Pew Research Study. Liberals Less Tolerant of Differing Opinions. More Judgmental.

[BeetTheBoxer]

Interesting study out today by the Pew Research Center. One of the key findings.


"According to a new Pew survey, liberals are less tolerant of differing opinions on online platforms. Among other things, the survey took a look at how social networking site users have responded to political content they do not like. It seems liberals are more likely to block, unfriend or hide someone on social networking sites than their conservative moderate counterparts."

Liberals were twice as likely to block, unfriend, or otherwise shutdown political speech they do not like versus moderates (28% versus 14%), and nearly twice as likely to do so versus conservatives (28% versus 16%).

There are many other conclusions. Here's a link to the headline story and one to the actual study.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/surv....ring-opinions/

http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/....-politics.aspx

[I invented that]

It seems liberals are more likely to block, unfriend or hide someone on social networking sites than their conservative moderate counterparts."

can we include the ignore feature it seems we have proof right here in our own little community.

[I invented that]

i think it's because liberalism is like a religion, in that true believers have such conviction in their faith that they have no time for non-believers.

[RiotGrip]

i think it's because liberalism is like a religion, in that true believers have such conviction in their faith that they have no time for non-believers.

If liberalism is like a religion, why do so many "religious people" gravitate towards Republicans who embrace religion as well as vote on religious issues? Maybe the way you define it, any political view can be seen as a religion.

I think some people come for real discussion, and trolls like you and MatthewT are so full of shit and annoying that they'd rather put you on ignore than debate nonsense with you. Me, I like pointing out holes in your knowledge and your clinging to BS talking points but I'm more patient than a lot of people. Liberals are often more sensitive though.

[I invented that]

If liberalism is like a religion, why do so many "religious people" gravitate towards Republicans who embrace religion as well as vote on religious issues? Maybe the way you define it, any political view can be seen as a religion.

I think some people come for real discussion, and trolls like you and MatthewT are so full of shit and annoying that they'd rather put you on ignore than debate nonsense with you. Me, I like pointing out holes in your knowledge and your clinging to BS talking points but I'm more patient than a lot of people. Liberals are often more sensitive though.

do you understand that religion is based on faith. faith means it can't be proved so you must believe. you're idea of a troll is a person that doesn't agree with you, perhaps you should ask dawg to start a new forum "politics for liberal pussies".

[RiotGrip]

do you understand that religion is based on faith. faith means it can't be proved so you must believe. you're idea of a troll is a person that doesn't agree with you, perhaps you should ask dawg to start a new forum "politics for liberal pussies".

I have no problems with differing opinions. I'd also venture to say that almost everyone has faith in something either spiritual or otherwise.

[I invented that]

I have no problems with differing opinions. I'd also venture to say that almost everyone has faith in something either spiritual or otherwise.

and you have faith in your mind reading abilities

[newcastlefan]

I have no problems with differing opinions. I'd also venture to say that almost everyone has faith in something either spiritual or otherwise.

"I have no problems with differing opinions..." They're all just wrong.

[Billy]

do you understand that religion is based on faith. faith means it can't be proved so you must believe. you're idea of a troll is a person that doesn't agree with you, perhaps you should ask dawg to start a new forum "politics for liberal pussies".

[Bosch76]

i think it's because liberalism is like a religion, in that true believers have such conviction in their faith that they have no time for non-believers.

Why would a homosexual be tolerant of someone who tell him he's an abomination?

Seriously, why I, someone who has conviction in my faith ("being gay") have time for some who believes I am going to hell?

[Bosch76]

Why would a homosexual be tolerant of someone who tell him he's an abomination?

Seriously, why I, someone who has conviction in my faith ("being gay") have time for some who believes I am going to hell?

Since none of you "tolerant" conservatives have an answer to my question, I guess you acknowledge you are wrong.

Nice.

[I invented that]

Since none of you "tolerant" conservatives have an answer to my question, I guess you acknowledge you are wrong.

