Red state Blue state

Post Reply New Topic

Why were political colors changed here in the US? Previously red was used for the democrats and blue for the republicans but then in the last 30 or so years, this was switched. It makes no sense considering that red is the symbol for left leaning politics.

Can anyone weigh in with some info?

Maybe because democrat-controlled states being red states is a little to close to the truth?

Apparently it came to uniform use during the 2000 election on electoral maps. Before that it was interchangeable. There is no real meaning behind it.

I think most Democrats would probably want to distance themselves from something that could get them labeled a socialist or worse yet a communist too.

Brings an ironic twist to "better dead than red".

I have wondered that myself since red is the color of socialists and blue of "bluestocking" conservatives.

Now see, even the slightest implication that "conservatives are generally racists" would be vociferously attacked and rejected as a disgusting smear and over-generalization. Snide remarks that liberals are all socialists, though, are apparently fair game and generally get passed over without comment.

Please tell me I'm not the only one who sees the blatant double standard here. And it's not just "here" on PPR; it's out there in the real political world as well.

That's because conservatives are communists.

Well to be fair, calling someone racist is a little more offensive than calling someone a socialist in most circles now a days.

Even if they are actually racist? and, can that be offensive and 'politically correct' at the same time?

Not talking about on an individual basis but generalizing that all conservatives are racist is more offensive than generalizing than saying all democrats are socialists.

the political democrats seem to be more altruistic than socialistic. Altruism is a meme that has run rampant in Christendom. It elevates living for the sake of others (and sometimes dying for the sake others) to a sacrament. Democrats seem to favor redistribution of income as the way to address the inequalities in society.

ruveyn

Why is it perceived as being more offensive? Why is it treated by the media and by everyone as being more offensive to accuse conservatives of being racist than it is to accuse liberals of being socialists?

I would guess that at least one part of it is that conservatives have been screaming "socialist!" non-stop for at least the past 80 years, and it's gotten rather hollow by now. Liberals have not managed to rack up such a massive overuse of the term "racist" applied to their political opponents, so it still retains its sting when such an accusation is made. Of course, once again conservatives are projecting—they believe that liberals just use "racist" as a blanket term for anyone who disagrees with them, when in fact it is conservatives you label anyone else as "socialist."

LOL,

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U06jlgpMtQs[/youtube]

Orwell, part of me agrees with you on the double standard, and part of me asks, "what's wrong with being a socialist? If it's the alternative to capitalist anarchy (aka libertarianism), then call me a socialist."

If it were possible to learn from history and alter the form of socialism which Russia had, perhaps with more freedom of choice, permission to own property, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of communication, free trade, etc. but combine that with some other things, like government job placement to ensure everyone who can work has work, free education through post graduate levels, etc., then I think it could work out and be better than either America or the Russia of last century.

The reason for the choice of colors could be due to the fact that the blue states produce more GDP per capita and generate more tax revenue than the red states, yet the red states recieve more federal tax dollars per income level than the blue states . The blue state's have a surplus of federal tax revenue while the red states have a deficit. Thus the red states are literally "in the red" compared to the blue states. The difference is made up by a net "spreading of the wealth" (i.e. federal tax dollars) from liberals to conservatives.

http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2010/03/31/red-states-blue-states-and-the-distribution-of-federal-spending/

Actually, one could argue that Alaska is the most socialist state in the union. After all, Alaska is the only state that forces the redistribution of oil revenues to all of its citizens. You also have to take into consideration all the government farming subsidies that go to the conservate Great Plains states. It seems like the red states are more socialist than the blue states after all.