Alternate Electoral Maps

Discussion in 'Alternate History Maps and Graphics' started by Tayya, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. Utgard96 The International Finance Arse

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Location:
    The Rape Capital of Europe
    To go with this (posting here because it isn't an OTL map, strictly speaking), I thought I'd illustrate just how malapportioned this map is by making a complement map of what Berlin and Brandenburg, probably the most malapportioned region next to the Rhineland, would look like with roughly equal constituency sizes. I based this on 1910 census data, with population figures cited in the 1920 Greater Berlin Act used for subdivisions of the city of Berlin itself as it stood pre-1920 as I couldn't find any other data for that.

    For a start, while I can sort of believe the original apportionment in 1866 was fair according to the standards of the time, by 1910, Berlin/Brandenburg was short of several seats compared to what they ought to have by a Hare calculation. Whereas in actuality Berlin had six seats and Brandenburg 20, according to their populations, Berlin should've had 12 (fully twice the number they had!) and Brandenburg 24.

    If Brandenburg wasn't that dangerously off in pure number of seats, the actual population of each individual one tells a different story. The smallest constituency was Ostprignitz (coterminous with the Landkreis of the same name) with 64,901 inhabitants, while the largest by far was the constituency covering Teltow and Beeskow-Storckow (the southern Berlin suburbs plus a hefty chunk of countryside for good measure) with 1,314,576 inhabitants. Yes, really. A twenty-to-one margin. It got particularly egregious after 1900 as more and more cities became kreisfrei (administratively independent from the Landkreise that formed the definitions of the constituencies), and yet nothing was changed regarding the actual electoral boundaries.

    So, a few things became clear: there needed to be more constituencies created in suburban Berlin, but more than that, there were also too many rural seats for good measure. I set a 2:1 ratio as the minimum, which is ridiculously generous by today's (Western) standards but would probably have been in line with expectations at the time. Most of the rural constituencies in Bezirk Potsdam fit the bill, so all I did there was merge the two Prignitz districts together and merge Oberbarnim with whatever would be left of Niederbarnim (the district containing Berlin's northern suburbs). In Bezirk Frankfurt, I shifted the Cottbus seat to the north by replacing Kreis Spremberg with Kreis Lübben, moving Spremberg to the Sorau-Forst seat (which brought it over the minimum quota), then split Crossen-Züllichau-Schwiebus between Guben and Sternberg and similarly split Landsberg-Soldin between Königsberg (Neumark) and Arnswalde-Friedeberg. This actually left it with one seat more than its Hare entitlement (8 rather than 7), but I decided that probably wouldn't be inconsistent with actual practice and decided to make up for it by making larger constituencies in suburban Berlin.

    Speaking of which, I immediately noticed that Schöneberg almost exactly fit the quota, so that became a seat to itself. Charlottenburg initially seemed about the right size to split down the middle, but that left Spandau without a logical way to get up to quota, so keeping in mind the need to have larger seats here anyway, I took off the western third of Charlottenburg (the bits west and north of the Ringbahn, as I decided) and merged it with Spandau, leaving the rest as its own seat. A bit crude, but it's basically how the present-day Bundestag seats work. Wilmersdorf fit the quota with Grunewald, Schmargendorf and Friedenau (basically the small bits around it) added on, so I didn't look the gift horse in the mouth.

    I initially experimented with lopping off a third of Neukölln's population onto a Treptow-Köpenick seat, but a combination of the increasing ridiculousness of that and the awkward half-seat left in the north by a similar Lichtenberg-Weißensee combination meant I abandoned that idea and left Neukölln unchanged, straddling the upper limit of acceptable size. Instead I merged Lichtenberg and Treptow - an awkward combination to say the least, but it made the numbers add up. That pretty much left two big seats, one in the north and one in the south, each one made up of roughly the urbanised area (going partly off populations and partly off what areas gained a "Berlin-" before their official names from 1912), and of course finally the remainders of the Teltow-Beeskow and Barnim seats.

    (Sorry for the word salad, fellow non-Germans, but it's very hard to explain this without it)

    What of Berlin itself, you ask? Well, when Greater Berlin was created in 1920, it was divided into six Bezirke (districts or boroughs - a further 14 of them were created from areas annexed to the city then), each one of roughly equal size. These were Mitte, Tiergarten, Wedding, Prenzlauer Tor (later Prenzlauer Berg), Friedrichshain and Hallesches Tor (later Kreuzberg). You can imagine how useful this was to me - I just split each one in half (roughly, according to my eyeball measurements), and done. This ironically meant keeping two of six Berlin seats almost unchanged, and shifting a third only slightly to the southeast, while the remaining three were redivided into nine new ones.

    wk-alt-brandenburg.png
     
  2. Alex Richards The Psephological Hulk Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Empire of Nova Elysium
    Oh that's absolutely magnificent Max.
     
