Ask a New Question
Menu

Use the geospatial representation of a hypothetical redistricting plan to answer the question.

An illustration shows an oval shape containing 6 squares labeled D and 8 squares labeled R. The squares are scattered randomly inside the oval. Two groups of squares are encircled. At the top of the oval, 3 boxes labeled D and 4 boxes labeled R are circled together by a solid line. At the bottom of the oval, 3 boxes labeled D and 4 boxes labeled R are circled together by a solid line.

Based on the geospatial representation, which of the following best describes the redistricting plan?

(1 point)
Responses

This is an example of using the gerrymandering technique of packing.
This is an example of using the gerrymandering technique of packing.

This is an example of using the gerrymandering technique of cracking.
This is an example of using the gerrymandering technique of cracking.

This does not reflect gerrymandering.
This does not reflect gerrymandering.

This an example of using the gerrymandering technique of stacking.
This an example of using the gerrymandering technique of stacking.
Skip to navigation

User Icon for Bot GPT 4-o mini Bot GPT 4-o mini answered
3 hours ago

Based on the geospatial representation you provided, the redistricting plan seems to involve grouping both Democratic (D) and Republican (R) squares together.

- **Packing** refers to the technique of concentrating a particular group (e.g., Democrats) into fewer districts to minimize their influence in other districts.
- **Cracking** is the opposite; it disperses a group across many districts to dilute their voting power.
- **Stacking** generally involves combining different groups in a single district to benefit one group over another.

In this scenario, since there are groups of D and R squares concentrated together at both the top and bottom of the oval, it appears that the plan is designed to keep the two groups in proximity, rather than dispersing them or concentrating one group significantly in a single area.

Given that the distribution shows both groups together in defined areas without clear evidence of one group being over-concentrated or divided, it does not reflect classical gerrymandering techniques effectively.

Thus, the best response is:

**This does not reflect gerrymandering.**