How come forums contain more liberals than the general population does?

[B_Hickboy]

superlarge,
This is a very interesting observation. I would like to know more about why you feel this way. What makes you think this is true? How would you identify a liberal on a forum? Is it by ideology or by their professed support for a particular candidate?

I predict he won't answer your post, JA.

 

[OldPArtner]

^You might be able to identify political orientation by statements made; for example, if you say that tax cuts always lead to increased revenues, there is a good chance that you are a Republican, and if you take the concept of class struggle seriously, you're probably a Democrat or someone too socialist to support that party.

Also, the right wing gets its information from fat over weight lip flapping talk show hosts who have never had real jobs, have never been in the military and have been married several times. People who listen to the radio for all that talk have no time to read.

I've seen them Rush Limbaugh books in Goodwill. They look like they've never been read. They sell on Amazon.con for upwards to a penny.

I previously mentioned people voting Republican because their parents did so, and their parents before then. Breaking from the mold takes ideas and thinking and inner strength.

First, Limbaugh is actually a lot more sane and reasonable than typical right-wing pundits; from what little I've heard of him (from over a decade after his last book was published), he doesn't put people down based on their gender, race, or religion, he doesn't refer to the Bible as the overarching source of truth, and his schtick is just warping everything into a conspiracy involving the media, interest groups, and public intellectuals to dupe the public into supporting Democrats and an increase in the size and scope of government.
Then again, he still sucks, so guess what I'm saying about the rest of them (this includes Lou Dobbs by the way)...

Also, I do know of people who vote Republican despite their parents voting Democratic, and usually this happens when they become affluent after growing up poor (protip: the powers that be in the GOP care more about tax breaks and corporate welfare than about abortion and same-sex marriage, and that's why they hate Huckabee and McCain); then again, John Edwards shows us that this isn't an ironclad rule.

As for me, well my father is the typical rich guy who votes Republican out of his own class interest but isn't all that ideological, and I suspect my mother votes Democratic out of her own class interest (having been royally screwed during the divorce) even though some of her views on the "hot-button" issues would mesh well with Stormfront (I say this even though she is only half-white, lol), but I'm more like a hardline social liberal who almost got lured into the Libertarian Party but intends to vote Democratic unless and until the realignment that started in the 1960s gets reversed (basically, if and when the South is solidly Democratic again).

Where was I...oh yeah, I guess it's more of a matter of class interest and the tendency of children to do about as well financially as their parents did (though to be fair I'm neither going to be nearly as wealthy as Dad nor expecting to be nearly as destitute as Mom).



I just have to respond to superlarge here:
"More taxes, more government, and political correctness pushing doesn't make for original ideas."
I get pissed off when Democratic politicians harp on about new spending programs and soaking the rich as the answer to this nation's problems too, and I think it's because it seems too risky to make their appeal to cultural leftists explicit, because the masses of poor and working-class voters also are wary of assaults on traditional (read: harmful) values.
Basically, IMO both major parties feel the need to emphasize their worst traits in order to woo the least common denominator.

As for the PC, I think that's what happens when people misunderstand genuinely good and original progressive ideas and either become alarmed based on their misunderstandings or actively pronounce those misunderstandings instead of the ideas they were based on; a common problem of this type is the statement that in America, non-whites cannot be racist, which is true only if you understand what the academics mean by "racist" in this context and is commonly understood as either a bald-faced lie or a license on the part of non-whites for behaviors known to be racist (in the commonly-understood sense). Other examples include the idea of race as a social construct, of gender as mutable, and of Barack Obama as not "really" being black.

 

[Act2_Begins_Now]

Conservatives need less support.

And I might add, have less of a need to be heard. Most of the time, in my experience, those that are the sqauwkiest have a liberal bent.

Conservatives tend not to play those games. They lay down the facts (either real or just as they see them) and then move on. Liberals like showing off whatever knowledge they may have (or what they often just think they have) and having their collective body parts kissed, stroked, sucked, etc. etc. Conservatives prefer to do that type of thing privately while whoring not to get caught. Um, I meant HOPING not to get caught.

Or what he said.

 

[OldPArtner]

And I might add, have less of a need to be heard. Most of the time, in my experience, those that are the sqauwkiest have a liberal bent.

Liberals like me tend to be all like "Fight the power!"
Conservatives tend to be the power.

