<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: US State legislators&#8217; affiliations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.webfoot.com/2009/10/09/state-legislators-affiliations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.webfoot.com/2009/10/09/state-legislators-affiliations/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 20:26:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://blog.webfoot.com/2009/10/09/state-legislators-affiliations/comment-page-1/#comment-504</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 06:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webfoot.com/?p=945#comment-504</guid>
		<description>Wikipedia has a nice article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states on the colours.  The colours really became fixed in peoples&#039; minds in the 2000 election and its aftermath.

I suspect that part of why the Democratic Party ended up identified with blue and not red is because red really was tied to Communism, and Communism was a real boogyman in the US.  The news outlets probably figured that if they coloured Democratic areas red, then the Democrats would accuse them of fanning partisan flames.  Nobody ever accuses Republicans of being communist, so the news outlets would not have been concerned about confusion there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wikipedia has a nice article at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states</a> on the colours.  The colours really became fixed in peoples&#8217; minds in the 2000 election and its aftermath.</p>
<p>I suspect that part of why the Democratic Party ended up identified with blue and not red is because red really was tied to Communism, and Communism was a real boogyman in the US.  The news outlets probably figured that if they coloured Democratic areas red, then the Democrats would accuse them of fanning partisan flames.  Nobody ever accuses Republicans of being communist, so the news outlets would not have been concerned about confusion there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Dougan</title>
		<link>http://blog.webfoot.com/2009/10/09/state-legislators-affiliations/comment-page-1/#comment-502</link>
		<dc:creator>John Dougan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webfoot.com/?p=945#comment-502</guid>
		<description>Do you have any idea how and when the US managed to get the colors backwards?  I know from reading historical political stuff that it wasn&#039;t always so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you have any idea how and when the US managed to get the colors backwards?  I know from reading historical political stuff that it wasn&#8217;t always so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
