I think drawing lines from political views to personality is just narrowing your scope to fit your narrative. Sure, there are those types in that category and those other types in that other category, but there are plenty of both types in both categories as well. It's just easy to state the former because it fits with your preconceptions. It's ironic that preconceptions are inherently illogical but often come after "it seems logical that..." or similar. Thats the main reason I think all the graphspam Sok and others do is complete shit, you can literally say anything you want, then go out and find some picture on the internet that supports what you just said. More republicans eat icecream than democrats. Pubs might look at that data and say "obviously they are being proactive and preparing themselves for nuclear winter by acclimating their system to cold" but the demos would draw something from it like "obviously they feel guilty for voting like they did and need comfort food to help cope".
I'd say the difference is pretty minor (at least based on the pew research data). I feel like the phrasing you used specifically highlights liberals cutting people out but has excuses conservatives being insular as "less trusting" and then positively spins it as "deciding something." That basically just says, "Conservatives are open minded until they make up their minds" while saying "Liberals pretend to be open minded but cut people out." So I'd phrase it this way: Liberals tend to have slightly more friends and associates with differing ideologies, while Conservatives tend to have fewer. However, liberals are also somewhat more likely to cut someone out for having opposing views, but that stands to reason given that on average they also begin with more associates to cut. This is likely to be more of an urban/rural difference rather than a personality one where one side is more open-minded than the other.
I think it was mentioned earlier, when going through lists of media trust, that there were more "liberal" sources listed than conservative. I'm wondering if some of the seeming lack of cohesiveness on the "left" might be related to a more diffuse (at least in terms of accounts if not the ultimate source) source of information. For example, if there are (perceived to be) 10-20 "Liberal" outlets but only 4-5 "Conservative" outlets it would inherently make the "Conservative" side have more overlap, even if those 10-20 outlets still primarily originated from AP, NYTimes, or whatever for their base story. Considering seeming media bias it would be another factor to explain the apparent disparity. People might all be following Drudge or something on the Trump side, but you'll often as not get the same news from MSNBC as CNN on the Clinton side, so the following is split somewhat by comparison. If there are more (perceived) diverse outlets for "Liberally biased" information... or a least more trustworthy (by those that deem them thus) ones. Just a random thought.
Yea, I mean, if we look at the survey data from Pew, that is certainly happening - most of those sources asked about would be considered "liberal" by conservatives. Does that mean mean they are actually? Or is this a manifestation of the more insular/less trusting nature? I suppose that's hard to say. (We have noted on other threads that Europeans, for example, consider our Liberals more centrists, typically.)
This is completely misinterpreting what I was saying, almost to the point of me feeling like you're doing this on purpose. Let me rephrase it: Conservatives tend to be close-minded until they get enough information to support a view, be it right or wrong. Liberals tend to be more open-minded to new ideas, but are more quick to cut out things they don't like. Note that it's neither a positive nor negative assessment of either, just rambling based on my personal experience. This is just listing reasons for why the differences exist, something I wasn't even wanting to touch on in my statement. Also, I had that disclaimer in there to let everyone know that I wasn't attempting to speak in an all-inclusive manner, since there's obviously different personality types on both sides, but to act like there isn't a trend is disingenuous.
pretty much why it happens its right of national socialism... or nazism if you want to use the shortened form.
As a Canadian who is pretty far left, I find American politics to be fairly Conservative/Centrist. I long for the day when leftist viewpoints are properly represented in the US and considered valid, instead of immediately being labeled as "anti-American" and "unethical." As of now, I see the US has having 2 parties: Right Wing GOP Centrist Democrats This, to me, is exemplified by the fact that someone like Sanders has to run under the Democrat party and pulled Clinton towards the left by doing so.
Can you explain how this works? How can you be "closed minded" while not having made up your mind and apparently open to information? Isn't this an oxymoron? Isn't "get enough information to support a view" the definition of open minded? I think this is the crux of the problem I have with your phrasing.
Not having a view would be what I'm talking about. They're less willing to accept random assertions, until they see enough evidence for it. They haven't made up their minds yet on the subject before getting this info. At least, that's how literally every conservative I know -personally - approaches topics. I can't say the same for the liberals I know.
I understand what you are saying, but that doesn't sound "close minded" to me is my point, and it sounds like you are just saying, "Conservatives are open minded and wait til they have information before making up their minds."
I'm probably using the wrong word(s), I tend to do that, but the important part is that you understand my meaning, which I'm not sure is happening.
This says to me you feel "Conservatives I know are open-minded until they get the information to decide" while "Liberals I know are close minded and have already made up their minds before getting the facts." Which doesn't give with these statements, IMO: So you are right, I don't know what you are saying.
Maybe this has to do with people calling me and others like that close-minded to the point that I have no other basis for what that phrase means.
Let me see if I can explain this another way: Liberals that I know tend to make snap judgements on issues as soon as they feel like they have enough information to form an opinion, rather than looking as deeply as they can at a subject and reserving judgement until they feel they have the most information available to them, as conservatives I know tend to do.
Personally, I see Conservatives I know as close minded and dug into their beliefs, often ignorant of or devoid of facts. While Liberals tend to want to know the facts - even if they have a particular viewpoint, they are open to challenges. This is exemplified, for example, by the responses to the data I often present to facilitate discussions here. Most of the time, the conservatives attack me personally and hardly ever actually engage with the data/information, or just outright dismiss the data/information as being relevant or useful in any way and continue to spout their rhetoric which is completely contradicted by the data.
