<p>Rather than just looking at red vs blue states, it is more telling to visit the school and find out the prevailing feelings. I have kept a NYTimes red/blue map that shows the divide since FDR was president, and you can see that the map was overwhelmingly blue for Clinton, overwhelmingly red for Reagan and blue for Carter's first term. How quickly things shift. I see states that are Democrat strongholds with a Republican governor and many local areas run by Republican. So I would not take that red/blue divide too seriously. However, I will mention that some schools like Wash & Lee, Davidson are more conservative that some liberal kid will like, and some schools like Sarah Lawrence, Wesleyan are a bit more liberal than a conservative kid likes. That is more indicative of how your day to day life is going to be than going by how the state went this election.</p>
<p>I have to agree with Jamimom. You really need to feel out the school. And a lot of it has to do with where you are living now. What is "liberal" here in Texas is more centrist elsewhere. </p>
<p>My son's school is billed as "conservative" but both BUCC and College Dems are flourishing and played active roles in the presidential campaign. Both have publications, both bring speakers to campus. </p>
<p>The school is in a "blue" state, but as my son says: "There is Pittsburgh, Phildelphia, and the middle is Pennsyltucky" LOL</p>
<p>I will not be applying to schools in ANY red states. I'm not sure how it happened, I'm just not that in to the south/midwest. More of a blue-blooded Northern Liberal here.</p>
<p>I find it utterly amusing that the same people who beg for reconciliation still cling to the notion of red and blue states. </p>
<p>College selection should be about best fit. Despite being in a blue state, the college I attend is the ideal fit for me. At my school, while students remain sheltered from the egregious ultra-leftist indoctrination that is so prevalent at most elite schools, the students represent every political faction on the map. </p>
<p>To each his own!</p>
<p>xiggi: Who's begging for reconcilliation? I'm just curious.</p>
<p>I have never had a desire to live in any of the red states - precisely because they are just too conservative for my taste. If my kid felt that way I'd certainly understand. As it turns out, he has already chosen as his first pick a school in Ohio - a decision he made long before the election. So fine. He could certainly do worse than Ohio I figure.</p>
<p>People seemed to have differences of opinion regarding economic, solcial welfare, health care, foreign, military policies.</p>
<p>But now, people are genuinely concerned about evangelical bibilical jihadi mind set.</p>
<p>Tell your friends that they better get a map that shows the County voting patterns because that's the only REAL way to tell how the area surrounding a particular school voted. For instance, UCSD is in California, a Blue state, but it's in San Diego County which voted Republican. So I guess a liberal who makes the mistake of going to UCSD because it's in a "Blue" state better not venture off campus because he'll be surrounded by maniac conservatives out to lynch liberals. Many counties across the country in Blue states voted Red and vice versa so you never know what you might stumble into in the surrounding county if you don't check up on these things. And, then of course, you have schools like Wheaton which is in Blue Illinois but is a - gasp - Christian Evangelical school (by the way, Wheaton does a nice job of describing the mainstream Christian Evangelical movement on its website:
<a href="http://www.wheaton.edu/isae/defining_evangelicalism.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.wheaton.edu/isae/defining_evangelicalism.html</a>. )Imagine the horror of picking Wheaton because it's in a "safe" blue state only to discover that you're surrounded by a pack of those horrible evangelicals who are out to destroy society! Finally, while some people may believe that everyone who lives in a Red state is part of some evangelical Christian jihad, that's like saying everyone who lives in a Blue state is part of some liberal pinko conspiracy to turn everyone gay. It just ain't so folks! So, to classify colleges simply by whether it's located in a red or blue state is simply absurd. I honestly don't understand this hysteria.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I am NOT a Christian Evangelical, I am not anti-gay rights, I am not a red neck, I am not anti-liberal. I just believe that America is a long way from going down the tubes.</p>
<p>My son probably would have views from the most redest state, but he goes to a blue state boarding school. In addition some of his views do not go with red, some are in blue sign. On top of it we are asian, thus we are not racist. My son has volunteered for more than 200 hours in a year. That does not make him zealot. His best friend is a democrat. They value each other and discuss their views. Please never ever judge a person what he thinks. So why choose a school based on opinions. We need to listen other people and then do what we seems best. Please do not let this opportunity go to waste by not applying to DUke, Emory. RIce, U stin etc.</p>
