Since my early days on the BBS it has been a refrain I have seen time and again: This board is dominated by Liberals. To a degree Hitler's axiom applies, and you begin to believe something, at a certain level, merely because you hear it so often. But further developments have coloured my perspective on this issue, primarily the fact that, despite holding many positions usually defined as conservative on key issues like abortion, the military, religion and affirative action, and despite having supported the Rep. presidential candidate in 5 of the past 6 elections, including the most recent, I have been repeatedly called a liberal in here...often with more descriptive qualifiers...simply because some of my positions on other issues reflect more classicly defined liberal ideals. I have my own theory, but I first want to look at this as objectively as possible. 1) Statistically speaking, studies show that the majority of Americans right now are more readily defined as 'conservative' than 'liberal'. Statistical probability would then lean to the conclusion that, if this site is an accurate sampling of US citizens, allowing for the influence of a foreign contingent which comprises a minority ( at least in this forum) it is more likely that the majority of posters in here would be conservative. 2) In that this is a site about a basketball teams, and studies show that sports fans tend ( to a fairly large degree) to be more conservative, this would increase that probability. 3) In that this site is about a team in Texas, in that most of the posters come from Texas, and in that Texas is among the, if not THE most conservative based states in the Union, not to mention the home state of the current ( Republican/Conservative) President, that would tend to even further increase that probability. And this is all on the US alone scale...on a global political scale the US in general falls far to the right. Now, on the other hand, studies also show that liberals tend to be more prone to/interested in political dialogie, as conservatives are ( by definition) usually less flexible/interested in alternatives, it could be argued that those BBS members who are liberal would be more likely to access/participate in this forum than their conservative counterparts. Whether or not this would make up enough ground to level the playing filed considering the previous 3 points is unknown. What can be said, unless you disagree with any of my assertions thus far( none of which would seem to be all that debatable), or feel that I have missed other factors which effect the liberal/conservative probability issue ( which is extremely possible)I think it can be said that, whle it is still possible that the BBS is mostly liberal, it would represent a statistical anomaly of a fairly significant degree. So I would like to hear people's ideas on this...if you feel it's liberal in here, which of the factors I mentioned do you take issue with, or which did Ifail to consider, or how do you account for the improbability of that being the case? If you feel it's conservative in here, how do you account for the commonly voiced opinion that this place is dominated by liberals? As for myself, I have no feeling about what I feel IS the present political climate, as a whole, and as such will go with what I see as the statistival probability. As to how to explain the misconception, I think that'e easy... As most polls show nowadays, liberals/Democrats are a lot more flexible, less united, etc. however you want to qualify it...Conservatives/Republicans are a lot less flexible/more united. As such it would then follow that: a)It would be more likely for someone certain of his own position to label/identify someone he sees as contrary, in this case more likely for a conservative to see someone with a different mindset as necssarily liberal than for a liberal, less sure of his own position, or the parameters of what qualifies his 'group's position to identify someone outside that group. b) Conservatives, more unified in action and position would be able to successfully present enough coincidental opinions...ie the BBS is liberal...than it would be for a more scattered/less unified liberal contingent to contradict that perception, in terms of volume, consistency, and apparent certainty. If you look at the country as a whole, we know 3 things: We are increasingly polarized, conservatives are increasingly unified, and liberals haven't unified to anywhere near the same degree. As such, a logical conclusion would seem to indicate that the extreme polarization is a result of the newer activity ( conservative unification) than by the status quo ( liberal fragmentation.) I find it likely that, like the statsitical probability, what is happening in the US in general is probably reflected in here to a large degree. Your thoughts?
I think if you just did a little math, you'd find that the liberals by far dominate this place. They post the most new topics and just in numbers alone outnumber the conservatives by at least a 2-to-1 margin.
But right there we come down to a key issue: Who is defined as a "liberal'? Is it whoever YOU think is liberal...for example, as I stated, my political ideologies are scattered acorss the map, while my voting record would, if anything, strongly indicate Republican/conservativ leanings...yet I have little doubt that you have classified me as a liberal for some time. Do you disagree? My point was that hard line conservatives will be more likely to lable anyone with any difference of opinion on any significant issue as being 'liberal' than the reverse and more so than would be the case from a neutral perspective. So if you only qualify Conservatives as those who are hard-line, in step right wingers, then, yeah, it will often seem that you're outnumbered. But that may not be an objective truth.
I think the board was more liberally dominated when I first joined. Since then, there has been a great migration of conservatives to the board, and some who were here before have been more apt to chime in on some topics (and, by the same token, there are some more liberal posters who don't post as much on political discussions as in the past). That may simply be because of the D&D Board being here and engendering more political topics (the political talk when I first joined sure seemed less strident and less frequent). One thing I think you forgot in your analysis was the age factor. I would venture to bet that this board skews younger than the general population, and younger people often skew more liberal than the older population. That comes and goes, of course, but I would also venture that younger people also tend to be more strident in thier beliefs and more willing to speak out about them than older people, in general. There are exceptions to every rule, of course. I would also argue that the conservatives on this board are no more unified than anyone else. I guarantee that there are other conservatives here who disagree with some of the things I say, just like there are things they say that I disagree with. I see as much unification of ideas from the more liberal members of this board as I do from the conservative side (and they do have the unifying factor of hating GWB.) So my answer is: I don't know.
MacB, you know this answer before you ask it of bama. He decides. While I hate how he holds forth, I will give bamaslammer credit in that he does not toe the GOP line and voices his displeasure at several of their policies. He really goes issue to issue. That's true of several "liberal" posters that he despises as well, however, which I know you've already said in essence. My take is that the board has a more liberal feel because liberals currently feel more agitated in the current political climate. Those removed from power are typically more vocal. Just my take at oversimplification.
