauren Boebert (who is anything but that) being won over by the DFL. There are other factors at play besides how much money someone has. IMO something that looks like the results of the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections by congressional district (but with more Dem support in West Virginia and the Rust Belt) or the results of the 1984 or 1988 elections by district (but with generally more Democratic support across the board) would be more accurate. I like the idea of reorienting the parties, I just don't think you can only divide it along class lines.