General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumscali
(114,904 posts)seems fine to me.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)joshcryer
(62,277 posts)Red stands for the left in literally every other country than the US. The Democrats were rebranded to "blue" in the 2000 elections, because the MSM wanted to change things up.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)I need to put on my tin foil hat to reflect the rays that logo is putting out!
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)Oh the horrors.
But yeah, "red" is literally the color of the left in practically every other country.
You'll note some DUers here lamenting "redbaiting" on this forum (just use Google). They may be the same posters lamenting the "red arrow." I can't say for sure as I don't take it that seriously.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)And in 2000, the Democrats were the incumbent party. For some reason, the colors just remained ever since. Funny, many Repubs hate being the "red" party!
joshcryer
(62,277 posts)It's hard to even differentiate.
But that's an interesting thing, DW-NOMINATE / Voteview always makes Democrats red and Republicans blue so I assumed that's how it was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states#Origins_of_the_color_scheme
Going by this I think the issue is sort of muddled.
The alternating scheme between incumbents and not seems to have only taken hold for a decade or so with the advent of color television, after that it was arbitrary until 2000 at which point it appears that the current color scheme took hold. Just skimming the Wikipedia article because I was interested in your argument, I don't know the veracity of anything here.
I just know that the left is represented by red pretty much everywhere else but the US.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)I had read somewhere that blue was used for incumbents. Looks like this was never the case at all.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Just being silly on Monday morning.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)may as well BOTH use it.
No doubt I'll be flamed & charcoal broiled, but where's the victory? Again, we have a slow road vs. the fast road to more servitude to the oligarchs. But hey, we've got a gov't subsidized health care, so we thank thee for the crumbs.
Not a word on TPP from Hillary, and it's game on...both sides set to spend billions while main stre et is in decline. Let's all go shopping.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)mother earth
(6,002 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)mother earth
(6,002 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)bludgeon.
If she has no challengers in the primary... well then I think it would be a fair criticism. But we have to wait just a little bit, don't you think?
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)would probably be most appropriate.
And that is meant as a comment on the whole damned system
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Evil corporate logo!!!!
It's nutso time on DU.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)I think I'm gonna have to pull the joker back out.
Sid
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Seems that Team Hillary for America has already made a change.
What was that about? Are there multiple designs of her logo being worked out by crowd-sourcing?
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)from left to right, not right to left.
Simply put, the arrow is pointing to the right, because it points to the text. Nothing nefarious, no hidden meaning or agenda.
Whether the logo is well-designed or not, you can guarantee it has been tested and focus grouped to death because a logo in this environment is not going to be left up to chance.
The company I work for is not doing anything "important" in the grand scheme of life but we're still doing a focus group test with our customer base this week on our new website design (and I'd venture a guess that most people have never heard of us and never will).
boston bean
(36,223 posts)justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)but I figured better this thread than the various others. I'm not going to get into "serious" debate over the friggin' logo when her stance on the issues matter so much more.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)woods, why anyone would think their criticism wasn't based on something constructive.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)It is obviously not really about the logo. If Warren had an E with a red arrow as part of the E pointing right, it would be proof of how competent she is.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I mean, to me it smacks of "Who designed your dress?"
boston bean
(36,223 posts)But it is mostly those who feel that fighting for their income equality is the only thing that matters.. and things like feminism and civil rights are dividing us democrats...
It's a strange world view to me. I see it in the MRA world and from the right... but is surprising to find those thoughts arguments here... and most of those persons who feel it is only their income that is important who are the most vocal against Hillary..
gollygee
(22,336 posts)if the outrage over this arrow is the stupidest thing I've ever read on DU or not. There's been other silly stuff from time to time, but I don't know if anything else as ridiculous has gotten this much attention.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)is she not aware of the heartache and heartbreak this causes on DU?
and an ARROW, for heaven's sake. An absolute in-your-face blow to NA-relations. AND pointing forward . . . jeez-louise what are they thinking?
How could her campaign NOT preview their thoughts here before an announcement????
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)I drive on it often. I must be a hater.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)OBVIOUSLY!
boston bean
(36,223 posts)woops that one is still pointing right!!!!! dagnabbit!
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,385 posts)brush
(53,918 posts)whether it was pointing forward or right, and the color of it.
There had to be some mention that some would see the arrow as pointing right and with the red color of it maybe 'dog whistling' to the right, but they went with it anyway because many would see it as just a blue "H" with a forward point red arrow for the crossbar.
Let's wait and see whether they can have it both ways or if this is the first big blunder of the campaign season.
If they have to change it we can chalk it up as a blunder and another unforced error like the personal email server.
randome
(34,845 posts)I know because I had this dream last night...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]
djean111
(14,255 posts)I don't know if I can copy it here, but I googled Atkins logo - and yeah. I don't really care about the logo one way or the other, but Hillary's logo will always remind me of net carbs.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)It's amazing. It's so similar to some DU posts.