Conservative children versus liberal children

Rym

Here's an interesting article in Psychology Today. It is possible the base political ideology of a person is formed from more fundamental personality traits at a very early age.

A salient excerpt:

Twenty years later, they decided to compare the subjects' childhood personalities with their political preferences as adults. They found arresting patterns. As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3.

I should like to see further correlations before making any causative assumptions, but I would not be terribly surprised if this sort of research panned out to be usefully predictive.

TheWhaleShark

See, I think the thing you should take away from this is that conservatives have all the maturity of 3-year-olds.

But really, this sort of thing has been observed in other areas as well. People really don't change that much.

HungryJoe

What about those "studies" the "moderates" and conservatives like to crow about that purport to show that conservatives are happier, give more to charity, and are just all-round better people?

HMTKSteve

Does the study look at the subjects every year or just ages 3 and 23?

Does the study breakdown the liberal/conservative views on social and economic views or does it simply rely on self identification?

More data required.

loltsundere

What about those "studies" the "moderates" and conservatives like to crow about that purport to show that conservatives are happier, give more to charity, and are just all-round better people?

They're in their happy little gardens, smiling their Stepford Smiles.

Neito

What about those "studies" the "moderates" and conservatives like to crow about that purport to show that conservatives are happier, give more to charity, and are just all-round better people?

It's easy to be happy when you're a moron.

Rym

or does it simply rely on self identification?

I'd wager that many, many people who self-identify as "conservative" or "libertarian" actually have very incongruous stances on most actual issues.

Neito

I would contend that most "conservatives" are conservative because liberals are dirty, scum-eating assholes who want to give your money to crack babies to buy more crack or whatever. If they actually looked at their stances one-by-one, they'd realize that they fit closer to the definition of liberal than conservative.

HMTKSteve

I would contend that most "conservatives" are conservative because liberals are dirty, scum-eating assholes who want to give your money to crack babies to buy more crack or whatever. If they actually looked at their stances one-by-one, they'd realize that they fit closer to the definition of liberal than conservative.

Are you referring to economic or social issues? One can be socially liberal while also being economically conservative.

Rym

Are you referring to economic or social issues? One can be socially liberal while also being economically conservative.

For example, many of the people advocating tea-bagger "fiscal conservatism" in opposing socialization of medicine are themselves heavily dependent on existing socialized medicine to survive.

Andrew

Are you referring to economic or social issues? One can be socially liberal while also being economically conservative.

For example, many of the people advocating tea-bagger "fiscal conservatism" in opposing socialization of medicine are themselves heavily dependent on existing socialized medicine to survive.

Read Matt Taibbi's latest piece in Rolling Stone to get the full monty of Tea Party's hypocrisy re: government spending.

After Palin wraps up, I race to the parking lot in search of departing Medicare-motor-scooter conservatives. I come upon an elderly couple, Janice and David Wheelock, who are fairly itching to share their views.

"I'm anti-spending and anti-government," crows David, as scooter-bound Janice looks on. "The welfare state is out of control."

"OK," I say. "And what do you do for a living?"

"Me?" he says proudly. "Oh, I'm a property appraiser. Have been my whole life."

I frown. "Are either of you on Medicare?"

Silence: Then Janice, a nice enough woman, it seems, slowly raises her hand, offering a faint smile, as if to say, You got me!

"Let me get this straight," I say to David. "You've been picking up a check from the government for decades, as a tax assessor, and your wife is on Medicare. How can you complain about the welfare state?"

"Well," he says, "there's a lot of people on welfare who don't deserve it. Too many people are living off the government."

"But," I protest, "you live off the government. And have been your whole life!"

"Yeah," he says, "but I don't make very much." Vast forests have already been sacrificed to the public debate about the Tea Party: what it is, what it means, where it's going. But after lengthy study of the phenomenon, I've concluded that the whole miserable narrative boils down to one stark fact: They're full of shit. All of them. At the voter level, the Tea Party is a movement that purports to be furious about government spending — only the reality is that the vast majority of its members are former Bush supporters who yawned through two terms of record deficits and spent the past two electoral cycles frothing not about spending but about John Kerry's medals and Barack Obama's Sixties associations. The average Tea Partier is sincerely against government spending — with the exception of the money spent on them. In fact, their lack of embarrassment when it comes to collecting government largesse is key to understanding what this movement is all about — and nowhere do we see that dynamic as clearly as here in Kentucky, where Rand Paul is barreling toward the Senate with the aid of conservative icons like Palin.

George Patches

The average Tea Partier is sincerely against government spending — with the exception of the money spent on them.

Summarizes the movement in one sentence. I can boil it down to one word, "selfish."

Rym

I can boil it down to one word, "selfish."

Specifically, selfish mixed with old, white, and likely fat. ;^)

Nuri

Are you referring to economic or social issues? One can be socially liberal while also being economically conservative.

THIS! OMG, THIS! We really should have 4 parties instead of two. Like a punnet square of politics.

Cremlian

"Well," he says, "there's a lot of people on welfare who don't deserve it. Too many people are living off the government."

"But," I protest, "you live off the government. And have been your whole life!"

I hate Hate HATE people.

trogdor9

Are you referring to economic or social issues? One can be socially liberal while also being economically conservative.

THIS! OMG, THIS! We really should have 4 parties instead of two. Like a punnet square of politics.

This is PoliticalCompass.org's representation of the political spectrum. While it's not perfect, it's better than simply identifying as "left" or "right".

HMTKSteve

That is one of the big problems with labeling people as left/right or liberal/conservative. Where does someone go if they are liberal on social issues but conservative on economic issues? What if you are a social conservative but economically liberal?

