Carol, honey, I think you need to make up your mind exactly what you mean when you say “lefty” or “liberal”. “Jesus is a cunt” is not a liberal idea; in fact, the vast majority of American liberals are Christians. Nor do liberals in general want American soldiers in Iraq to die. And AFAIK, the alleged existence of “woman sperm”, whatever that’s supposed to be, is unrelated to politics.
There are, on the other hand, lots of Americans in real life who support genuinely liberal ideas like the progressive tax system and a woman’s right to choose an abortion.
So basically, the problem with your attempted argument is that the “ideas” in your list that are loony aren’t specifically liberal, and the ones that are genuinely liberal aren’t loony.
Again, you have to explain how you define Leftism (and you have to have a more coherent definition than just “all the stuff that I don’t like and think is loony”) before you can know whether such a statement is valid.
If you’re equating it with party identification—where “Leftist=Democrat” and “Rightist=Republican”—then in fact, it’s quite true “there are more of us [Leftists] than there are of you [Rightists]”, though the margin is slim:
By the way, you also seem to be a bit confused about the definition of “majority”. “There are more of us than there are of you” means that “we” have a plurality (or “relative majority”), not that “we” actually constitute “a majority of the body politic”, i.e., more than 50% of it. BrainGlutton was quite right in noting that there are more Democrats than Republicans, but he did not claim that Democrats actually constitute a majority (more than half) of the entire population.
Observe the numbers cited in the Emerging Democratic Majority quote in Kimstu’s post (#101). More people identify as Democrats than as Republicans, though neither number reaches 50%+1 of the population. That, as most middle schoolers who paid attention in math class could explain, is what constitutes a plurality – a number which is larger than the number(s) to which it is compared but which does not necessarily constitute a majority.
If 14 people prefer bananas, 12 apples, and 4 oranges, bananas take a plurality but not a majority in that preference poll. Mr. Bush arguably outpolled Mr. Kerry in 2004 – but that does not apply to today’s overall party preference – or, arguably, what it will be in November or in 2008.
And, to second Kimstu’s point, you might consider removing your blinders and find out what people who identify as liberal or progressive actually do think about issues. You seem to be confuting anything you dislike ever advocated by any one person here with the views of all liberals, and then denouncing them. And Ray Bolger has been dead for several years, so he won’t dance to that tune.
Not a single one of these so much as suggests that a plurality is greater than 50% of anything.
Y’know, I don’t see Kimstu weasling quite so much as Carol Stream pulling things out of her ass, here.
Big of you.
:rolleyes: yourself, dearie.
Unless you’d like to favor us with cite to a definition of plurality (other than the one you appear to have just made up) that defines it as greater than half. Saunter in here with that, and I’ll take your rolleyes and apologize to you for my cheek on top of it.
Meanwhile, just because I’m so cocksure of myself: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Depends, again, on how you define “leftism.” There are more registered Dems than Pubs, have been for a long time. To divide it more finely than that, your best source is the Pew Political Typology. See and [url=http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=949]here. By that analysis, the groupings on the “left” or Dem-leaning side total 44% of registered voters (but that includes the Conservative Democrats), those on the “right” side total 33%.
Carol Stream, please forgive me for the impudence I demonstrated when I implied that you would not be able to find a definition for plurality that defined it as a majority. My tone was disrespectful, not merely to your argument, but to you personally. I did know that by implying that you were making up definitions and “pulling things out of [your] ass”, I was doing it to be mean, rather than merely providing support for my definitions being superior to yours. I was wrong to treat you that way, and I offer no excuses. I will attempt, in the future to exercise better control over my baser impulses.
You may now roll your eyes at me, if you are so inclined.
