• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Caprice's Maps and What-Not

sh1982.png

Michigan State House districts in use for the 1980s reapportionment decade. Depending on definitions, this might be the first fully reformed apportionment, as the 1964 and 1972 reapportionments had somewhat different rules.
 
I just take the blank maps, copy them into Paint.Net, increase the contrast to maximum and lower the brightness to usually about 63% - that's a good way to get hard black lines, but as I say it tends to mess up things like numbers a bit.
1596129297432.png
My lines are perfectly aliased, though; I just have the white pixel-thick borders for a dual purpose: to better show district boundaries in cases where the subdivisions are mapped, and to better show the district labels and boundaries against one another when the district is filled with a dark color. For example, here's what the map would look like without them (and with unopposed districts in the darkest shade, to better show how districts look in the darkest shade):
1596129971864.png
 
I think lightening the blue colour scheme would make the black borders and numbers more legible - that seems to be what makes them difficult to see.
 
View attachment 23378
My lines are perfectly aliased, though; I just have the white pixel-thick borders for a dual purpose: to better show district boundaries in cases where the subdivisions are mapped, and to better show the district labels and boundaries against one another when the district is filled with a dark color. For example, here's what the map would look like without them (and with unopposed districts in the darkest shade, to better show how districts look in the darkest shade):
View attachment 23380
Oh I see, I didn't realise it was deliberate. I can see the argument for that, but the problem is it immediately makes it look like an aliased jpeg when your eyes are used to seeing that.

I usually do black borders but light green numbers so they stand out.
 
Numbers with the white outline and borders without could work?
I tried that really early on, but for congressional elections the white county borders ended up standing out more than the congressional district borders, so I added the outlines to the districts to make them hopefully stand out even more.
 
I've been recently thinking about a rather absurd scenario. Something something tortured metaphor. But here goes:

2017-2021: Donald Trump/Mike Pence (Republican)
2016: def. Hillary Clinton/Tim Kaine (Democratic)
2021-2025: Hillary Clinton/Tulsi Gabbard (Democratic)
2020: def. Donald Trump/Mike Pence (Republican)
2025-2029: Hillary Clinton/Sherrod Brown (Democratic)
2024: def. Mike Pence/Tom Cotton (Republican)
2029-2033: Cory Booker/Sherrod Brown (Democratic)
2028: def. Mike Pence/Tom Cotton (Republican), various Democratic splinters
2033-2037: Cory Booker/Lisa Madigan (Democratic)
2032: def. Beto O'Rourke/Todd Smola (Democratic)
2037-2045: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez/Susan Rubio (Democratic)
2036: def. Tom Cotton/Chris Sununu (Republican)
2040: def. scattered opponents

2045-49: Barron Trump/someone not important yet (Democratic)
2044: def. three other Democrats who I can't be bothered to figure out

Credit goes to the OFC Discord for helping me figure out some of these people.
 
In 1788, Massachusetts chose presidential electors for the first time. Each voter chose two candidates for elector in his district, and then the General Court selected one of the top two finishers. This meant that I had to map a non-partisan, two-winner election. I decided to do maps for any candidate who won a town, because this happened to directly correspond to any candidate that got more then ten votes.

This is one of eight Congressional districts.

pres-dist1.png

Results by town:
1601840857974.png
 
Last edited:
Back
Top