<p>"Living" in a red state is identical to "living" in a blue state. You get up, go to work, talk to your spouse, interact with the community,do homework......the day is not spent debating foreign policy, gay rights or tax policy. And the guy next door whether it be in Michigan or Georgia is not all that different from you. Same general wants, needs,etc.</p>
<p>I know I'm repeating myself but residing in Birmingham,Al is no different from Mineola,NY....</p>
<p>Oldman:</p>
<p>If you're white, that is. If you're "lucky" enough to be born straight and not gay. There are areas in our red state that you would not be safe if you're gay. I work in the schools, and the gay kids are very, very careful to keep hidden. (And some of them are very, very sad.)</p>
<p>Since we live neither in a blue nor a red state, my sons really have considered the differences between the two only in terms of the weather, which looks to be every bit as predictable as the outcome of elections.</p>
<p>Our school has kids from every color state, every color country. My kids know how to have respectful, interesting conversations with kids and adults from wide ranging political, religious and social backgrounds on virtually every "touchy" topic. It has been part of their education to date to learn how to voice differences, remain open minded, consider the perspectives of others. They will be disappointed if they do not attend a college with the kids capable of the same, regardless of the color of the state.</p>
<p>"Tell your friends that they better get a map that shows the County voting patterns because that's the only REAL way to tell how the area surrounding a particular school voted. "</p>
<p>That's very true. I live in a very rare blue county in a very red state. The college students in my city are very liberal as am I.</p>
<p>farawayplaces 1: I may be wrong but I am not convinced there is more or less discrimination in any given place. Is a middle class guy from Boston more or less open to somebody "different" than his counterpart in Omaha, Jacksonville or Cheyenne?</p>
<p>I think that there are pockets (per Northstarmom) of red and blue in every state. And then, not every red or blue is quite the same, is it...I lived for 6 years in a red state where people cared a lot about "guns and ammo" but could have cared less about what happened in other people's bedrooms. Then I lived 2 years in a red state where I was villified for not attending (the right or any)church, for not adorning my house (or mailbox) in the appropriate ways for various holidays and for supporting a woman's right to choose (by not donating to the neighborhood drive for Operation Rescue). Oh, and they also cared about guns and ammo..</p>
<p>College is a time for expanding one's horizons, not solidifying barriers in thinking. What will make a kid "viable" in a global economy(the theme of several other threads) is the capacity first of all to appreciate how we are all the same. I would guess there is more reinforcement for this on some campuses than others (and that some of these campuses are in red states, and some are in blue states).</p>
<p>If you're "lucky" enough to be born straight and not gay. There are areas in our red state that you would not be safe if you're gay.>></p>
<p>farawayplaces, Unfortunately, I think that holds true for many places in BLUE states as well. It's a sad, sad state of affairs but don't blame it entirely on the "Red" states. I live in a Blue state and I can testify that we've had reported incidents of gay hate crimes - and other types of hate crimes - here as well. </p>
<p>The problem is that brandishing EVERYONE in a state or EVERYONE who practices a particular religion or EVERYONE who voted the same way or EVERYONE who lives a certain lifestyle the SAME way leads to the same ultimate end: lots of stereotyping, more prejudice, and less dialogue and hope for understanding. I wish that people could stop categorizing individuals in terms of "EVERYONE" and recognize that just because you are in a certain group - be it sexual orientation, racial group, religious group, or yes, even a state of origin - you are not necessarily going to be EXACTLY like the stereotype of that group. Come on people, this is how hate crimes begin in the first place.</p>
<p>Don't you guess, Carolyn, that some of the EVERYONE issue would abate if the colors used on these maps would be proportional to the voting rather than presented as an either red or blue. How can the absolutist attitude that appears to have been reinforced by these election results not have been amplified by the misimpression that a single homogeneous color represents.
