"Red states" and "blue states"

[Alcon]

Just a quick rant on one of my least favourite labels.  I don't mean to offend anyone, and I know it's became a part of the lexicon, but I just want to make my peace... 

Next time before you call a state a "red" state or a "blue" state, keep this in mind...

If you got 10 random people from every state in a room, all but five states and the District of Columbia would be statistically most likely likely to have a 6-4 or 5-5 alignment, and if I was in a crowd with 6 against 4 or even 7 against 3, I would hardly call that one-sided.

There are very few states that do not have at least a few counties, or at least areas, that have strikingly different politics than the state overall.  So the idea that an entire state can be "red" or "blue" falls apart when you look down to a county level, and especially to town level and even further to the neighbourhood level.

Now I know there are major exceptions like D.C., but these are rare and generally targeted politically (San Francisco or Kansas bashing, anyone?) because they are rare.  Even in a state like Utah, over 25% of the population voted Democrat in 2004.  That is over one in four people - it may be a huge landslide, but it's still one out every four people, and a one-in-four event is hardly a rare one.

So, for those of you who assign labels like "red state" or "blue state" as if it was some sort of cultural standard (especially, for God's sake, a state like New Mexico or Wisconsin!), consider that even in a two-to-one landslide, that one-third of the population remains, and two-thirds does not a universal lifestyle make.

[jacob_101]

I agree with you Alcon.  Maybe we could just refer to blue and red states only when a candidate on the national level consistantly gets 60% or better.  Otherwise it's too close to just label it blue or red.

I would say Utah is a blue state and DC is a red state.

[Erc]

I agree with you Alcon.  Maybe we could just refer to blue and red states only when a candidate on the national level consistantly gets 60% or better.  Otherwise it's too close to just label it blue or red.

I would say Utah is a blue state and DC is a red state.

The world outside this forum would think you're crazy.

[Gabu]

I agree with you Alcon.  Maybe we could just refer to blue and red states only when a candidate on the national level consistantly gets 60% or better.  Otherwise it's too close to just label it blue or red.

I would say Utah is a blue state and DC is a red state.

Even with 60%, that's still 40% of the state who didn't vote for that candidate, and I don't think that that 40% will appreciate you alleging that they supported that candidate by calling the state a (red/blue) state.

How about we just forget that terminology?

[Gustaf]

I agree with Alcon, I think you make an excellent and highly valid point. To talk about red or blue voters is somewhat more acceptable, but generally one should attempt to keep geography out of it.

[dazzleman]

As a "red" voter who lives in a "blue" state, I agree with you Alcon.  I would also say that it's not at all difficult to find moderate to conservative Republican voters where I live.  Most of my friends are moderate to conservative Republicans, living in New York and Connecticut.

[Now We Are Free]

As a "red" voter who lives in a "blue" state, I agree with you Alcon.  I would also say that it's not at all difficult to find moderate to conservative Republican voters where I live.  Most of my friends are moderate to conservative Republicans, living in New York and Connecticut.

and you say I isolate myself from reality only hanging out with people who agree with me.

[tarheel-leftist85]

I agree with the premise of this post, especially since I'm from a state that went to Bush by a meager 12 pts.  I think some people would nominate Virginia and North Carolina as deep red (or blue on this forum) states beofre they would Utah and Idaho.

[dazzleman]

As a "red" voter who lives in a "blue" state, I agree with you Alcon.  I would also say that it's not at all difficult to find moderate to conservative Republican voters where I live.  Most of my friends are moderate to conservative Republicans, living in New York and Connecticut.

and you say I isolate myself from reality only hanging out with people who agree with me.

WTF?  You have said that you wouldn't be friends with anybody who voted for Bush.  I never said that I have no Democratic friends, just that most of my friends happen to be Republicans.  You isolate yourself far more than I do.

[muon2]

I'm hoping the notion fades as well. But my bias is that the choice of "red" and "blue" in the media froze a particular pattern that a particular network used for a particular election.

I personally prefer our fine scheme here on the Atlas. It's a better match to the tradiational liberal-conservative color scheme. The networks are proabably better served by returning to their alternating pattern that used to exist, but it's hard to see that happening when the currnet lables have stuck in the media.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Mind if I post this here as well?

[12th Doctor]

The 6-4, or more closely, perhaps, 11-9 rule is something that I try to remind my Conservative friends of all of the time.  If we just open up a bit, Minnesota, Wisconsin, PA, Michigan, Oregon, New Jersey, Washington and perhaps even Connecticut and California are not close to being out of the grasp of the next Republican Presidential candidate.

[AuH2O]

I of course agree with this.

All things considered, Bush got a goodly number of votes in Mass., and that's with a Texas twang and walk. Got a real goodly number in Conn. Obviously the same can be said for Kerry in "deep blue" states  .

11001010101110100001

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Purple=mixed (ie: 1 D, 1 R) or non partisan. Green is Indie or Third Party

[WalterMitty]

it is also important to note that the 'bluest of the blue' states: vermont, massachusetts, rhode island, hawaii, and connecticut, all have gop governors.

meanwhile democrats hold the governors office in north carolina, wyoming, montana. tennessee, virginia

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

it is also important to note that the 'bluest of the blue' states: vermont, massachusetts, rhode island, hawaii, and connecticut, all have gop governors.

meanwhile democrats hold the governors office in north carolina, wyoming, montana. tennessee, virginia

They're less politically polarizing than President. BTW, no one tell Romney that when the state House and Senate are well over 2/3rds Democratic, that means he has no power.

[Smash255]

it is also important to note that the 'bluest of the blue' states: vermont, massachusetts, rhode island, hawaii, and connecticut, all have gop governors.

meanwhile democrats hold the governors office in north carolina, wyoming, montana. tennessee, virginia

They're less politically polarizing than President. BTW, no one tell Romney that when the state House and Senate are well over 2/3rds Democratic, that means he has no power.

Correct the GOP govenors in the blue states tend to be moderate to liberal Republicans, more liberal than the Natl GOP party (Romney has moved to the right, but ran as a moderate & the Dem Govenors in GOP states do tend to be moderate to conservative Democrats, more conservative than the Dem Natl Party.

[GA > OH, FL, NC]

People in 'polarized' states simply trust their local parties more than the national ones, I would assume. At least that's how it is around here.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Correct the GOP govenors in the blue states

There are no "blue states". There are no "red states". How long does this little truth take to take root into your thought patterns?

[Smash255]

Correct the GOP govenors in the blue states

There are no "blue states". There are no "red states". How long does this little truth take to take root into your thought patterns?

Point is Dem Govenors in states Bush won tend to be more conservative than the dem Natl Party, Republican Govenors in states Kerry won tend to be more liberal than the Natl Republican party.

[Democratic Hawk]

I've always used the terms "red state" / "blue" state just because it's a simple dichotomy. The trouble if you look at most "blue states", geographically, they're pretty red, which is where it can almost seem paradoxical

I suppose anywhere where the margin of victory for one party was less than 10% over the other; then it's neither red nor blue

Dave