Alabamian

A Southern Point of View
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister  Log in  

Share | 
 

 Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
lmm
Epic Author
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 1873
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Colbert County

PostSubject: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:54 pm

Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
Are Liberals Smarter Than Conservatives?
By Andrew Gelman on December 4, 2009

Tom Ball writes:

Didn't know if you had seen this article [by Jason Richwine] about political allegiance and IQ but wanted to make sure you did. I'm surprised the author hasn't heard or seen of your work on Red and Blue states! What do you think?

I think the article raises some interesting issues but he seems to be undecided about whether to take the line that intelligent Americans mostly have conservative views ("[George W.] Bush's IQ is at least as high as John Kerry's" and "Even among the nation's smartest people, liberal elites could easily be in the minority politically") or the fallback position that, yes, maybe liberals are more intelligent than conservatives, but intelligence isn't such a good thing anyway ("The smartest people do not necessarily make the best political choices. William F. Buckley once famously declared that he would rather give control of our government to "the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University."). One weakness of this latter argument is that the authorities he relies on for this point--William F. Buckley, Irving Kristol, etc.--were famous for being superintelligent. Richwine is in the awkward position of arguing that Saul Bellow's aunt (?) was more politically astute than Bellow, even though, in Kristol's words, "Saul's aunt may not have been a brilliant intellectual." Huh? We're taking Richwine's testimony on Saul Bellow's aunt's intelligence?

Richwine also gets into a tight spot when he associates conservativism as "following tradition" and liberalism with "non-traditional ideas." What is "traditional" can depend on your social setting. What it takes to be a rebel at the Columbia University faculty club is not necessarily what will get you thrown out of a country club in the Dallas suburbs. I think this might be what Tom Ball was thinking about when he referred to Red State, Blue State: political and cultural divisions mean different things in different places.

I do, however, agree with Richwine's general conclusion, which is that you're probably not going to learn much by comparing average IQ's of different groups. As Richwine writes, "The bottom line is that a political debate will never be resolved by measuring the IQs of groups on each side of the issue." African-Americans have low IQ's, on average, Jews have high IQ's on average, and both groups vote for the Democrats. Latinos have many socially conservative views but generally don't let those views get in the way of voting for Democrats.
Back to top Go down
The Propagandist
Sonneteer
avatar

Virgo

Posts : 68
Join date : 2011-06-20
Location : Tuscaloosa, Alabama

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:15 pm

It’s not often that we stop and wonder exactly why conservatives are so violently against ideas like the Tier 5 unemployment extension — but last December, a few unrelated studies were published that seem, together, to offer up a startling hypothesis: it’s in the brain. Two areas of the brain, the amygdala and the anterior cingulates, are pronouncedly different in liberals and conservatives, with predictable results.

Background

In a study published in December by the University College in London, scientists found that, across 90 students and 2 members of Parliament that were scanned, there was a near-universal correlation between conservatives and a large amygdala, and between liberals and a large anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Alone, that doesn’t tell us much, but in conjunction with several other relatively recent studies, a few reasonable (although decidedly unscientific) conclusions present themselves.

The Amygdala – The Conservative Lobe

The amygdala is sometimes considered a part of the basal ganglia, and even if it’s not, is recognized as part of the ‘primitive brain’ — something much less cerebral and much more primal. That alone might go a long way toward explaining why conservatives seem to be much more willing to rely on faith, instinct, or gut reactions than liberals tend to be.

According to Science Daily, scientists at the California Institute of Technology have used tests to prove that the amygdala is responsible for “loss aversion” — in other words, the desire to NOT give up those things you have. Makes sense, given that one of conservatives’ primary goals is to keep the government from taking their money.

The amygdala is also responsible for your sense of community, according to Nature.com. People with larger amygdala tend to have “larger and more complex social networks”, though scientists were careful to note that “This effect did not depend on the age of the volunteers or their own perceived social support or life satisfaction.” In other words, even if you don’t feel like your social network likes you, the fact that it’s a large social network shows that you likely have a large amygdala. This might explain why conservatives tend to organize more effectively, join churches and other social groups more often, and have a more coherent media ‘face’ than liberals.

The ACC – The Liberal Lobe

The anterior cingulate cortex, in contrast to the amygdala, is part of your ‘gray matter’, much more cerebral and ‘formal’ than the conservative lobe. This could explain why most liberals feel the need to make statistical and rational arguments (even to the point of being grotesquely counterintuitive) to make their points.

The ACC is, according to this study, a key part of your brain’s ability to recognize errors you commit. The language in the study itself is impenetrable: “In conclusion, we have shown that the [ACC is] selectively activated during trials in which there are errors of commission, consistent with…source modeling studies of…human subjects. These findings suggest that the [ACC] and left lateral frontal cortex are involved in the brain’s error checking system” What it means, however, is that people with developed ACCs, while they likely make just as many mistakes as others, are more likely to recognize a mistake when they make one.

