The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Delmar on March 29, 2015, 01:17:32 PM
-
Sun Mar 29, 2015, 12:28 AM
Star Member LiberalElite (5,608 posts)
Origins of red state/blue state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states#Origins_of_the_color_scheme
"Red states and blue states refer to those states of the United States whose residents predominantly vote for the Republican Party (red) or Democratic Party (blue) presidential candidates.
This terminology came into use in the United States presidential election of 2000 on an episode of the Today show on October 30, 2000. According to AlterNet and The Washington Post, the terms were coined by journalist Tim Russert, during his televised coverage of the 2000 presidential election. That was not the first election during which the news media used colored maps to depict voter preferences in the various states, but it was the first time a standard color scheme took hold; the colors were often reversed or different colors used before the 2000 election."
My opinion? I wish they'd drop it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026431157
I agree with the primitive. In every other political context besides the electoral maps, the color red is associated with the left/communism. I believe that identifying democrats with blue instead of red was done consciously and intentionally by the media because dishonest leftists always try to obscure their socialist ideology.
If the left is successful in the fundamental transformation of America, it will lead to confusion when they try to get all the low info crowd to rally together under a red flag.
Response to LiberalElite (Original post)Sun Mar 29, 2015, 12:45 AM
Star Member stone space (2,436 posts)
1. In my wife's country, ...
...yellow birds are called pájaros amarillos, red birds are called pájaros liberales, and blue birds are called pájaros conservadores.
I don't want them to drop it.
I just want them to get it right for a change.
I still get confused whenever anybody talks about red states and blue states. I can never remember which is which, and I often get it backwards.
You're getting it backwards for good reason--everybody knows that Reds are leftists.
Response to Leontius (Reply #4)Sun Mar 29, 2015, 02:21 AM
Star Member stone space (2,436 posts)
5. Her country has it right.
And my country had it right until recently, also.
According to the OP, it was the result of a very recent media goofup that for some reason has stuck.
"Come the revolution, I'll buy you a new hat"
Warren Beatty---REDS
(http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i475/Delmar59/stock-footage-seamless-looping-d-rendering-ussr-union-of-soviet-socialist-republics-flag-closeup-waving-in-the_zpsjkfo94t2.jpg) (http://s1095.photobucket.com/user/Delmar59/media/stock-footage-seamless-looping-d-rendering-ussr-union-of-soviet-socialist-republics-flag-closeup-waving-in-the_zpsjkfo94t2.jpg.html)
(http://i1095.photobucket.com/albums/i475/Delmar59/christians-in-pakistan-china1_zpsme4j8cdm.jpg) (http://s1095.photobucket.com/user/Delmar59/media/christians-in-pakistan-china1_zpsme4j8cdm.jpg.html)
:ownit:
-
but it was the first time a standard color scheme took hold; the colors were often reversed or different colors used before the 2000 election."
Often? Yes, because history started in 2000 (after gOrbAlwaRmenInG!!!!!!stopped)
(http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/u25930/2011/09/Reagan_-_1984_landslide_map.jpg)
F*cking retard....... This was standard. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
I believe that identifying democrats with blue instead of red was done consciously and intentionally by the media because dishonest leftists always try to obscure their socialist ideology.
Absolutely.
-
I get why democrats would dislike anything that makes a visual of exactly what leftist political influence amounts to.
It is exactly what the founding fathers were determined to prevent.
-
Truth:
In every election including 2000, the incumbent candidate or candidate's party was shown in blue while the challenging candidate/party was shown in red. This is a convention taken from military battle maps where USFOR and allies' positions and movements are shown in blue while OPFOR is shown in red.*
Thus is was that in 2000, Gore/Lieberman states were shown in the blue of incumbency (the incumbent, Bill Clinton, term-limited but still in office) while Bush/Cheney states were shown in red.
If the pattern continued (and I honestly don't know if it did), during the TV coverage of the 2004 elections the Bush/Gore states should have been displayed in blue and the Kerry/Edwards states in red. The wikipedia entry shows it the other way http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004
I think we are stuck with the current color pattern until something else accepted by the general public, and any protest to the contrary is as futile as shouting "Photocopy! photocopy! photocopy! Xerox is a BRAND NAME!" --or, since Aspirin was also once a brand name, insisting on calling it acetylsalicylic acid.
*During the Soviet era, Soviet and Warsaw pact nations flipped the concept, showing Communist forces-- themselves-- in red and their OPFOR in blue.
-
I must admit to my ignorance.
But I should have know better.