In the new spirit of bi-partisanship, may I recommend the abolition of references to "red" and "blue" states?
At first it was novel, and somewhat useful to see the US in those terms during the 2004 Presidential election. The media certainly picked up on the paradigm, and most media outlets are still referring to the two colors, now, 2 years later.
Staring at the entire US map as a whole, it’s not hard to deduce that Democratic and/or liberal-leaning areas make up densely populated centers primarily on the East and West coasts (blue); and states verging on the right, or Republican-leaning, held sway in-between and in the South. Or at least that’s what seemed convenient as a stereotyped tool when you need to talk generalities, and there are some exceptions (Minnesota, for example).
But if you take care to examine any state’s county-by-county outbreak of red and blue, you realize what a mish-mash of colors it is…almost purple.
Statisticians and electoral college vote-counters HAVE to paint each state one color according to constitutional principles, but if the US ever forsook that system, and went for a majority-vote-rules system, we’d see shades of red, bleeding into purple, seeping over to blue in a never-ending blend of color.
Right-leaning Country ‘n’ Western music fans abound in New York City, and left-leaning Joe six-packs proliferate in Birmingham, Alabama. Gone are clear distinctions, only broad generalities apply, and even then, they’re frequently wrong.
So it’s with those thoughts in mind that I again say: Red and Blue State references need to go the way of an all-Republican Congress, in favor of a purple bi-partisanship.
—-submitted by Dave Courvoisier