The ACC also tends to be put to sleep by religious thoughts. NeuroInterests.com quotes a few interesting studies in this vein. Of note, “The results showed that when people were primed to think about religion and God, either consciously or unconsciously, brain activity decreases in areas consistent with the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), an area associated with a number of things, including regulating bodily states of arousal and serving an alerting function when things are going wrong, including when we make mistakes.” This, contrasted with the above, might serve to explain why liberals tend to be less religious than conservatives. That same article also features a sidenote that mentions that the ACC is one of the parts of the brain most involved in the process of empathy.

Finally, the ACC is also responsible for our ability to choose to overcome fear and act courageously despite being afraid, or so says PsychCentral.com. The study presented there, regarding fear of snakes, said that increased activity in the ACC “correlated positively with the level of subjective fear when choosing to act courageously but not when choosing to succumb to fear.”

Conclusions

In short, the people who are fighting tooth and nail against the Tier 5 unemployment extension are, neurologically, more likely to be scared — specifically scared of losing the things they already have. They’re also more likely to have lots of friends and acquaintances, and less likely to notice when they make mistakes — especially when they’re in a religious mood. Finally, they’re much more likely to be unable to clearly present an argument about why they are right, because they are prone to relying on instinct and gut feelings to tell them what to do.

As regards the Tier 5 unemployment extension, of course, there’s little except bad news here. How do you convince someone who would rather not be reasoned with, bases their decisions on fear, has trouble empathizing, and is prone to gathering large groups of like-minded people around themselves (making it easy to avoid information that runs contrary to the aforementioned gut instinct)? The prospects are grim, so long as those are the people who have control of enough of the government to put the kibosh on Tier 5.

http://micmn.com/science-says-conservative-brains-are-wired-against-tier-5-unemployment-extension/10057/
Back to top Go down
The Propagandist
Sonneteer
avatar

Virgo

Posts : 68
Join date : 2011-06-20
Location : Tuscaloosa, Alabama

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:26 pm

It’s one of the great assumptions underlying modern democracy that an informed citizenry is preferable to an uninformed one. “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government,” Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1789. This notion, carried down through the years, underlies everything from humble political pamphlets to presidential debates to the very notion of a free press. Mankind may be crooked timber, as Kant put it, uniquely susceptible to ignorance and misinformation, but it’s an article of faith that knowledge is the best remedy. If people are furnished with the facts, they will be clearer thinkers and better citizens. If they are ignorant, facts will enlighten them. If they are mistaken, facts will set them straight.

In the end, truth will out. Won’t it?

Maybe not. Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

These findings open a long-running argument about the political ignorance of American citizens to broader questions about the interplay between the nature of human intelligence and our democratic ideals. Most of us like to believe that our opinions have been formed over time by careful, rational consideration of facts and ideas, and that the decisions based on those opinions, therefore, have the ring of soundness and intelligence. In reality, we often base our opinions on our beliefs, which can have an uneasy relationship with facts. And rather than facts driving beliefs, our beliefs can dictate the facts we chose to accept. They can cause us to twist facts so they fit better with our preconceived notions. Worst of all, they can lead us to uncritically accept bad information just because it reinforces our beliefs. This reinforcement makes us more confident we’re right, and even less likely to listen to any new information. And then we vote.

On its own, this might not be a problem: People ignorant of the facts could simply choose not to vote. But instead, it appears that misinformed people often have some of the strongest political opinions. A striking recent example was a study done in the year 2000, led by James Kuklinski of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He led an influential experiment in which more than 1,000 Illinois residents were asked questions about welfare — the percentage of the federal budget spent on welfare, the number of people enrolled in the program, the percentage of enrollees who are black, and the average payout. More than half indicated that they were confident that their answers were correct — but in fact only 3 percent of the people got more than half of the questions right. Perhaps more disturbingly, the ones who were the most confident they were right were by and large the ones who knew the least about the topic. (Most of these participants expressed views that suggested a strong antiwelfare bias.)

Studies by other researchers have observed similar phenomena when addressing education, health care reform, immigration, affirmative action, gun control, and other issues that tend to attract strong partisan opinion. Kuklinski calls this sort of response the “I know I’m right” syndrome, and considers it a “potentially formidable problem” in a democratic system. “It implies not only that most people will resist correcting their factual beliefs,” he wrote, “but also that the very people who most need to correct them will be least likely to do so.”

Whole story:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full
Back to top Go down
lmm
Epic Author
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 1873
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Colbert County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 7:51 pm

All true Prop. Once an idea takes hold, like the Obama fake Birth certificate, people will continue to believe that any 'facts' presented are a ruse to cover up the REAL facts. I don't know if has a basis in politics or more just the stubborn nature of the human beast.
Both sides will defend to the death their view of any item, contrary to opposing facts.

