There’s nothing about having a debate that requires one to complain about being outnumbered all the time. If people enjoy debating their ideas with people who don’t agree with them then that’s one thing, but moaning and groaning about how unfair it is that this is a left-leaning board and there are hardly any conservatives is quite another. Since some of our more conservative posters clearly dislike being outnumbered all the time, I think it’s fair enough to wonder why they don’t find some other board that will make them less miserable. This would be trivially easy to do, it’s not like packing up and moving from a “blue state” to a “red state”.
I’m not sure if you imagine me as a member of the complaining chorus, but I can tell you that my harmonizing in that chorus, to the extent I do, is not because I’m outnumbered. It’s that I see much greater tolerance for foolish argument when it comes from the “correct” side of the political spectrum. Near the beginning of this thread, in response to the OP’s questions, I mentioned that at least two posters were worse than Starving Artist in the attributes complained of in the OP, and yet they got nowhere near the negative attention that SA does.
Nor is it merely useless complaining. Like any other issue, it’s my belief that drawing attention to it and providing substantive argument for my position will result in at least some people becoming convinced there’s something to what I say.
I’m not a fan of SA’s approach. I think there are few things more irritating than repetition of one’s position, with perhaps slight shifting of the goalposts as the discussion continues, but with no reall effort to understand and respond to the arguments being offered in response. If he did this in MPSIMS or IMHO, he would at least be able to say that the forum is designed for precisely this sort of engagement. He does it in GD, and it’s irritating, counterproductive, and just plain wrong. And I say this as someone on his side of the fence, politically (generally) speaking.
So by pointing out that others with more egregious examples of this same behavior are generally given much latitude, apparently because the views they’re inartfully expressing are the ones shared by the crowd, I hope to effect some change in that behavior.
This. I’ve been flipping through Facebook polls lately looking for ignorance to fight, but the level of discourse is horrifying (on both sides, though Facebook poll comments are dominated by extreme conservatives, for some reason).
For example, somebody shilling for Ron Paul said:
To which I responded:
Response:
Trying to (civilly) explain to someone that Obama was not a Muslim got no less than three responses along the lines of “go back to hadjistan, Mohammed”.
Now, granted, Facebook polls are hardly representative of anything - but I tried The Free Republic and it turns out they ban nonconservatives.
Had to work 'em back in there huh, you French-surrender-monkeys-supporting liberal, you?
Trust you are using the real thing though, none of that Grey Poupon wannabe American crap. 
That’s because outrage is so much more fun than disappointment. When someone posts something opposed to a position you (generic you) hold and their argument is weak/specious/fallacious, your natural response (assuming you’re the kind of argumentative and competitive and arrogant person who posts in GD in the first place) is to leap from your chair in excitement and say “a-ha! a weak argument against my position! I will destroy it with my logic! victory will be mine!”. When someone posts a weak/specious/fallacious argument in support of a position you hold, there is no such excited motivation.
A-HA!
… I agree.