 

[tripod]

I think that liberals by and large have a higher emotional IQ which allows them to navigate these cyber forums with ease as compared to most conservatives who are self centered and have a lower emotional IQ. Emotional IQ is needed on these forums because we can't read body language, facial expressions, or differences in verbal pitch and timbre (emotions).

Most conservatives don't give a fuck about anyone unless they are in their little "circle" of people: family, friends and some co-workers (if they're conservative).

Liberals on the other hand are concerned with all people... the whole world is one big and happy family and everyone is welcome.

There are some known conservatives on this board and most of them just love to argue with the liberals (they abhor actual data and empirical evidence, but love to prove their point). Or they just tell jokes or chat in the chatroom, they have little or NO use for actual communication with the people.

 

[SteveHd]

Percentage wise forums have a vast majority of liberals. Explanation?

It isn't clear whether you mean forums within LPSG or forums on the internet in general. I'll assume you that mean LPSG only.

Here's a factor not yet mentioned: A substantial portion of LPSG members are queers. [I guess the words "large penis" draws them.] Opinion surveys generally show queers to be more leftist than the general population. My personal experience is that queers are quite left-leaning. I'm generally centrist, compared to the general population, so I'm often to the right of most of my gay friends, either male or female.

So the higher portion of queers skews LPSG to the left. That doesn't explain it all. Many left-leaning LPSG members are straight.

 

[Not_Punny]

Being neither liberal nor conservative, I mostly stay out of discussions that go in that direction. Simple.

I don't come here for politics.

 

[viking1]

I have found it's best to stay out of political discussion, here, and elsewhere.
Most all political threads here, and on other forums, turn ugly. Politics, like religion, is 90%+ opinion. Everything that's highly opinionated brings a lot of passion with it. Passion makes for rather heated debate.

I do think the high population of gays here has a lot to do with it. Rightly so. After all, it's the conservatives that cater to the religious community here in the U.S. They are the ones who hate homosexuality, and want to deny the gay community any and all rights. Also, there are a lot of scientists, educators, and foreign members here. Those groups also tend to be more toward the liberal point of view.

There are plenty of forums that are very populated by conservatives too.
I have read on several where if you say anything against the Bush administration, you will be viciously attacked.

 

[tripod]

Conservatism and Liberalism are mind-sets and ways of thinking, they can have nothing to do with politics.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Percentage wise forums have a vast majority of liberals. Explanation?

Percentage wise AM radio talk shows have a vast majority of conservatives. Explanation?

 

[SteveHd]

... I have read on several where if you say anything against the Bush administration, you will be viciously attacked.

From what I've seen the inverse applies to LPSG: someone who says something supportive of the Bush admin. can be viciously attacked. It isn't a certainty but it could happen. If I was a Bush supporter I would keep quiet.

 

[THEEman]

because they are smart enough to utilize(not just use) the internet. ?

 

[JustAsking]

From what I've seen the inverse applies to LPSG: someone who says something supportive of the Bush admin. can be viciously attacked. It isn't a certainty but it could happen. If I was a Bush supporter I would keep quiet.

Steve,
That is very true. Bush supporters here are not very popular here. However, that is not surprising since not even Republican Presidential candidates seem to be Bush supporters.

Given that Bush's popularity rating is in the low 30s, any given random collection of people will have a high percentage of people who would disagree with a Bush supporter. In fact, low 30s suggests that those who disagree with the Bush supporter would also be Republicans.

At this point in his administration, one can draw a big distinction between conservative/liberal ideology and simply being a Bush hater. In fact, I bet there are a lot of conservatives who would agree with the policies of the Bush administration but would disagree that the Bush administration is competent to carry them out.

I believe Giuliani is currently occupying this niche, he is careful to articulate his position, which is completely aligned with the Bush administration but he is also very careful to not be identified as a Bush supporter. Guiliani's platform is subtly defined as "I am George Bush, but I am also competent."

 

[JustAsking]

Well, if you're correct about many conservatives taking a dim view on sex then that would explain why I've noticed so many liberals at LPSG and a couple of other sexually based forums.
I think you have a good point with this.

I'm on the conservative side of the line (not way way out to the right though) but I still agree Rush Limbaugh is a dumbass.
I think most intelligent conservatives would agree with you.

"Breaking from the mold", "ideas". How so? More taxes, more government, and political correctness pushing doesn't make for original ideas. Seems to me liberals tend to lack in ideas.
What the heck is "political correctness", anyway? Liberals get accused of that all the time. I hope you are not referring to such things as protecting the civil rights of minorities, or protecting freedom of religion?