What party do you support? Is either party fiscally conservative anymore or is fiscal conservatism being redefined to mean, "we still spend too much but it only goes to programs my supporters believe in."

The people mentioned above from the rally are not conservatives. They are followers of the "pay for me but not for thee" school of thought. Or you can just call them hypocrits.

I have been seeing articles saying that the tea party is taking over the Republican party. BS, it is republicans (and social cons) who are taking over the tea party. These folks are simply trying to counter liberal authoriantanism with religious authoriantism.

BTW it's no more hypocritical to ignore billion dollars in spending and then rise up when spending goes into the trillions than it is to humor a weak friend who is punching your shoulder and to then clock them when they kidney punch you. Scale is important.

(Spelling sucks, typing on phone.)

lackofcheese

BTW it's no more hypocritical to ignore billion dollars in spending and then rise up when spending goes into the trillions than it is to humor a weak friend who is punching your shoulder and to then clock them when they kidney punch you. Scale is important.

Could you clarify this?

Jason

easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3.

Bottom line: Republicans are prejudiced. Let's think about how those emotional states are influenced or caused by: Immigration, gay marriage, terrorism, money, homelessness, etc. There is an element of fear that infuses each Republican argument in regard to these issues. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

Let's dissect an argument I had today with a mayor's secretary while waiting for an interview. Topic: School funding. Her argument: She is afraid to give any more money to schools (fear) because she is upset about how it could potential be spent (anger). She became irate detailing stories of people who she believes are criminally reliant on taxpayers to transport their kids, pay for sports, buy reduced lunches (hate). She thinks the schools should cut all spending on items, classes, perks, etc. that she didn't have in school, leaving students suffering because of her arbitrary line in the sand.

George Patches

I do hate the "back in my day" argument.

HMTKSteve

Clarification: when something is perceived as a minor issue (quick rainshower) it may be ignored. When that same thing grows in scale (torrential downpour) it is not hypocritical to take notice of (and grab an umbrella). It would be stupid to treat both the same.

Fear is used by both Democrats and Republicans. Remember the 'if you elect Bush another black church will burn' ads? How about the constant reuse of 'Repiblicans want to poison the air |nd water or kill grandma' ads?

Fear ads work, it's why both major parties use them.

Andrew

Clarification: when something is perceived as a minor issue (quick rainshower) it may be ignored. When that same thing grows in scale (torrential downpour) it is not hypocritical to take notice of (and grab an umbrella). It would be stupid to treat both the same.

Ok, now show how this is applicable to the current situation. I'm interested to see how Bush was a quick rainshower compared to Obama's torrential downpour.

HMTKSteve

Clarification: when something is perceived as a minor issue (quick rainshower) it may be ignored. When that same thing grows in scale (torrential downpour) it is not hypocritical to take notice of (and grab an umbrella). It would be stupid to treat both the same.

Ok, now show how this is applicable to the current situation. I'm interested to see how Bush was a quick rainshower compared to Obama's torrential downpour.

Do a youtube search for "debt car".

balderdash

What about those "studies" the "moderates" and conservatives like to crow about that purport to show that conservatives are happier, give more to charity, and are just all-round better people?

Ain't self-reporting a beautiful thing?

Andrew

Do a youtube search for "debt car".

All I found was a poorly animated video about driving cross country with zero references. Try again.

lackofcheese

Clarification: when something is perceived as a minor issue (quick rainshower) it may be ignored. When that same thing grows in scale (torrential downpour) it is not hypocritical to take notice of (and grab an umbrella). It would be stupid to treat both the same.

Ok, now show how this is applicable to the current situation. I'm interested to see how Bush was a quick rainshower compared to Obama's torrential downpour.

Yeah, this is exactly what I wanted to see from him.

@ The Tick:
For a start, get a comparison with debt relative to GDP. The whole debt car thing is misleading (perhaps deliberately) in its portrayal of "speeds" from a long time ago because of not using GDP, which is clearly setting you up to react more strongly to the end. While the Bush vs Obama comparison is less affected by GDP, it's still an important factor. The absence of a proper source for the information, particularly the future projections, is a major issue with the video. As Andrew said, try again.

George Patches

Do a youtube search for "debt car".

All I found was a poorly animated video about driving cross country with zero references. Try again.

try this



I checked the numbers on Obama myself. He's projecting massive deficits with no end in sight. Is it too late to have Bill Clinton back?

lackofcheese

Do a youtube search for "debt car".

All I found was a poorlyanimated video about driving cross country with zero references. Try again.

try this

I'm pretty sure that's what Andrew was referring to.

Anyways, I want to see a reference for these numbers, and I can't be bothered finding one myself because I'm not a resident of the U.S. so it doesn't matter enough to me.

George Patches

Anyways, I want to see a reference for these numbers, and I can't be bothered finding one myself because I'm not a resident of the U.S. so it doesn't matter enough to me.

If you don't care because you don't live here then don't ask for them. I found them and checked them. The CBO estimate has the projections starting at a staggering near $700B short fall and increasing every year until well over the $1T mark.

lackofcheese

Anyways, I want to see a reference for these numbers, and I can't be bothered finding one myself because I'm not a resident of the U.S. so it doesn't matter enough to me.

If you don't care because you don't live here then don't ask for them.

Don't care enough to look it up != don't care.

Jason

Do a youtube search for "debt car".

Do a search for "even though Bush showed the single largest deficit increase in any presidential reign, Republicans still think they can play the 'fiscal conservative' card."