Nice.

there's plenty of bible thumping democrats that are anti-gay, so what's your point?

[Bosch76]

there's plenty of bible thumping democrats that are anti-gay, so what's your point?

Do you think that "liberals" are "tolerant" of those dems?

If you can't tell me a good reason why someone would be "tolerant" of someone who thinks they are going to hell for how they were born, the premise of this thread is bullshit 100%.

[newcastlefan]

Interesting study out today by the Pew Research Center. One of the key findings.


"According to a new Pew survey, liberals are less tolerant of differing opinions on online platforms. Among other things, the survey took a look at how social networking site users have responded to political content they do not like. It seems liberals are more likely to block, unfriend or hide someone on social networking sites than their conservative moderate counterparts."

Liberals were twice as likely to block, unfriend, or otherwise shutdown political speech they do not like versus moderates (28% versus 14%), and nearly twice as likely to do so versus conservatives (28% versus 16%).

There are many other conclusions. Here's a link to the headline story and one to the actual study.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/surv....ring-opinions/

http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/....-politics.aspx

liberals on one extreme, evangelical republicans on the other extreme. why is is so odd that either extreme is intolerant? I would have expected an organization like Pew to be more cognizant of the syntax: they just proved that an extreme position excludes everything else, which is pretty much the definition of "extreme".

[Goo For You]

Republicans love to claim that academia churns out leftist graduates and solutions to the society's problems. If we take this claim seriously, it follows that liberals are more likely to be intolerant of non-scientific opinions. Are you conservatives ok with this conclusion, or would you prefer to take a step back in your crusade against "educated idiots"?

I think we already know the answer, so let's not pretend there's any parity between leftist and right-wing intolerance.

[I invented that]

Republicans love to claim that academia churns out leftist graduates and solutions to the society's problems. If we take this claim seriously, it follows that liberals are more likely to be intolerant of non-scientific opinions. Are you conservatives ok with this conclusion, or would you prefer to take a step back in your crusade against "educated idiots"?

I think we already know the answer, so let's not pretend there's any parity between leftist and right-wing intolerance.

such irony. liberals are very fond of using junk science then claiming science is on their side.

[BeetTheBoxer]

[Goo For You]

Here's a quick theory: Conservatives are more comfortable with disagreement because they are less used to having engaging discussions where participants actively change their views on stuff (such conversations require reasonableness and therefore espouse distaste for opinions that sound unreasonable), and because it is way easier to be united in opposing policy proposals than supporting them (it's easy to find fault in Obamacare but notoriously difficult to propose a better solution -- one good conservative alternative would be to implement the Singapore model, but make a guess how much support current GOP could rally for such a proposal -- better to not risk unity by proposing something constructive...)

^ EDIT: To clarify the second point, defending constructive policies requires actively disputing claims and arguments from all directions, whereas opposing said policies often requires nothing but a single point of contention, based on which one can (lazily and irresponsibly) conclude "oh well let's just agree to disagree..."

[I invented that]

Here's a quick theory: Conservatives are more comfortable with disagreement because they are less used to having engaging discussions where participants actively change their views on stuff (such conversations require reasonableness and therefore espouse distaste for opinions that sound unreasonable), and because it is way easier to be united in opposing policy proposals than supporting them (it's easy to find fault in Obamacare but notoriously difficult to propose a better solution -- one good conservative alternative would be to implement the Singapore model, but make a guess how much support current GOP could rally for such a proposal -- better to not risk unity by proposing something constructive...)

^ EDIT: To clarify the second point, defending constructive policies requires actively disputing claims and arguments from all directions, whereas opposing said policies often requires nothing but a single point of contention, based on which one can (lazily and irresponsibly) conclude "oh well let's just agree to disagree..."

another liberal that uses the ignore function, then spouts off about conservatives.

[RiotGrip]

another liberal that uses the ignore function, then spouts off about conservatives.

Who does he have on ignore? Not you obviously if you are replying to his post.