The liberals main base for debating is usually nothing more than disapproval of the conservative ideas that are presented. More taxes and more government programs is about it. That's the liberal solution/idea for just about everything.

To which you just disproved your point, by stating an actual liberal position and showing your disapproval of it.

I predict he won't answer your post, JA.

Of course not. That's because he uses the term liberal as a prejorative, rather than expressing a concern about liberal ideas.

^You might be able to identify political orientation by statements made; for example, if you say that tax cuts always lead to increased revenues, there is a good chance that you are a Republican, and if you take the concept of class struggle seriously, you're probably a Democrat or someone too socialist to support that party.

OldP, I think you are right about that. But I think it goes deeper. When it comes to the economy, conservatives stress what they see as a neutral playing field for all businesses and workers. They tend to believe in their own personal competence and talent, and they believe others should be the same way. Therefore, they stress a level playing field where these abilities would be the ones that are most rewarded. And if that happens, people will rise to the occasion and be themselves competent and hard working.

Liberals, on the other hand, are more interested in the equity of the outcome of whatever system is in place. They are suspicious that simply leveling the playing field, such as complete deregulation of business, would make up for all the other disadvantages that might befall a particular group of people, such as racism, unequal educational opportunities, etc.

A conservative sees himself as someone could succeed on a level playing field and if others made the right choices, they too would succeed.

A liberal says that the playing field can never be made level, so certain leveling policies should be put into place (such as affirmative action, more spending on education, etc.).

I am leaving out the other legs of the conservative stool, such as social conservatism, etc.
.....

Where was I...oh yeah, I guess it's more of a matter of class interest and the tendency of children to do about as well financially as their parents did (though to be fair I'm neither going to be nearly as wealthy as Dad nor expecting to be nearly as destitute as Mom).

The interesting thing is that conservative beliefs and wealth do not correlate as much as people think they do. This includes economic conservatism. The reason for that is that most poor people see themselves as rich people who have not yet made it, or are being held back by something beyond their control. They are also interested in a level playing field because they see themselves as "players" who have not yet had their chance. So they think like rich people when it comes to economic conservatism. In fact, they will be there vehemently supporting free trade and deregulation for the very companies that are outsourcing their jobs and exploiting them.

This is why the Republican phrase "tax burden" works so well. It implies that all taxes are a burden and an impediment to the free trade that will fix everything.

...Basically, IMO both major parties feel the need to emphasize their worst traits in order to woo the least common denominator.

This is so sadly and profoundly true.

As for the PC, I think that's what happens when people misunderstand genuinely good and original progressive ideas and either become alarmed based on their misunderstandings or actively pronounce those misunderstandings instead of the ideas they were based on; a common problem of this type is the statement that in America, non-whites cannot be racist, which is true only if you understand what the academics mean by "racist" in this context and is commonly understood as either a bald-faced lie or a license on the part of non-whites for behaviors known to be racist (in the commonly-understood sense). Other examples include the idea of race as a social construct, of gender as mutable, and of Barack Obama as not "really" being black.

Very well said. I think the term "political correctness" is an attempt to make anyone who is against racism sound like someone who is superficial and naive.

...Here's a factor not yet mentioned: A substantial portion of LPSG members are queers. [I guess the words "large penis" draws them.] Opinion surveys generally show queers to be more leftist than the general population. My personal experience is that queers are quite left-leaning. I'm generally centrist, compared to the general population, so I'm often to the right of most of my gay friends, either male or female.

So the higher portion of queers skews LPSG to the left. That doesn't explain it all. Many left-leaning LPSG members are straight.

Yes, I think this is a strong factor. Also, it has to say something about the straight people who are here, who find themselves at home and very comfortable with a diverse forum community full of gays, foreigners, and such. Those people would have to be more to the left of center on the average.

.... Also, there are a lot of scientists, educators, and foreign members here. Those groups also tend to be more toward the liberal point of view.....

I believe you are right, viking. Both scientists and educators see themselves as protectors of a intellectual truths that are global in scope. Both groups would be extremely resistant to any kind of government interference with their ability to identify and exchange ideas with the worldwide community. As such, they tend to be more multi-cultural in their outlook, and are less interested in nationalism over truth.

A scientist would be more loyal to a group of his peers around the world than he would be to the politics of his own country. Scientists see themselves as members of a worldwide community.

