"Red Brands" and "Blue Brands"

Should it matter whether or not you share your boss's politics?  This question (and others) are raised in a National Public Radio story from the other day (CLICK HERE to read or listen).  In the piece, the reporter describes CEO political activism and how it impacts the workplace.  Companies referred to in the piece include: Levi Jeans and Dick's Sporting Goods.  In short, the story explores what it's like to be in the workplace where leaders of a company take political positions on different issues.

But what caught my attention most is this quote from Melissa Harris, a marketing agent in Chicago: "I think increasingly you're going to see more 'red brands' and 'blue brands.'"  Harris goes on to explain that companies come to her firm asking for "provocative" language for grabbing more consumers' attention.  What I find so interesting (maybe even troubling) about this is that branding (clothes, cars, technology, maybe other products) seem to be carrying political brands in addition to their label.

Can anyone out there share an example of a product that seems to be a "red brand" or "blue brand"?  Does branding products tied to political parties divide our country even more?  Or should we have great respect for CEOs sharing their political views?