As for the primitive brain, I'll hold out opinion on that one. That article seemed to be a little tooo biased to believe by itself. I never believe one study or two, but more like 100 or 200. And the liberals also gather the like minded around them. The so called inner circle.

That's the best I've got tonight. Been a long day. Glad you dropped in. How's the rift raft at the TNF? Giggle
Back to top Go down
Ubu
Poet Laureate
avatar

Pisces

Posts : 2475
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Here

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:27 pm

Hence the old saying "he knows just enough to be dangerous" which I readily admit describes me to a "t Very Happy
Back to top Go down
Bluetick
Poet Laureate
avatar

Aries

Posts : 2168
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : tuscumbia

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 8:35 pm

Too cerebral for me. Now I don't know if I am liberal or conservative. I suppose I am only fit for lighthearted banter and troll hunting. Crackingup

On the serious side, its good to see you here Prop. It is refreshing to not have to suspect ones identity. Thumbup
Back to top Go down
The Nagel
Odist
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 106
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : florence AL

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:05 pm

lmm wrote:
All true Prop. Once an idea takes hold, like the Obama fake Birth certificate, people will continue to believe that any 'facts' presented are a ruse to cover up the REAL facts. I don't know if has a basis in politics or more just the stubborn nature of the human beast.
Both sides will defend to the death their view of any item, contrary to opposing facts.

it's called:
Wizards First Rule - People are stupid -
they will believe something because they want it to be true; or they're afraid it's true.

Given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe its true, or because they're afraid it might be true. Peoples' heads are full of knowledge, facts and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool.
Back to top Go down
Joy
Poet Laureate
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 3063
Join date : 2011-05-18
Location : Lauderdale County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:26 pm

I think some of it boils down to being lazy. If you (general you) don't question or test, you don't really 'know' or 'believe' anything about anything. It's almost like you don't really care, know just enough to be able to exist. You repeat other people's conclusions because you have never taken the time to study a subject & form your own conclusion. Nothing you say is really your opinion, just a repeat of another person's ideas.

We see this in every election. People don't do their homework.
Back to top Go down
http://alabamian.forumotion.com
Ubu
Poet Laureate
avatar

Pisces

Posts : 2475
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Here

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:26 pm

Bluetick wrote:
Too cerebral for me. Now I don't know if I am liberal or conservative. I suppose I am only fit for lighthearted banter and troll hunting. Crackingup

Me too........let's go have a drink
Very Happy
Back to top Go down
Joy
Poet Laureate
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 3063
Join date : 2011-05-18
Location : Lauderdale County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:34 pm

Bluetick wrote:
On the serious side, its good to see you here Prop. It is refreshing to not have to suspect ones identity. Thumbup

I heard that! cheers
Back to top Go down
http://alabamian.forumotion.com
Joy
Poet Laureate
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 3063
Join date : 2011-05-18
Location : Lauderdale County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:41 pm

Ubu wrote:
Bluetick wrote:
Too cerebral for me. Now I don't know if I am liberal or conservative. I suppose I am only fit for lighthearted banter and troll hunting. Crackingup

Me too........let's go have a drink
Very Happy

Psht, whatever...y'all are both cerebral when you want to be.

I hesitate to label myself because it all depends...on the subject at hand, the person or people involved, the circumstances, who is affected by my choice, if it's right or wrong or possibly just right or wrong at the time, if the person is trustworthy, deciding the lesser of two evils, etc.
Back to top Go down
http://alabamian.forumotion.com
Ubu
Poet Laureate
avatar

Pisces

Posts : 2475
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Here

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jun 20, 2011 9:51 pm

Joy wrote:
Ubu wrote:
Bluetick wrote:
Too cerebral for me. Now I don't know if I am liberal or conservative. I suppose I am only fit for lighthearted banter and troll hunting. Crackingup

Me too........let's go have a drink
Very Happy

Psht, whatever...y'all are both cerebral when you want to be

sssshhhhh.....we relish our roles as Von Bluessing and his trusty side kick Ubugor......renowned troll hunters
Giggle
Back to top Go down
The Propagandist
Sonneteer
avatar

Virgo

Posts : 68
Join date : 2011-06-20
Location : Tuscaloosa, Alabama

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:34 am

lmm wrote:
How's the rift raft at the TNF? Giggle


How are things at TNF? Have you ever seen one of those interviews with Michele Bachmann where she is asked a question she would rather not answer? Instead of attempting to weasel out or justify a position, she completely ignores the question and continues with the talking points on the point she is trying to make. A made-up mind, sure in their “facts,” appears to be the immovable object even when faced with the truth which should be the irresistible force.