 

[Guy-jin]

I've been to forums that were heavily Conservative, as well.

A very simple answer regarding this forum in particular is that it's got a very high percentage of gays, as someone else mentioned.

And since Conservatives have taken a general stance against equal rights for gays, of course you'll have more Liberals here.

And yes, the whole "liberal as a perjorative" thing is so tired.

 

[B_superlarge]

JustAsking wrote:

What the heck is "political correctness", anyway? Liberals get accused of that all the time. I hope you are not referring to such things as protecting the civil rights of minorities, or protecting freedom of religion?
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not referring to those things.

I'm talking about the going overboard in too sensitive a fashion.

For instance, I'm not religious yet I still believe it is going too far to try and ban the use of the word Christmas to describe a tree, and insist it be referred to as a holiday tree when referencing it in public. That is just one example. I don't really have to present them all to make my point do I?
(After I pasted your post my typing came out blue like yours. When I pasted the link it reverted back to black. I drew a dotted line to separate yours from mine.)

Crooks and Liars » Colbert: Political Correctness vs. Actual Correctness

 

[Osiris]

I don't think it is overpopulated by one or the other. It's a difference of societies. IRL, you seek out like minded people to socialize with hence, you are around people who are more like you or at least aren't confrontational.

Here everybody from everywhere comes in and then the comfort of like minded people goes out the window. We all have opinions and we are all of different mindsets. The key is to listen and try to understand the other person's stand on things and not blindly agree, but at the very least respectfully agree to disagree.

 

[JustAsking]

I'm not referring to those things.

I'm talking about the going overboard in too sensitive a fashion.

For instance, I'm not religious yet I still believe it is going too far to try and ban the use of the word Christmas to describe a tree, and insist it be referred to as a holiday tree when referencing it in public. That is just one example. I don't really have to present them all to make my point do I?
...

Yes, you made your point quite clearly, but instead, you managed to prove mine. I would like you to find one instance of the banning of the word Christmas in a public place for use by an ordinary citizen.

It is true that I can find countless banning of religious symbology, themes, and excercises regarding their use by agents of the government, such as public school teachers and government buildings. However, that is just a simple matter of making sure that the government does not endorse a religion in violation of the Constitution.

Surely you don't call upholding or defending the Constitution as simply political correctness?

 

[Principessa]

Because internet forums involve two skills. Reading and writing.

hahaha :lmao:

Maybe they don't - maybe an awful lot of the people who just nod their heads and say very little when right wing conservatives go off on one are actually far more liberal in their opinions but chose not to debate publically. Whereas online 'publically' means a very different thing.

Just a theory.

Hmm, I can go along with that.

By the way, Ann Coulter is a member of LPSG. :firedevil::AR15firing:

Yeah, but she only likes the big, black cocks. :tongue:

superlarge,

This is a very interesting observation. I would like to know more about why you feel this way. What makes you think this is true? How would you identify a liberal on a forum? Is it by ideology or by their professed support for a particular candidate?

I would think it goes by political candidate support, and a general conservative thinking about many things including sex. I don't personally know a lot of conservatives but I'd bet money most aren't into BDSM or other kinky or fetish type sexual acts.

Liberals like me tend to be all like "Fight the power!"

Conservatives tend to be the power.

Sad, but true. :12:

It isn't clear whether you mean forums within LPSG or forums on the internet in general. I'll assume you that mean LPSG only. As did I.

*SNIP* So the higher portion of queers skews LPSG to the left. That doesn't explain it all. Many left-leaning LPSG members are straight.

I think you may be on to something there. It makes sense.

*SNIP*

I don't come here for politics.

Nor do I. That said I have never had sex with or even kissed a Republican.

Percentage wise AM radio talk shows have a vast majority of conservatives. Explanation?

They're too dumb to operate television remote controls. :tongue:

 

[B_superlarge]

Yes, you made your point quite clearly, but instead, you managed to prove mine. I would like you to find one instance of the banning of the word Christmas in a public place for use by an ordinary citizen.

It is true that I can find countless banning of religious symbology, themes, and excercises regarding their use by agents of the government, such as public school teachers and government buildings. However, that is just a simple matter of making sure that the government does not endorse a religion in violation of the Constitution.

Surely you don't call upholding or defending the Constitution as simply political correctness?

Why do you think so many department stores advertised it as a "Holiday"? It offended some 'individuals', who then return the purchase and state that as the reason. Sometimes one has to read between the lines.