this just in
This is a column I wrote in early October. Since it won't appear on my web site until well past the election, I thought it might be fun to sneak it in here:
Dear Word Detective: Now that we are in the throes of another political
campaign season, my curiosity has become aroused by the designation of
Democratic-leaning states as "blue" states, and Republican-leaning
states as "red" states. These designations seem to have come out of the
blue a few years ago, and I would like to know how and when they came
about. I am curious, too, about the colors. It seems to me they should
be reversed. I associate blue with "blue-nosed" and "blue laws," which
suggests to me conservatism/Republicanism, and red with the left in
politics where the Democrats are generally positioned. -- Russell J.
Greatens.
Good question, but you left out the "purple" states, where a solid
majority of voters cast their ballots for Barney the Dinosaur. The big
galoot actually carried the state of Ohio, where I live, last time
around. Quite a change, I must say. The colors are much brighter now,
people are nicer and almost everyone sings instead of talking. It makes
dealing with the local IRS office downright pleasant. "I love you, you
love me, we'll just waive those penalties...."
OK, back to depressing reality. But Ohio really is a "purple" state (a
mixture of "red" and "blue"), one where the margin between Democratic
and Republican votes has been narrow, to put it mildly, in the last few
elections. In reality, of course, no state is all one party, and the
"red/blue" election-night shorthand only has any validity at all because
of the "winner take all" US Electoral College.
The "red state/blue state" divide has become such a staple of cable news
since the 2000 presidential election that many people assume that it's a
recent invention, but it isn't. More importantly, although "red" and
"blue" have become rallying cries for political partisans in recent
years, the color labels were never intended to last beyond a given
election, and are, in fact, supposed to flip in 2008.
The use of "red" and "blue" as color codes on maps of electoral results
actually dates back to at least 1908, when the Washington Post printed a
special supplement in which Republican states were colored red and
Democratic blue The colors were apparently arbitrarily assigned in that
case, although in later years both parties strove to claim blue (as in
"true blue Americans") and avoid red, with its connotations of radicalism.
Finally, in 1976, the TV networks agreed to a formula to avoid any
implication of favoritism in color selections. The color of the
incumbent party, initially set as blue for Gerald Ford's Republican
ticket in that year, would flip every four years. Consequently, a
successful challenger runs again in four years, as the incumbent, under
the same color. So in 1992, the challenger Clinton was red on the maps, and in 1994, incumbent Clinton was also red. Challenger Bush, red in
2000, was red again as an incumbent in 2004. But perhaps because the
pundits decreed 2000 to be a watershed election, the "red/blue" divide
has assumed a broader political significance (at least to pundits), and
although the formula dictates that the Republicans should be carrying
the blue flag in 2008, it will be interesting to see how the networks
color their maps.