Liberal v. Conservative leanings...

[Duemellon]

Let me start off by saying I think it's ridic that people continue to claim this board has a particular "leaning" towards being liberal or conservative. Most of that call is subjective at best, but most of it is most likely you projecting your own feel about how "the board" is.

I find the more conservative a person is (even if they're slightly right of center) will feel the conservatives have less a voice or pull in CE/P. I can attest, as a liberal, that I felt & still feel this board is definitely right-leaning.

So what to do?

Well, I went out looking for liberal/conservative quizzes to take so we could tally it up for ourselves. However, all the tests were crap.

Crap I say? Yep. They were already slanting the quiz by the way/form the questions were posed. When you have a question asking:Generally, do you tend to trust or distrust government's ability to solve problems?
trust/distrustI mean, c'mon. There aren't any conservatives who would even answer "Trust" to that question. It's clear the person writing it had a bias. (this link (http://madrabbit.net/webrabbit/quizshow.html))

Here's another (http://www.allthetests.com/quiz15/quizpu.php?testid=1123475739&katname=) andit's lead in question is:Question 1: How do you feel about the topic of ABORTION/CHOICE?

[b] I completely disagree with choice. Women should not be allowed to have abortions. Even in certain cases of rape or other circumstance, abortion is wrong and should be banned.WTF? If I was going to ask someone who was anti-abortion I wouldn't ask them if they were against "choice" unless I was trying to bias them.

Another one: Do you think that censorship by public libraries is acceptable?

Should schools conduct organized prayer? Poorly worded. Leading questions. In no way do they address the intracacies involved.

Even the one I think we all took some time ago is biased in it's questions. I mean:i'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.c'mon!

Okay okay, so the whole point of this is to invite some people (select few) to come up with some questiosn (more like a group of questions) that actually do so with as little bias as possible.

Anyone with me? After we construct this absurd test, we could then possibly see if this board has a leaning.

[miami2112]

does liberal = democrat
and
conservative = republican?

[DaHood]

no
and
yes


OR

yes
and
no


It just depends on whether you are a Democrat or a Republican.

[seafoamgreen]

In my view, there are fewer 'conservatives' in general on the boards, but the number of outspoken/visible 'conservatives' is roughly equal to the number of outspoken/visible 'liberals', since most discussions on the boards devolve into pissing matches between the same few people.

As far as a multiple choice test is concerned, I feel it's unlikely that one can quantify rather complex political backgrounds/motives. As well as the fact that the conservative/liberal and republican/democrat binaries tend to be as useless as they are factually/theoretically inaccurate. It is very hard to get to one's political principles through issues alone when there could be policy agreement on a set of issues between very different political/ethical/moral positions.

Beyond that, using liberal and conservative as constructed within contemporary political discourse gives me a fucking coronary, since both have been completely mangled from their proper historico/theoretical backgrounds.

[Frost]

I propose a pissing match forum.

There, people who discuss the same issues and argue back and forth on the same topic for sometimes Years, can be sent to hash it out.

You get sent to the forum in twos or threes. That forum will be set so that to get out of it, you have to click a button that says you agree with the other person, have resolved your differences or agree to disagree and not continue it here.

Because honestly, arguing the same points for years really, really is played.

[seafoamgreen]

I propose a pissing match forum.

There, people who discuss the same issues and argue back and forth on the same topic for sometimes Years, can be sent to hash it out.

You get sent to the forum in twos or threes. That forum will be set so that to get out of it, you have to click a button that says you agree with the other person, have resolved your differences or agree to disagree and not continue it here.

Because honestly, arguing the same points for years really, really is played.

I'll second that.

[Ambassador V3.0]

My own is Centrist, even though I am a registered Democrat. Lesser of two evils, in my humble opinion. :cool: Plus you've got such great individuals as Jefferson, Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and even Bill Clinton!

The far left is too looney and fiscally irresponsible, while the far right is (while also too looney) too dogmatic and shortsighted.

With regard to the political orientation tests on the 'Net, you are absolutely correct--they are skewed toward the ends that whomever made them may have had.

[seafoamgreen]

Well, this gets to my point. What does Centrist even mean? Is it a policy tendency? Or a discursive attitude?