"Now, on the other hand, studies also show that liberals tend to be more prone to/interested in political dialogie, as conservatives are ( by definition) usually less flexible/interested in alternatives, it could be argued that those BBS members who are liberal would be more likely to access/participate in this forum than their conservative counterparts." I don't agree with the above assertion. I do agree with your other assertions however, Macbeth. I think the dominance of liberals in here can be easily explained- George Bush is in the White House and they are not happy about it. People who are angry tend to be more vocal than happy people. I remember through the '90s most of the stuff in message boards and such was anti-Clinton stuff. I have been surprised at the amount of anti-Bush stuff and lack of anti-Democrat stuff in the past year on message boards.
i'm not 100% sure on this, but being that most people here are educated and have gone to college, let alone colleges that have aquainted them to the internet, and since, i've read, that most college educated people are liberal, that would make a lot of people on this board liberal. however, this could be mixed because usually wealthier people can afford college and wealthier people are sometimes more conservative or have children that shared the same views. one point that is true, MacB, is that liberals are more likely to debate and post. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of posters were liberal but the majority of members were conservative. edit: ill take into consideration what, Mr. Clutch said, that a big part of the debate and posting in the D&D is mostly because of Bush.
I think there is an element of that, though I don't think it is consistently the case where only the hard liners are considered to be conservatives. I'm no hard liner, but I don't think I'm considered to be liberal by the regular conservative posters on an occassion... though they may just ignore me when I stray.
I honestly don't feel it is more liberal, but that's just my perception (and I do skip a whole lot of threads). But to expand on this idea, the bulk of the news that's going to come out to comment on is going to be stuff relating to the administration in power. There's more for a liberal to say because there's more ammunition being generated. The Bush Administration is in charge. The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The Republicans control both the Texas House and Senate, as well as pretty much every statewide office in Texas. So the things that come out that affect us... the things we want to talk about are going to be things that the Republicans have done or are doing. And those that are going to be most wanting to debate such topics are those who disagree with them. If the Administration is doing something I agree with, I'm probably not going to go start a thread on it. Best I could do would be to argue for it when someone posted attacking it.... and even then, if one of the other conservatives posted essentially what would've said first, I'll probably just skip it altogether. With the election coming up, there's more stuff showing up about those candidates, just because they're in the news. But after the election, we'll go back to whoever is in charge making the most news and, therefore, prompting the bulk of the talk, mostly from those who are in opposition.
You'll never get an accepted definition of Liberal. Or 'conservative' Is everyone who disagrees with Bush a 'Liberal' - You get caught in this net you socialist left leaning traitorous leach on the hard working people of America. Is everyone who supports Bush and his tax cuts (and spending increases) conservative? Interventionalist vs isolationalists. Where do we slot them? On voting poles a huge proportion identify themselves as independents, libertarian, green, etc. I think you'd have trouble labeling yourself here. How do you expect to label the board? We're a diverse bunch. A strange bunch. A VERY strange bunch. Opinionated. Informed. Ignorant. Dysfunctional. Disturbing. Insightful. Stubborn. Sometimes brilliant. Sometimes drunk. Occasionally brilliantly drunk. Hard to place. Hard to understand. But loveable none the less. And welcome back. I've missed your dissertations. And I do believe that makes me the 112th person today to kid you about your verbosity. And kidding it is. Hope you're feeling better. (You were off sick for a bit were you not?)
I recall it feeling more liberal then, but I don't remember people saying it. But I don't think most of the more strident conservatives were here prior to Bush being elected. I don't recall a whole lot of political topics until the election aftermath in 2000, and I often felt like I was the only Republican in those debates, even though I probably wasn't.
I understand what you are saying..........but to continue............ we need to designate/pick the bbs poster(s) that represents the median American viewpoint on most topics. Once we establish that......it becomes easier to quantify any bias/skew on this BBS. MacBeth rimbaud glynch SamFisher andymoon GreenVegan rimrocker Woofer B-Bob gifford1967 <i>(missing a few people)</i> I think represent views generally to the left of Middle America. Trader Jorge BigTexx Mad Max Stupid Moniker Dadakota <i>(missing a few people)</i> I think represent views generally to the right of middle America. Who (that posts in this Forum) on the BBS falls into the moderate center?
I'm not sure you're correct about whether or not younger people sway to the left anymore...you might be, but I think what they usually represent is the extreme of the current trend, ( as in most of Hitler and Mussolini's initial support, hard right, came from the youth demographic) and the current trend is towards conservatism. But you make a great point in mentioning that it IS a factor I overlooked.
I am interested. I had thought this was a firly accepted truism, and in fact one of the standard complaints I hear conservatives make about liberals is how much liberals feel the need to discuss politics. But unlike the other points i made, this one was less based on quantifiable objectivity than what I felt was an accepted truth, so I'll cerrainly listen to why you disagree. I do, however, think that the very nature of liberalism promotes the value of dialogue, for good or ill, whereas the very nature of conservatism is to assume that the truth is self-evident.
I find MacBeth to be very close to the middle on most issues. Nice to have you back, BTW. Personally, I am a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. That means that I believe the federal government needs to spend as little money as possible accomplishing the important jobs that only the federal government can do. The state and local governments need to spend as little as possible to accomplish their goals, etc.
If my perception that this mantra was already commonplace when I signed on, pre-9-11, then this is a valid point. It certainly affects how I am percieved, I know that much. In that the war has been THE dominant issue for a while, and in that my position is contrary to the accepted Republican position, I have been charecterized as liberal. People might be surprised by whay my position was on Clinton and the Lewinsky thing, excepting MadMax, who is well aware...
