You poor lonely conservative in the SDMB sea of liberals

[gobear]

I’m a little confused here by the term “conservative?” How exactly are we defining this? It seems to me that true, old school conservatives would be
anti-abortion
anti-drug legalization
against gay marriage
against legalized euthanasia and protitution

Yet libertarian posters, (and I’m one) adopt the contrary positions, which seem pretty darn liberal to me, and yet claim to be conservatives. I used to think that I was a conservative, but I am pretty much opposed to the crude politics practiced by this Republican administration.

I’m against affirmative action except in very specific instances, such as breaking into “old-boy” institutions that would otherwise not give a non-white applicant a fair shake.

I’m pro-American hegemony, but not in the crude, overbearing way that’s practiced by the ignorant thugs running our government. They may have read Machiavelli, but they didn’t learn the right lessons.

I’m pro-euthanasia, but only in limited circumstances, such as terminal illness.

I believe drug addiction should be treated as a health problem, not a crime. I do NOT think that taking drugs should ever be socially acceptable.

I believe that women should control their rights to reproduce, so I’m pro-choice, but I dislike abortion and believe that using it as routine birth control is disgusting.

I believe that “under God” properly ought not to be in the PoA, but I’m willing to let it slide because sometimes you have to bow to the will of the majority.

I believe that paying taxes is part of the duty of being a citizen. If you want roads, firemen, police, libraries, public hospitals, mail, garbage pickup, schools, and other services provided by federal, state, and municipal governments, then Pay. Your. Damn. Taxes. and stop this “it’s my money” crap. OTOH, government has the duty not to waste the money contributed by its citizens.

Re the war: Getting rid of Saddam is a good thing, but the stupid, short-term thinking of the Bushies and their stubborn refusal to learn anything about realpolitik in the Middle East or to adjust their policies in the face of shifitng alliances is absolutely criminal. Replacing tyranny with chaos is not an improvement–I fail to understand why the Bushites don’t get this.

I’m for religious liberty, but firmly oppose religious supremacy. I don’t believe that Shodan’s distaste for my sexuality should allow him to forbid me marriage, any more than a Jewish poster’s distaste for pork should allow him to forbid me bacon. I also oppose Mesopotamian creation myths being taught as science in public schools. OTOH, I don’t think the government can dictate to religious institutions who they can hire. If a private Baptist school does not wish to hire an atheist, their right to discriminate should be protected. Government and religion should be kept apart by a restraining order so that Government has to stay 100 feet away from Religion at all times.

So, am I a conservative, a liberal, or what?

[dropzone]

Children, children, children! Let’s look at this factually. This board’s charter is to fight ignorance. Therefore, it should surprise no one that the lion’s share of the posters are liberal.

Jesus, it’s so simple! Why can’t the conservatives understand? (sighing) But I shouldn’t be mad at them. They can’t help it.

[Missy2U]

gobear, when you find out, would you let ME know? I’m right about there with you on just about every point you made - don’t know what I am either.

[Metacom]

@gobear

So, am I a conservative, a liberal, or what?

A socialist civil libertarian. Welcome to the club.

[gobear]

Wait a sec–I’m so not a socialist. civil libertarian, sure, but I like making money and small government.

[dropzone]

@gobear

So, am I a conservative, a liberal, or what?

When you find out, tell me because those beliefs match mine exactly, yet on that “Political Compass” test I came up more liberal than Ghandi. That test was bullshit.

My guess? You are a centrist. A classic, Midwest US, middle of the roader who sees value in government when it does its job but its job doesn’t include telling you what to believe or how to live your life unless your actions have a DIRECT, negative bearing on the lives of others. You are the type of person who SHOULD be nominated for president but, both because the most partisans don’t consider you solidly enough a member of their party and because you don’t feel you should be forcing your beliefs down the throats of others, you would never be nominated.

[Metacom]

@gobear

Wait a sec–I’m so not a socialist. civil libertarian, sure, but I like making money and small government.

Think “socialist in the Social Democrat” sense rather then the “crush the bourgeoisie under the heals of my jack-boots!” sense I was just keying off your “people should pay their taxes” paragraph, which seemed to advocate some form of socialized medecine, etc.

That assesment wasn’t ment to be taken that seriously.