And if are unable to pin down the two poles, is it possible to have a center?

[euro60]

I propose a pissing match forum.

There, people who discuss the same issues and argue back and forth on the same topic for sometimes Years, can be sent to hash it out.

You get sent to the forum in twos or threes. That forum will be set so that to get out of it, you have to click a button that says you agree with the other person, have resolved your differences or agree to disagree and not continue it here.

Because honestly, arguing the same points for years really, really is played.

Sort of like Exile Island on Survivor! Me likes!

[Duemellon]

I propose a pissing match forum.How does that help us agree to a measurement of who is liberal & who is conservative? Sometimes I think you just want bloodshed for you amusement. Like the Thunderdome, but with avatars instead.

[Duemellon]

Liberal (as I was intending to use it):
Includes people who identify themselves as Democrats, as well as progressives, anarchists, socialists, & Communists.

Conservative (as I was intending to use it):
Includes knuckledragging troglodytes, niave automoton-proles, Bible-hurling fundie crusaders, secret-police fascists, & the immorally wealthy.

I'm thinking my phraseology might not be considered unbiased so I'd like to hear someone else's definitions as well.

[the-dude]

On social issues I'm a far left liberal. Social libertarian I suppose. On economic issues I'm moderate to conservative. I suppose that makes me libertarian, but I'm not full on, because I do like some restraints on capitalism. I believe in open market in general, but I have a Spitzer-esque desire to make sure corporations aren't abusing their power.

I, as a biased libertarian, always prefer the 2 dimensional political leaning tests. In reality we should have a 5 or 6 dimensional test, but the 2 dimensions (social and economic) are huge improvement over our oversimplified views fostered by a one dimension political system.

Maybe this one?
http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi

Thats funny after writing all of the above I took that test and it came out just as I had expected.
"I just took the Political Brew Political Gauge and came up as a Strong Liberal on Non-Fiscal Issues and a Centrist on Fiscal Issues."
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (18).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (49).

[Ambassador V3.0]

Well, this gets to my point. What does Centrist even mean? Is it a policy tendency? Or a discursive attitude?

It means that I am generally middle of the road. I'm outta here shortly--I gots beers to drink, funky stuff to imbibe, and hell to raise! :D

[Frost]

How does that help us agree to a measurement of who is liberal & who is conservative? Sometimes I think you just want bloodshed for you amusement. Like the Thunderdome, but with avatars instead.

I dunno - I just saw this:

since most discussions on the boards devolve into pissing matches between the same few people.

And got the idea. And not for my amusement - you only see the forum when you're in it. Your status goes to "pissing match".

[markalot]

I'm thinking my phraseology might not be considered unbiased so I'd like to hear someone else's definitions as well.

double negative

[seafoamgreen]

Due, you are asking people to state their political leanings by using already politically charged rhetoric, like liberal/conservative. You're loading the question. The self identified liberals and conservatives will identify as such, but you will be unable to draw answers from those identifying as moderate or independent, which is most people.

It is also preposterous to put liberals, socialists, communists, and anarchists in the same over arching categorization. Each group carries with it, as a baseline, an understanding of the relationship between distributive politics, justice, and role of the state/citizen that are incompatable with each other. They do not have things in common just because you want them to. The only connection, and it is an infinetely problematic one, is that they have been crammed together as a coherent 'left' by dominant political discourse.

To gloss over the historical/theoretical difference between political views on each side is to invite yourself to answer your own question in whichever way you see fit.

[seafoamgreen]

Beyond what's been stated above, your binary political relationships between liberal and conservative breakdown completely when you contrast feelings on domestic and international politics. How do you explain with any sort of authority substantive differences in foreign policy when you can't see that liberals, who have become essentially classical conservatives or realists in terms of foreign policy, have essentially given up on notions of international governance in the face of neoconservatives stealing the ground from them in terms of idealist foreign policy?

[Duemellon]

Due, you are asking people to state their political leanings by using already politically charged rhetoric, like liberal/conservative. You're loading the question.I am, but I'm trying to use that to an advantage.

If the question was about keeping abortion legal, I know how I'd phrase the question. I also can see in those other quizzes I was citing how people can phrase the question so it's already setting up some distance. Instead of having one person come up with what they believe is unbiased, have someone from either extreme see if they can read that same question & feel it's not biased, u'kno?

