"Red Over Blue" Summary & Analysis

In an excerpt from James Ceaser and Andrew Busch's political book "Red Over Blue", the authors attempt to clear common misconceptions about political divisions in the United States. The title derives its name from the two colors associated with the main political parties in America: Red for the  Republicans and Blue for the Democrats. The original background of these colors came from an illustration on the cover of The New York Times when it showed the results of the 2000 presidential election. Ceaser and Busch go on to explain how this image helped compound a misrepresentation about political life in America. Though Red states may appear to be overwhelmingly Republican, it actually has its fair share of Democrats as New England has its own Republicans. The meat of the passage concerns the 2004 election between Democrat John Kerry and incumbent Republican George Bush. In this election, the Republican Party not only held on to the presidency but also made solidified its majorities in Congress through gains in the House and Senate. Ceaser and Busch explain the issues that defined those elections and how "moral values" polled as the most important issue, actually were misread due to polling questions. A political analyst, Walter Dean Burnham, had earlier created a "realignment" theory which stated that a massive political shift would occur in the American political landscape because of a catastrophic or major event, and that such a shift occurred every fifteen years. Ceaser and Busch explain how this theory is untrue, since no severe events, including September 11, did not have an overall effect on political ideologies.  
 
This article is rather interesting in expunging long held beliefs held about politics. The illustration on the cover of The New York Times, the authors declare, is responsible for misleading the public about the divide between conservatives and liberals in America. The illustration cast the impression that political beliefs were limited to geographic regions. Other misconceptions were that the Republican sweep in 2004 was an actual political shift. As we know now, two years later in 2006, the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress and later the presidency in 2008. That in turn led to predictions that the Democrats were the new dominant party. As of two week ago, we know that also to be false. This article shows how the political landscape of America is both fickle and traditional: what may seem different is only a cycle that repeats itself through every decade and will continue to do so.