[Debaser]

@Desmostylus

Yep, no-one ever argues here. :rolleyes:

Well, this was extremely dishonest of you. You quoted me, but clipped out the beginning of the sentance where I start of with “Sometimes…”. Then you pretend that I’m making some statement that “no-one ever argues”. What an incredibly transparent cheap shot on your part.

[Knorf]

[HIJACK]

@hajario

*Racial quotas are ok, unless it’s White people

Given that white people are already–and have been since before the country was formed–empowered and privileged in a way that causes constant descrimination against minorities…We’ve had quotas for white people as a function of racism for hundreds of years. When whites have almost all the political and ecomonic power, why on earth would they need help via quotas?

Also, affirmative action is NOT an attempt to create racial quotas. Stop listening to paranoid hegemonist screed from empowered white people and learn to think about the issue. White people would do well to realize the way the world looks to us is not the way the world looks to many minorities.

*Using family connections to get special treatment is bad, unless you’re a Kennedy

Now you’re being a dumbass.

*Tariffs are bad, unless my constituents want it (that one works both ways)

Non-issue.

*Blocking judicial nominees is bad, unless it’s Bork

Blocking specific nominees because of their berserk and warped politics is fine; blocking nearly every nominee just to spite a president (as was done to Clinton) is bad. Understand?

*The First Ammendment is sacred, unless it’s buring a flag

countered with:

*The First Ammendment is sacred, unless it’s a student who wants to lead a prayer.

Name for a single Democrat in Congress who has proposed a constitutional amendment against student-led prayer.

Oh, yeah, the constitution already forbids state-led prayer.[/HIJACK]
Conservatives are a bunch of crybabies. It’s true here, it’s true throughout the country. It’s hard to understand why a political party which controls the presidency, congress, the SCOTUS, and a majority of state governorships and legislatures is so nervous and insecure about itself. “Oh, WAH we control everything, but those darned libruls don’t see how right we are–those commie pinko atheists–but GOD is on our side, isn’t he? WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH much sobbing and wringing of hands”

[PatriotX]

@PaulFitzroy

As for the “neocons,” whom I believed were a code-name for “Jew,” and still do, don’t get the idea that I support “neo-conservatism,” because I don’t. I don’t support any one straightforward political philosophy, and I’d fit more into civil libertarianism than anywhere else.

Out of curiosity, are you ever going to back this up with any examples? Or is this just one of those “touchy-feely-I-know-it’s-true-despite-a-lack-of-evidence-and-despite-allevidence-to-the-contrary” conclusions?
That thread you started is patiently waiting for you.

[yojimbo]

If I were to list out my political thinking I’d basically recreate gobear’s points. although mine wouldn’t be worded or spelt as well even US hegemony BTW.

[Little_Nemo]

The problem is that some people consider that everyone who isn’t a conservative is by definition a liberal. By that standard you’ve got a handful of self-professed conservatives here amidst a seaful of liberals by default.

But how many people on this board actually call themselves liberals? If you flip the analogy over and count everyone who isn’t a self-professed liberal as a conservative, you’ll end up with a vast conservative majority.

But if you went by the realistic option and had everyone define thier own political ideology, you’d almost certainly find that both conseratives and liberals are small majorities here and the majority either have some other political ideology, shift between ideologies, or simply ignore politics.

[John_Mace]

@DMC

Actually, apologies to myself for hijacking my own thread, I also get the impression that a lot of our Libertarians vote based more on their fiscal leanings than their social, at least when there is no Libertarian candidate to choose from (and sometimes when there is). Is this “weighting” fairly common among Libertarians, is it just this board, or are my impressions wrong?

I can’t speak for others, but I tend to place fiscal issues on a higher level than a lot fo the social issues. Governments can’t do too much if they don’t have the money to do it with, and much of what the gov’t does is either counterproductive or wasteful. And it seems that a lot of the "social issues’ debated around here are just people being paranoid-- OMG, Bush is going to arrest me for thinking bad thoughts about him!

I think Shodan hit the nail on the head about the anti-Bush pile ons. I wasn’t around here during the Clinton years, so I don’t know if the Republican partisans were as bad then, but the venom spewed at Bush on this board is so over the top that it does make things seem ridiculously slanted at times. [Cue the residient Bush-whackers: But you don’t understand-- Bush DESERVES all the venom spewed at him…]

[Greathouse]

With the way the lines between liberal and consevative seemed to be blurring a bit, I really have no idea where I fall.