Like, if I was really going to try to come up with a question about pro-choice/life I wouldn't have a prompting question, I would just jump to the answers:[ ] I feel that unborn children should be protected by the law of the land from being aborted in almost every case if not all

[ ] I feel the option to terminate a pregnancy, for almost any reason, should be protected by law

[ ] I have no opinion on this matter whatsoeverI think that's pretty unbiased b/c (I beleive) both answers are biased equally. U'kno? One's not calling the other anti-choice or pro-abortion. There's even room for someone to chose one they lean to but aren't the extreme on, u'kno? I didn't say "abortions should be illegal <period>" but added "in almost every case if not all" so those who want abortions illegal except for rape, incest, & maternal health.The self identified liberals and conservatives will identify as such, but you will be unable to draw answers from those identifying as moderate or independent, which is most people.See, that's what I'd like to do. Is see if those people who claim liberal-ality are really what they profess. The same for moderates & conservatives as well. Perhaps we'd come up with something that could get someone to re-evaluate their claims?It is also preposterous to put liberals, socialists, communists, and anarchists in the same over arching categorization.Well, that's the thing eh? What is the baseline for making someone liberal or conservative?

By the very nature of their terms you could slash the world with a rigid line, but the application of the descriptive term, nowadays, is so loaded you can't call someone "Conservative" without them assuming you meant "Republican right-winger Fundie W-Supporter". So I do believe I'm using the baseline definition of that when I say liberal v. conservative, even though there's plenty of opportunity for someone to bring in their own baggage regarding those terms.

[seafoamgreen]

I'm sorry. I forgot why i don't post over hear that much.

What the hell was I thinking?

The very nature of this thread is to justify whatever feelings you had about the subject to begin with, rather than actually think about anything in any substantive way.

Seriously, I'm an idiot for posting in this thread at al.

[WonderBoy]

I feel like Due is trying to find new people to argue with since BigSug isn't here anymore. I read the CE/P forum quite often but I choose not to write because it always ends up in ridiculous arguing until someone like BigSug goes off the deep end.

But yeah I'm conservative and I'll leave it at that, because I really don't think I need to defend my beliefs. I am what I am. If you don't like it, shove it.

[Breeze]

I'm sorry. I forgot why i don't post over hear that much.

What the hell was I thinking?

The very nature of this thread is to justify whatever feelings you had about the subject to begin with, rather than actually think about anything in any substantive way.

Seriously, I'm an idiot for posting in this thread at al.

I feel like Due is trying to find new people to argue with since BigSug isn't here anymore. I read the CE/P forum quite often but I choose not to write because it always ends up in ridiculous arguing until someone like BigSug goes off the deep end.

But yeah I'm conservative and I'll leave it at that, because I really don't think I need to defend my beliefs. I am what I am. If you don't like it, shove it.

Quoted for emphasis. :cool:

This is nothing but trolling by another name.

[Buzzstein]

I'm sorry. I forgot why i don't post over hear that much.

What the hell was I thinking?

The very nature of this thread is to justify whatever feelings you had about the subject to begin with, rather than actually think about anything in any substantive way.

Seriously, I'm an idiot for posting in this thread at al.

Well maybe, but I appreciate your thoughts and perspective regardless.

[Ambassador V3.0]

Whatever your political leanings, all you cats are swell. At least you have good taste in tunes!

[DaHood]

I can attest, as a liberal, that I felt & still feel this board is definitely right-leaning.That's ridiculous.


How do you feel about the topic of ABORTION/CHOICE?Abortion sucks. But I support choice.

Truth be told, when it comes down to it I could give a fuck less about the issue. I will never base my vote on this issue either way. In fact the issue pisses me off because it clouds the issues that are really important.

Do you think that censorship by public libraries is acceptable?No.

Should schools conduct organized prayer?No.

I am also strongly anti death penalty and I couldn't give a fuck less about gay marriage either way. So you tell me, am I a liberal or a conservative?

You're loading the question.Ooookay... and you've been around here for how long?

:p

[Homsar]

Now Due, you of all people should know not to label things like that.

