Question about "red" and "blue" maps

[last_texas_dem]

Started thinking about this after reading a recent post asking about whether information was available about the "red" and "blue" breakdown of counties in Florida.

This made me start thinking about "red" and "blue" maps in general. It seems that because of the infamous 2000 (s)election, the colors red and blue have become inseperable from the parties they represented on maps for that election, red= Republican and blue= Democrat. Politically-oriented people describe themselves as "red staters" or "blue staters", people writing about politics use them as casual descriptive terms, etc. Essentially, it seems to me that the 2000 election made the colors inseperable from the party.

However, I remember a few months after the 2000 election hearing one of the networks explain that red was not meant to be a permanent representation for the Republicans and blue was not meant to be a permanent representation for the Democrats. It was explained that red was meant to be the color for the challenging party and blue for the "incumbent" party. The '92 election was referenced, and it was pointed out that Bush had been represented with blue while Clinton had been represented with red.

This got me thinking about this election. From what I have seen, all maps representing the candidate's standings in the current electoral college have been using red for * and blue for Kerry, despite the fact that * is the incumbent. So unless the media is actually acknowledging that the Democrats *really* won the 2000 election and are thus the true incumbent party (like that would ever happen) it seems that maybe the media has decided to consistently use the same color to represent each of the major parties. Does anyone know if this has been adapted across the board by the media? Like, on Election Day is blue going to be the Dem color and the red the Repug color? If so, just thought it was kinda interesting... seems the craziness of 2000 caused a permanent change. I know I'd have a hard time getting used to reverse colors being used, even if, following media tradition, this is what would be done.

Anyway, I guess I just find weird stuff like this interesting. Sorry for wasting a couple minutes or so of everyone's time! haha :-)

[Blayde Starrfyre]

1. It's bizarre in Washington

In the primary here, the Democratic section was red, Republicans were green, and Libertarians were blue. Odd, I know.

[4morewars]

2. Interesting obvservation

thanks for pointing it out !

[Lexingtonian]

3. I like to think of it as

blue representing the Federal, i.e. ultimately winning, color in the Civil War. And red...well, the Republican Party these days is a transparent imitation of the method, madness, and machinery the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. There is a reason Grover Norquist has a picture of Lenin hanging in his office, and it's not aesthetics.

[Bronco69]

4. I've been thinking the same thing for a while now.

I was always accustomed to blue for the incumbent and red for the challenger. Who knows? The way things are changing, maybe they have decided to keep them permanent.

[ComerPerro]

5. Good observation. All I can say is

I prefer blue anyway.