Lately I’ve been pondering: The biggest disadvantage for conservatives (among many other things) is that they are almost always on defense, while liberals are almost always on offense.
Taking same-sex marriage as an example: Most liberals support it, many conservatives oppose it. But even if conservatives “won” - that is, overturning or banning gay marriage - they technically haven’t won anything. They would just be returning things to the prior status quo - where marriage was one man one woman. Whereas liberals had everything to gain - victory means SSM is passed - and nothing to lose - defeat just means the status quo stays the same.
This is an immense drawback for conservatives, because it means that the best outcome they can attain is simply “return things back to what was previously normal” while the worst outcome they can suffer is big, unwanted change. Furthermore, even if liberals “lose,” they can still try again an unlimited number of times until they finally do win. If same-sex marriage failed once, then try, try again until it does pass. It doesn’t matter if SSM fails 99 times, if it succeeds the 100th time, it passes.
Same-sex marriage is just one example, of course (I don’t mean the thread to focus on that only.) Take the removal of Confederate statues - if liberals win, they attain something - the statues are gone. But if conservatives win, they attain nothing - all that they “win” is that the statues get to remain standing, as before. This dynamic plays out in a hundred different political issues - liberals are on offense and have much to gain, while conservatives are on defense and have nothing to gain.
Conservatives can’t possibly win the political football game if the opposing team always has possession and the only thing conservatives can do is keep them out of the end zone, while scoring nothing themselves.