Heehee.

[The_Deacon]

Veal is very lean. And tasty.

[Duemellon]

I'm sorry. I forgot why i don't post over hear that much.

What the hell was I thinking?What the F?

If you're going to be that sensitive about it, maybe you shouldn't. I didn't call you names. I didn't say your idea or you were phoey either! WTF dude? B/c I decided to use that opportunity to clarify the point it made you uncomfortable? The point was to see if we could find a way to objectively (objectively in an agreed manner) measure how left or right leaning the board would be. I simply restated that with more clarifications of an expected result.

Now you're acting like you were beat-down, marginalized, & personally affronted? WTF? It's a discussion. There was no hostility in my post. NONE. I thought you might actually talk. Instead you run as if I'm attacking.The very nature of this thread is to justify whatever feelings you had about the subject to begin with, rather than actually think about anything in any substantive way.The nature of this thread was to see if we could create an agreed upon objective measurement to once-and-for-all say the boards lean left/right. Not whether or not I'm right in which way they lean.

You say it's impossible to measure b/c liberal/conservative automatically create partisanship. When people use those terms they are oversimplifying, but yet they do so all the time. So the challenge went out: "Let's prove it". Seriously, the greatest thing under this all was to demonstrate how we can't really prove it, but we kinda havta try to find out we can't. U'kno?

[Duemellon]

I feel like Due is trying to find new people to argue with since BigSug isn't here anymore. I read the CE/P forum quite often but I choose not to write because it always ends up in ridiculous arguing until someone like BigSug goes off the deep end.So you posted here to complain about me? Nice work.But yeah I'm conservative and I'll leave it at that, because I really don't think I need to defend my beliefs. I am what I am. If you don't like it, shove it.Who's trying to convert you in this thread? Did you even read what the point of it was? No one here is trying to change you views.

WTF?

I was simply asking some people who self-identify as conservative & moderate to help come up with meaningful questions to help draw a finer line between conservative & liberal. A daunting task indeed. Here you are taking the opportunity to complain about the motives you project on me, then start reacting with paranoia that someone's trying to change your views.

Those 2 posts have already tried making this thread about me instead of the subject. SFG took my response dialog as being dismissive or belittling & WB has already accused me of baiting.

Honestly, how can someone even work under these conditions?

[markalot]

People are so damn sensitive. ;)

[Motti]

Ok, I think this is an interesting proposal yet quixotic.

It's just too hard to expurge the bias out of anything and, OTOH, it's too easy to see bias in anything. See, "abortion" sounds bad while "choice" sounds good, as Due pointed out, so unless we start creating some new words it wouldn't work.

So I don't think it's possible to create The Ultimate Quiz. It might be worth the try, but don't count on me. Because it's Sunday, the sun is shining and I'm off to the swimming pool.

[Duemellon]

Ok, I think this is an interesting proposal yet quixotic.

It's just too hard to expurge the bias out of anything and, OTOH, it's too easy to see bias in anything. See, "abortion" sounds bad while "choice" sounds good, as Due pointed out, so unless we start creating some new words it wouldn't work.

So I don't think it's possible to create The Ultimate Quiz. It might be worth the try, but don't count on me.So why not go for the extreme language/rhetoric that one side uses (slightly softened for a way out), but use it on behalf of that side...

er...

The example I had of abortion/choice question. The one where you were seeing if they were conservative included the word "abortion". Those who were anti-abortion/pro-life would easily identify with that word & see no problem getting behind it. Also absent was the word "choice". Then, when it came to the pro-choice/women's rights one, "abortion" was dropped & used the term choice. Also, I softened them both still by having abortion be prohibited "in most if not all", & choice be a "protected option".

Do you think that's a way to cater to the "Leanings" while still leaving contrary bias out the other's question? I mean, if I used "abortion" in the "pro-choice" prompt, it wouldn't be as good. Nor if I used "not a choice" in the pro-life one.

[upwithpeople]

What the F?

If you're going to be that sensitive about it, maybe you shouldn't. I didn't call you names. I didn't say your idea or you were phoey either! WTF dude? B/c I decided to use that opportunity to clarify the point it made you uncomfortable? The point was to see if we could find a way to objectively (objectively in an agreed manner) measure how left or right leaning the board would be. I simply restated that with more clarifications of an expected result.