Some states would have a bluer hue, some a redder hue...mostly they would be varying shades of purple or brown. The electoral college is not America.</p>
<p>Yes, that's why I found the county voting maps so interesting. It clearly pointed out that there were very few states that were entirely "one color" and even then there were gradations. It brought home to me the idea that no state or county or town or street can be painted as being all of the same cloth. I hate this whole concept that people who voted one way are somehow better or worse than people who voted another way - it just goes against my belief in tolerating differences in other people and more importantly, listening and asking questions to see if there is something valuable to be learned from those differences. I also agree with you: the electoral college is not America. I hate to say it but it is probably time to start talking about whether a simple majority rule should be applied to presidential elections. But that's another issue.</p>
<p>The parents in the original post strike me as narrow-minded, divisive, intolerant...oh wait, those are all the characteristics that "blue" voters are using to describe the "red" voters in their effort to explain what a miscarriage of justice the reelection of Bush is. My bad.</p>
<p>Two points: 1) Most colleges are bubbles of liberal thought. Students are only likely to make contact with the surrounding community if they make a concerted effort to get off campus and out into the community (liberal or conservative), so don't worry, you're safe. 2) Many colleges are located in "blue" cities as others have pointed out, so you don't have to fear being asked to broaden your mind with contact with other systems of belief even if you do wander off campus while in college.</p>
<p>The blue/red map of the country by county demonstrates what others have said. Here is one such map and a long piece about the "Urban Archipelago".
<a href="http://www.urbanarchipelago.com/%5B/url%5D">http://www.urbanarchipelago.com/</a>
The writer starts off rationally enough, but keep reading past the first five paragraphs. I thought it was a piece of satire like that posted earlier, but after reading on I am afraid not.</p>
<p>"We are citizens of the Urban Archipelago, the United Cities of America. We live on islands of sanity, liberalism, and compassion--New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Seattle, St. Louis, Minneapolis, San Francisco, and on and on. And we live on islands in red states too--a fact obscured by that state-by-state map...Citizens of the Urban Archipelago reject heartland "values" like xenophobia, sexism, racism, and homophobia, as well as the more intolerant strains of Christianity that have taken root in this country. And we are the real Americans. They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers."</p>
<p>What hubris! What condescension!. What arrogance! If the author thinks that like minded folks can nominate one of their own and have a chance at electing him/her to the Presidency, then he is delusional.</p>
<p>The article seems to be written to feed on the beliefs of the parents in the original post.</p>
<p>Interesting how so many readers of the first post actually missed the whole point.....the parents are not the ones reaching these conclusions, it's the students. One parent actually blamed the son's involvement in a political organization at his school. Another parents said her daughter had been actively engaged in politics for a few years and had strong opinions. I got the impression that the parents were less concerned and that the kids had been invested in the election and were angry about the outcome. I reread the original post several times to see why people were getting mad at the parents......lol.</p>
<p>"I honestly don't understand this hysteria."</p>
<p>And that's exactly what it is---hysteria fostered by incredibly simplistic thinking. The assumption of many people seems to be that, if you voted for Bush, you voted for him with gusto, agreeing with everything he's done and everything he says. And while that may be true of some people, MANY people (myself included) voted for him (albeit with a heavy heart) only because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Kerry. For me, the fact that Kerry wasn't George Bush just was not a good enough reason to vote for him. He failed to give me enough reason to vote FOR HIM. Now, if our current Governor, Mark Warner (a democrat) were to run for President, I'd vote for him in a second. I believe many Virginians would do the same. I voted for him as governor in 2000, and I believe he'd make a very good President. I live in a "red state", and I voted for the "red candidate" this time around, but I don't now, nor have I ever tapped into the "hive mind of the Borg" that so many hysterical left wingers assume exists among Bush voters (personally, I don't think such a thing exists, any more than it exists among Kerry voters). I consider myself neither liberal nor conservative. And even though it is that most horrible of things---a "biblical" principle---I believe moderation is to be prefered over extremes in most things.</p>
<p>I think all this hand wringing, chicken little rhetoric from bereaved Kerry supporters springs from a total inability to fathom the idea that any sane person could vote republican, let alone for Bush. Therefore, this panic to distance themselves (either by talk of moving out of the country---be my guest!--- or refusing to consider schools located in "red states") is to be expected. I think it's telling that there are people who actually fail to ascertain that the article referenced by Driver is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. </p>
<p>The country will survive a second Bush term, just as it would have survived a Kerry presidency. Our system of Government serves to minimized the damage of any single presidential administration. In four relatively short years, someone else will occupy the oval office. Come on guys, it's really not that bad!</p>