But since were a general interest board and not just politics I think we we’re towards the middle really because people tent to call both sides out when needed because rabid people on both sides tend to get themselves banned or just ignored for repeated histrionics … I remember a few posters swore they were moving when bush was elected and I’m sure theres tons on the other side swore the same them Obama took office
Remember the december and collonsbury feud? I don’t see a lot of those since ive been back its just a few dipsticks that everyone seems to hate …(although theres one poster ive noticed wouldn’t mind being back in the gilded robber baron age of labor relations that if I wrote better id call out …but I digress)
but if you’ve come to preach to the choir you’re in the wrong place because even If your left or right no one here is gonna be a yes man and not challenge or make you defend your position …
Why it leans left? People in general prefer to hang around those with similar philosophical points of view and so it becomes self reinforcing to a large extent as stated above.
Now I like this place because I like interacting with people with different view points and there are some very knowledgeable people here. I don’t think it has to be as hostile as it devolves into at times, but aside from the pit, this board is pretty fair. I feel bad for the mods though with how nitpicky some of the rules lawyering can be.
My take is that health/science woo encompasses the political spectrum. Sometimes a particular theme gets associated with the Left or Right (for instance, normally rational leftists may go bonkers over GMOs, and antivax positions are much more common among right-wing politicians compared to their left-leaning counterparts - but there are plenty of GMO-fearing conservatives and vaccine-shunning liberals).
A little of column A, a little of column B, a little long-term historical bias and a tendency for the anti-intellectual trolls to trend right (thanks, Breitbart and Fox!) resulting in their more thoughtful brethren taking collateral damage when the idiots get splatted. It all adds up.
It’s worth caveating the “facts and science people lean left” view with the observation that the reverse isn’t remotely true - being left-leaning is no guarantee of a more reality-based outlook, as many lefty messageboards full of delusional idiots out there demonstrate.
However, I have seen many posters that come for sure from those delusional boars and they also get a drubbing here, even by me.
Historically speaking I do think that what we see now is just a happenstance of the left having a lot of scientific issues that matches with their points of view and even politics. More than once I have made the observation that if Teddy Roosevelt was made to be the current president of the USA that he would not just think to toss guys like the polluter Koch brothers out of the window of the white house, he would do it. And would had torn many banks to pieces because they are too big to fail.
The point here is that if we had republicans like that in office and had those policies most in this board would be following them and conservative causes.
When you consider how Republicans and conservatives have drifted more and more to not just pander to troglodytes for their vote but to also support their policies it is time to seek places that look more at the evidence and not to political biases that are becoming not only dangerous to the nation but to the world too.
LIke I said, and lets not forget that currently the would be leaders offer painful evidence of who are a walking bag of scientific ignorance and bigotry. And that is not Clinton and most Democrats nowadays, point being that a lot of the woo woo seen currently in politics has a lot of Republicans not only pandering to the troglodytes, but they are now supporting policies that will undermine the progress made. The lefty side that is less scientific has very little to say on many subjects at high levels of government. On the Republican side…
Even in the pit in the SDMB it is clear that most of us in the anti vaccine thread think that Trump should not be put in the position to control the CDC, the FDA, the EPA and many other American organizations. Even if by chance Trump does not appoint woo woo guys to administer those groups, having an anti vaccine guy like Trump get the biggest bully pulpit in the world will mean that he will influence a lot of people to cause lot of harm by discouraging vaccinations.
On a more personal note I will only mention that what you said once to defend the taking away of the health care I got thanks to ACA (when I was sick) by trying to get me to bet on it was one of the most personal insults that I have seen in this website.
A couple of the forums on Delphi are very conservative. But when liberals post in the threads, they are for the most part treated courteously. And for the most part, they are the ones who start with the personal insults and glurge, at which point the thread degenerates.
I hadn’t heard of them before. Just had a poke around (without registering or posting) and at a cursory glance they do appear quite civil and (mostly) as coherent and articulate as the members of this board, which is refreshing - certainly no txtspeak or animated gifs to be seen, which is already a positive trait for an internet forum.
They also insist that Trump won the debate handily but, like, that’s just their opinion, man.
To go absurdly broad, I think that, to American liberals, the main problem with people is that they are ignorant and need to be educated, whereas, to American conservatives, the main problem with people is that they are immoral and need to be controlled and, if possible, saved.
So the political coloration of this board seems pretty obvious.
Empirical science advocates eliminating bias and only relying on observation without any foregone conclusions. Those who use the scientific method are thus heartless, without empathy, and appear cold to those who rely on spiritual guidance to get by. Conservatives believe patriotism and strong Christian values are what makes America great. When non-Conservatives challenge those beliefs, they are seen as the enemy, and by extension united with foreign powers the US sees as antagonistic.
Not to say all liberals identify with the scientific method. There are plenty who see Conservatives as the driving force behind class and racial issues without always looking into the facts. Liberals can also include those who reject Christian principles for New Age and woo, mainly because it’s something different that has less of a negative history than Christianity, but they eschew reason for faith just the same. They get shouted down here too, but this isn’t noticed as much, because there’s very little political labeling associated with those issues.
I’m definitely a liberal, but this board tends to be very anti-religion (I know, I know… some may say it’s a function of “fighting actual ignorance with facts and science”). Generally speaking, those are the right are more religious, though there are plenty of those of us on the left who are as well. I imagine that the constant anti-religion can turn away some who are religious.
FWIW, I find this place to be sometimes a fascinating place to see what the atheist (and the various types of atheism) mindset is.
To paraphrase Colbert, reality has a well-known atheist bias.
This board has a founding principle of “fighting ignorance”, and the general attitude of participants simply reflects that. If that means the board is generally anti-religion or anti-right-wing-lunacy or anti-antivax etc., it’s ridiculous to portray these attitudes as attributable to “bias” among members. It’s primarily attributable to the level of ignorance associated with the beliefs themselves.
Why would anyone expect the SDMB to have a tolerant attitude to beliefs that are ignorant and unsupported by evidence? Most especially when such beliefs entail a fundamental desire to impose the consequences of ignorant beliefs on others, as is true with the much of the political right and the religious.
I think the worst that can be said is that it’s unfortunate if those with reasonable right-wing or spiritual views sometimes get tarred with same brush, but that’s hardly a function of SDMB being a place where people rush to judgement more than anywhere else. It’s a result of the dominance of crazy and damaging right-wing and religious views in modern politics. It’s not the SDMB’s fault if a reasonable and sane Republican these days has to qualify and explain that they are not that kind of Republican.
I’m happy to oblige - we certainly agree that this board is generally anti-religion.
Do you have any argument to offer against my point that there’s a good reason for this? Do you have any reasonable basis to expect that a board that’s dedicated to fighting ignorance would look favorably on religious truth-claims that are unsupported by evidence?