Now you're acting like you were beat-down, marginalized, & personally affronted? WTF? It's a discussion. There was no hostility in my post. NONE. I thought you might actually talk. Instead you run as if I'm attacking.Bait deployed.

[Duemellon]

Bait deployed.what have I done in this thread? what?

I just don't understand how the rest of the board puts up with people like you, coming into a thread just to start stuff up. You're willing to turn anything into some personal issue. You haven't said one thing as a contribution to any topic I've seen you post in, in a long time.

Well, enough of that.

[WonderBoy]

I just don't understand how the rest of the board puts up with people like you, coming into a thread just to start stuff up.


well if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black.






uh oh that could be taken as racist. Look what I've gotten myself into.

[upwithpeople]

what have I done in this thread? what?

I just don't understand how the rest of the board puts up with people like you, coming into a thread just to start stuff up. You're willing to turn anything into some personal issue. You haven't said one thing as a contribution to any topic I've seen you post in, in a long time.Bait deployed.

[upwithpeople]

what have I done in this thread? what?

I just don't understand how the rest of the board puts up with people like you, coming into a thread just to start stuff up. You're willing to turn anything into some personal issue. You haven't said one thing as a contribution to any topic I've seen you post in, in a long time.

Well, enough of that.A.) Thanks for monitoring all my posts for content.
B.) I thought this was a stupid idea for a thread the first time I saw it, i.e., the first time I ever looked at these boards.
C.) Your righteousness is what draws me to you, makes me love, makes me want to "do mellon" if you catch my drift.

[upwithpeople]

A.) Thanks for monitoring all my posts for content.
B.) I thought this was a stupid idea for a thread the first time I saw it, i.e., the first time I ever looked at these boards.
C.) Your righteousness is what draws me to you, makes me love, makes me want to "do mellon" if you catch my drift.Ha! He took the bait!

[Duemellon]

well if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black.






uh oh that could be taken as racist. Look what I've gotten myself into.Again, now the thread is about me. People wonder why there there isn't a consistent mature discourse here & no one seems to call out people like you. Do they not see how this works? You & those others like you just come, derail a thread to make some personal attack & that makes the whole thread "uncomfortable". Who wants to talk about this subject now? Who even wants to find out where it goes? No one. You & your disorganized clan of sabotuers pretty much keep things like that from happening.

Not only do you undermine genuine conversations, but you look for any & everything said by certain people to have some hidden agenda or some form of insult. Who calls you out? No one does. They don't see the barnacles slowing the ship down, they just see the ship goes slow & blame the wind.

If you disagree with someone's view, disagree with their view. Make a point about the subject, but you don't have to make it about them. If there's something I disagree with I very specifically begin talking about what I'm disagreeing with. If you think you're performing some of service, you aren't. You're just boring people, steering them away, & making a casual conversation into some way to harass others.

You're a small-minded, grudge-holding, troll. No one calls you out on it, but it's people like you who make this whole thing fall apart. I'm done with this stupid shit b/c no one seems to care. They just go other places or don't come at all.

[mike]

You're a small-minded, grudge-holding, troll. No one calls you out on it, but it's people like you who make this whole thing fall apart. I'm done with this stupid shit b/c no one seems to care. They just go other places or don't come at all.

Come on, man. Give it a break.

It's like this: it's fine to have a discussion, even a disagreement, when the discussion is on equal terms. You make a point, the other guy makes a point, and so on. So, don't get upset when you open with 10 points to make and don't receive an equal point-by-point response.

Ever ask for someone's opinion, and after hearing 2 minutes of uninterrupted response, you think "geez, why did I even bother?". It seems trying to argue a point usually becomes too one-sided. Most people just don't have that kind of energy. If no one seems to care to your level of intensity, that's life, man.

When you start badgering other people's debate style, things fly off the rails and inevitably pisses people off. Reminds me of the "Don't you want to haggle?" guy in Life Of Brian. Make your point, and stay on point.

And yeah, this had the potential to go astray from the get-go so I've been a-watchin' it. My wife's out of town this weekend so I have extra time to look over this stuff while reviewing new CD's :D.