Gay marriage - Yes
Legalize Pot - Yes
Gun Control - No
Abortion - Yes
Much, Much, Much tougher punishment for law breakers - Hell Yes
Death Penalty - Yes
A whole bunch of welfare cutbacks - Yes
Well, looking back over that list, I guess I am kinda consevative because the most important ones to me are the tougher punishments and the welfare cutbacks.

[Mr.Moto]

@Mr. Moto

If I wanted my ego stroked I sure wouldn’t be hanging out here, one of the few conservatives on this message board.

I had to go back to the thread where this was posted, and read it in context. It was basically in response to someone accusing me of wanting them to beg me for the right to marry.

It is obvious that conservatives are underrepresented here. I also think it’s good that the few of us that are here stick around. After all, you liberals need to know how we think, seeing as we’re such a potent force in American politics.

Though we’re small in numbers here, we’re great in numbers in the voting booths. And that’s really what counts.

[bordelond]

@gobear

So, am I a conservative, a liberal, or what?

Oddly enough, I share with you almost all the views you expressed in the thread quoted, and I’ve always identified myself as a hard conservative.

[dropzone]

@bordelond

Oddly enough, I share with you almost all the views you expressed in the thread quoted, and I’ve always identified myself as a hard conservative.

This and the similar responses from liberals like me can explain why our European friends believe there is little, if anything, to choose between the two parties.

[Aro]

Most of the disagreements I see here are NOT about specific political positions, but about *blind loyalty * to a particular side. (and there are plenty). People on both sides of the floor, at the base level, have a lot more in common than they have in difference, yet never wish to visit this shared ground.

A lot of posters seem to have chosen their party first and then work hard to fit their actual opinions and beliefs into the fabric of the chosen party. And no one sits fully comfortably within that faked nest of political discomfort.

It’s like when you choose to support a particular team in sport - You stick by that team in good times and bad - you always call foul against the opponents tackles, you always expect the referees call to favour you, you always complain when it doesn’t. There is no room for acceptance of the other side, no time is spent trying to finally realise your team DOES commit fouls, CAN be wrong, WILL make mistakes.

Great, have a team and support them. Good on you. But don’t lose sight of the fact that *not everything * produced by that team will be good, right, brilliant or worthy of your support. Lose the blinding partisan blinkers. You will all be better off for it.

[BrotherCadfael]

@MaxTheVool

Hang on… couldn’t you go into political threads and argue with the respectable, sober, intelligent and patriotic left? Or are you going to pull a Shodan and snidely dismiss the entire liberal side of the SDMB as one big intellectually lockstepped nader-loving tree-hugger?

That’s actually what I do. I contribute to reasoned discussions and avoid train wrecks.

[Charlie_Tan]

C’mon guys, are we supposed to be fighting ignorance here?

I was gonna come down on the 50/40 000, which is just plain silly. How many people have sihned up over the years and gone away? The mods are not re-using user names, which I know since I tried to change to just Gaspode. But then, it seems like 4000 have paid subscription, so we’re down to 1/10 of the original assumptions.

But statistics is a slippery subject.

How many of these engage in political debates? I almost never read MPSIMS, but if I stumble in there, at least half of the users names are unknown to me. I can only assume that there are a lot of posters, conservatives and liberals who never voice their opinions about politics at all, at least I don’t see them in GD or here.

Now the ratio of liberals/conservative in political threads may seem to be slanted towards the liberal end, but that doesn’t mean the board in itself has a liberal slant, only that there are more liberals voicing their opinions in political threads.

Another factor is the GOP administration. It’s a lot easier to speak up in a place like this if you’re pissed off about the powers that be. Liberal posters sees something that’s done by the White House and goes on to rant in the Pit or Start a debate in GD. It’s part of how we work. Few people wake up in the morning, listen to the news, hear something they like and decide to post about it.
Those who post are pissed off or at least pasionate about a subject. With conservatives in rule, more liberals are likely to start threads or coming running to threads bashing Bush. Had Gore been in office, I’m sure there would have been a lot more Gora bashing threads from the conservatives, giving an impression of a board slanted to the right.

However, I don’t know. It’s just my WAG, and have nothing to do with science.
So unless someone takes the pain to dig through the archives and work through all posters that have participated in political threads and mark them for one slot or another (which might be difficult), no one can say anything about the slant of the board as whole in any way, neither from a conservative or liberal standpoint.

Not that anyone will be bothered by this. I’m sure it will be business as usual come next post.