    Damian0358 and Utgard96 like this.
  3. Nanwe Latte Liberal

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Location:
    Maastricht, NL/Alcalá de Henares, ES
    Indeed, this is a thing of beauty. Would Max dare to do a FPTP map for the Weimar Republic based on those calculations? Or is that too much asking?
     
    Damian0358 and Utgard96 like this.
  4. Utgard96 The International Finance Arse

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Location:
    The Rape Capital of Europe
    I have absolutely no way of saying how most of these seats would've voted, but safe bet that most of the added ones would go SPD.

    It would be a massive undertaking, but I could probably reapportion the entire country according to 1910 population data if I wanted to - gemeindeverzeichnis.de is a godsend for stuff like this.
     
    Damian0358, Puget Sound and Nanwe like this.
  5. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    It's 2020, Trump's approval rating is hovering around 25-30% after a recession, a failed second GOP healthcare bill, and evidence implicating him in the Russian election meddling scandal, Mitt Romney challenges him for the GOP nomination but narrowly loses. in the general election Trump faces off against the Democratic ticket of Steve Bullock/Cory Booker and the third party conservative ticket, Evan McMullin/ Mitt Romney. polls throughout the campaign show Trump trailing badly behind Bullock, with some polls even putting him in third place behind McMullin. in the end Trump wins only 5 states (Tennessee and Alabama are won by razor thin margins) and 25% of the popular vote, barely clinging to second place and only beating McMullin by 1.2%. Bullock wins 38 states and 45% of the popular vote. Democrats take back the Senate and expand their majority in the House (which they took back in 2018)

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    And the county map (keep in mind many counties are won with ~30-35% of the vote, which is why some results are a bit wacky)

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Bjornhattan Stuck in GMT

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2014
    Location:
    Tynedale
    That's a Bullock win in NE-02 by the looks of it, but who won NE-01 and NE-03? Looks like 3 went for McMullin but 1 looks like a photo finish between Bullock and McMullin.
     
  8. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    McMullin wins Nebraska CD-3 60%-30%-10%, Bullock wins Nebraska CD-2 45%-35%-20%, and McMullin wins Nebraska CD-1 by about 300 votes over Steve Bullock, with Trump again coming in third.
     
    Bjornhattan likes this.
  9. wolfram Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Being excessively parochial:
    I can't see Montgomery County going Democratic - even if Trump's 2016 voters were halved, he'd still be ahead by a decent margin. I suspect that Trump would narrowly win there, but I could see McMullin getting it.
    Generally I think McMullin would do better in West Texas - bidness-Republican places like Lubbock and Midland, for example - and worse in the East, which is Trump territory through and through.
     
  10. Bjornhattan Stuck in GMT

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2014
    Location:
    Tynedale
    Might Bullock be blue doggy enough to pull potential Trump voters away though?
     
  11. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    I think so, plus on top of being moderate, Bullock has the whole cowboy/western thing going for him because he's from Montana, which certainly helps him in the West and parts of Texas.
     
    Bjornhattan likes this.
  12. wolfram Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Right, but Bullock pulling away Trump voters would make McMullin's situation relatively better. I'm not saying that the counties that went to Bullock wouldn't - if anything, I think he underperformed in places like Foard County - but I think that some of those red counties like Ector might turn green.
     
  13. Chairwoman Roxelana Footstool Empress

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2010
    Location:
    Land of Maps and Conlangs
    How did you figure out the county map?
     
  14. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017

    It's a mixture. I gave Bullock most counties where Clinton got at least 35% of the vote, I gave McMullin counties where third parties have done well in the past (as well as counties where he's a uniquely good fit in Utah and Idaho), and I gave Trump the most Trumpian counties in the US, if that makes sense.
     
  15. Pericles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2013
    1968 with Reagan as GOP nominee
    [​IMG]

    Ronald Reagan/George Romney-Republican: 336 EV 46.03%
    Hubert Humphrey/Ed Muskie-Democratic: 163 44.52%
    George Wallace/Curtis LeMay-American Independent: 39 EV 9.02%
     
    RightTosser likes this.
  16. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    I'm pretty sure Reagan would get over 50% in California and Washington. Also why does Humphrey win Vermont?
     
  17. jonnguy2016 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Capture.JPG
     

    Attached Files:

  18. Tex Arkana Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2017
    Interesting how Johnson wins 33 states but only 287 electoral votes.
     
    Pokemon Master likes this.
  19. naraht Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Which Montgomery County? Montgomery County, Maryland (the one just north of DC) is going for the person with a D next to their name under almost *any* circumstances...
     
    wolfram likes this.
  20. naraht Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Democratic counties coast to coast?

    Does anyone have a feeling for how much this (or any recent election) would have to shift for a path of counties won by the Democrats would go from the Atlantic to the Pacific?
     
    Bjornhattan likes this.