OK, this isn’t really about academics, but I have to get it off my chest.
Let’s face it: red is not the same as blue. Not only do the two colors have different wavelengths, they have radically different effects on the human psyche.
What’s the color shown to most improve retail sales? Red.
What’s the car color most likely to get you stopped by the cops? Red. (Adding a black driver also helps, of course.)
What color is virtually every dining room in my neighborhood painted? Red.
What color attracts peasant grandmothers the world around? Red.
What color is showing up the most right now in retail store windows? Ok, a pukey aquamarine, but that’s really beside my point.
My point is, how the heck are the Democrats supposed to win the electoral college when Republicans get to have control over the inspired color, namely red? Red is hot, passionate, active, thrilling, sexy. Blue is so wimpy, so non-descript, so tame compared to red. Blue is vacuous, predictable, flat: boooring.
I really do think, if the Democratic party ever hopes to take back the White House, they’re going to have to insist that they get the red label for a while.
And why not? After all, football teams switch which side is facing which goal post at regular intervals during games. During the presidential debate, candidates varied who went first for each question. My husband and I trade who cleans the refrigerator vs. who cleans the toilet. (He’s doing both this century, because I did both last century.)
So why not insist that the Democratic Party get to have red for the next presidential election? Maybe then they’ll actually win.
Or, you know, the Democratic Party could actually get back on track and be the champions of working classes, health care, and social progress that they used be. That’s another viable option.
Nah, they should just insist on a color trade. If that doesn’t work, they can always repaint.