I would agree that the board has always had at least a slight lean to the left.
But I’d disagree that in 2000 or 2001, the board leaned nearly as far left as it does now. Quite simply, conservatism as it was then was much more defensible than conservatism as it is now. So people were more apt to defend it, and were more able to do so in the only coin that amounts to anything here, good argument supported by facts.
Now, quite frankly, there isn’t a whole hell of a lot about contemporary American conservatism that’s intellectually defensible. And those who defend parts of it successfully are pretty selective about which parts they defend. Those here who defend conservatism broadly are limited to the Shodans and Starving Artists of the world, because one really must be some sort of idiot to defend conservatism broadly. And that’s why the balance has changed a great deal over the past 10 years.
It’s my understanding that you offered the assertion as a rejoinder and a rebuke to MaxTheVool’s admission that liberals are imperfect and outnumber conservatives round these parts. Your implication was that Max is hypocritical to expect your acceptance of these facts while refraining from criticism of the liberals who in this very thread are denying those same facts.
I’ve no doubt we can find almost any proposition defended or denied if we engage the full power of the SDMB’s awesome search function. But the specific point we’re arguing rather requires that we examine only the original parameters you claimed as evidence of anti-conservative bias.
And as I said in a recent thread, you’ve devalued ‘troll’ as a useful term. To you, it has become just another insult, to be used when ‘asshat’ and the like have lost their oomph.
Not really fair to F-P there, Shodan. The goalposts as originally defined are Bricker’s, and the argument about whether Elvis’ remark crossed the posts is mine, not F-P’s. F-P is in agreement that the remark fails to meet Bricker’s criteria, but I don’t think I see a disagreement from F-P with the thrust of Bricker’s argument.
So, to rebut this proposition, I’d have to find someone who denies the board leans left, and denies that liberals are correct?
Why? If I’m limited to searching this thread, and only this thread, because my original claim was limited to this thread, why must I also accept a limitation that wasn’t part of my original claim?
You don’t have to accept any new limitations, we’re just disagreeing with your interpretation of Elvis’ claim. He doesn’t appear to be denying there’s more liberals posting here; he’s claiming that’s because we’re less delusional.
AIUI, it’s a riff on Colbert’s “reality has a well-known liberal bias.”
OK, let’s regroup a bit and firm up what’s being argued.
Proposition #1, offered by MaxtheVool, which I said was being denied, either explicitly or implicitly, in this very thread: Furthermore, it’s also unquestionably the case that the SDMB as a whole is left-leaning
Agreed as to proposition #1?
Proposition #2, offered by MaxtheVool, which I said was being denied, either explicitly or implicitly, in this very thread: * And, unfortunately, that has become somewhat of a vicious cycle… as right wing posters have become fewer, the ratio has increased…*
So, with your new, more selective block quoting, you’re saying my interpretation of which propositions you claimed are being denied was incorrect? That you were not accusing un-named liberals in this thread of denying that liberals ever misbehave, as I listed explicitly as my interpretation several times for your review?
Really, Bricker, a little bit of correction on that point a few posts ago would’ve been in better faith, doncha think?
I do not fully understand your new proposition #2. You’d have to explain to me what SDMB phenomenon you think is being denied that can be expressed as a ratio which has increased.
Is it [ul]
[li]the raw ratio of liberals to conservatives on the board, or[/li][li]the ratio of posts expressing disagreement with any single given conservative proposition as compared to posts in support of that proposition?[/ul][/li]
I think the first is a point of disagreement between you and RTF, where he’s been affirming and you denying the proposition!
And I think the second is so slippery as to not only be difficult to demonstrate but also to deny or affirm.
Can’t be arsed right now to find where you bragged about having done exactly that–I’m sure it was in one of the threads where you were asked to explain what “Regards,” meant, at the very least–but maybe someone can remember where the evidence for your blithe disavowals of ownership of your words might be found.
I’d like for you to point out what “misinformation and nonsense” I believe, and how I’m actively trying to make the country worse. Because, from my vantage point, it’s the exact opposite.
While black conservatives are a rarity IRL, they’re quite abundant on op-ed pages, in right-wing think tanks, and in the commentariat generally. It’s the wingnut parody of affirmative action, in action.
So your handle, which suggests that some people might be surprised to find out that there are black conservatives, reveals a pretty deep well of ignorance or idiocy, I can’t say which.
No, Bricker, I’m pointing out that your latest block quoting of MaxTheVool’s post which ignited your indignation is more selective than your initial block quoting was. Since your initial umbrage was directed not only at the paragraph which you’ve now separated into Propositions #1 and #2, but also at the paragraph which pointed out that liberals can be assholes too, it was my stated impression that this assertion was included in your claim to Max as being denied in the thread.
Would’ve been nice if you’d corrected me when I first so characterized your argument.
Now that you’ve zeroed in on the leftward tilt of the board and this poorly defined ratio as being the disputed propositions, I’d like to get the ratio clarified so I can understand whether I even disagree that it’s being denied. Seems so far like I don’t even agree that the meaning is even commonly understood between you, me and the rest of this message board.
Sure.
But I want to state again why I’m arguing this and why I think it’s relevant to the treatment you receive on the boards during political discussions. When MaxTheVool made his assertions, whether you agreed with them or not, your response was to chastise Max for failing to criticize others who did not accept those propositions. As if these denials had already been demonstrated, but more importantly as if such denials, were they to exist, had fuck all to do with Max’ point, or with the general treatment of conservatives by liberals.
This sort of reflexive accusation from you is often parodied as “come and see the liberal hypocrisy!” and is why you’re greeted with hostility more often than your basic conservative viewpoint would merit if you were to present it without such sanctimony.
That’s a separate issue, of course, from the general SDMB tradition of hostility to GOP / right wing talking points, which as others have said is very much part and parcel of the anti-woo, pro-science tradition on the board.