I’ve been thinking more on the difference between Liberals and Conservatives. The boiled-down version is this:

Conservatives – the amygdala is responsible for “loss aversion.” Conservatives are stuck on tradition, status quo. Want to keep what they have; trying something new is like gambling: You might lose what you have. “Bird in hand.”

Liberals – the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is, according to this study, a key part of your brain’s ability to recognize errors you commit. “The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting a different result.” Willing, even eager, to change when a mistake is recognized.

I have also found a thesis by a Canadian psychologist but who did much research in the US. Here is a portion:

The well-known cognitive scientist George Lakoff proposes in Moral Politics (1996, U. of Chicago Press) that conservatives and liberals think differently because they use different moral systems based upon different ideal family types. He also states (p. 110) that conservatives actually tend to come from one of these family backgrounds, and liberals from the other. Because authority plays such a pivotal role in the development of conservative thought in Lakoff’s analysis, one can easily imagine it might also explain right-wing authoritarians.

Conservatives, it is proposed, grew up in a family featuring “strict father morality.” Fundamentally, life was seen as difficult and the world as dangerous. Typically the father had primary “responsibility for supporting and protecting the family as well as authority to set overall family policy. He taught children right from wrong by setting strict rules for their behavior and enforcing them through punishment.

The punishment was mildly to moderately painful, commonly being corporal punishment administered with a belt or a stick. He also gained their cooperation by
showing love and appreciation when they followed the rules” (p. 65).

Liberals, on the other hand, seemingly came from a “nurturant parent” family background, which featured “being cared for and cared about, having one’s desires for loving interactions met, living as happily as possible, and deriving meaning from mutual interaction and care” (p. 108). Supposedly liberals had more secure and loving attachments to their parents, which leads them to develop nurturing, empathetic social consciences.

This briefest of summaries does not do justice to Lakoff’s conceptualizations, but I am happy to report that some of what he proposes is supported by my own
findings. For example the statement, “Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues that children should learn” appeared on the Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA) scale for many years and goes back to the first attempt to measure authoritarianism during the 1940s.

Similarly the reader knows from this chapter that parents of high RWA students, and high RWA students themselves tend to believe the world is a dangerous place. The story of Hugh and Lou, which is based on my own research with the RWA scale and which first appeared in my 1988 book Enemies of Freedom, resonates with Lakoff’s model in many places, as I’m sure you noticed.


The Authoritarians
http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/TheAuthoritarians.pdf
Back to top Go down
lmm
Epic Author
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 1873
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Colbert County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:07 am

So you avoided the question. How are things at the TNF? LOL

That study sounds BS to me. It makes all conservatives sound like they were raised in concentration camps and liberals had Shangri la.

If that was true you would not have families with both, which I can tell you happens a lot. If you think conservatives don't like to gamble, you have never been to Tunica.

If you think obedience and respect for authority is not important, that explains why liberals have violent protests, and conservatives have Tea Parties.

The paper is as full of holes as Swiss Cheese.

As for the author, not exactly unbiased is he:
George P. Lakoff (play /ˈleɪkɒf/, born May 24, 1941) is an American cognitive linguist and professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972.

In recent years he has applied his work to the realm of politics, exploring this in his books. He is a member of the scientific committee of the Fundacion IDEAS, Spain's Socialist Party's think tank. He was the founder of the now defunct progressive think tank the Rockridge Institute
Back to top Go down
The Propagandist
Sonneteer
avatar

Virgo

Posts : 68
Join date : 2011-06-20
Location : Tuscaloosa, Alabama

PostSubject: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jul 18, 2011 8:23 am



Thinking metaphorically
Starts at 1:45; starts talking about metaphorical family types at 2:20 – not literal, but idealized family types; How your “family type” influences your political views at 4:00

That study sounds BS to me. It makes all conservatives sound like they were raised in concentration camps and liberals had Shangri la.
That’s pushing it out toward the extreme ends of the spectrum, isn’t it? Where is the middle?
It is not necessarily the literal family you grew up in, but your idealized conception of what a family is. You may or may not have had that kind of family, but the one you envision as “ideal.” Watch the video.

If that was true you would not have families with both, which I can tell you happens a lot.
Of course it does. Nobody said everybody has to be either/or. That is how right wing authoritarians think: either/or; black/white; “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists.” You will always have the ubiquitous undistributed middle. If you watch the Lakoff video, he also says that the family type you grew up in may not match your current political type.

If you think conservatives don't like to gamble, you have never been to Tunica.
Everybody not paralyzed by fear “lets their hair down” and “sows wild oats” on occasion. But habitually going to Tunica and blowing a wad of cash is exhibiting conservative tendencies? Ha!

If you think obedience and respect for authority is not important, that explains why liberals have violent protests, and conservatives have Tea Parties.
Like these town hall meetings from 2009?






Republican operatives masquerading as ordinary Tea Party “concerned citizens” deliberately disrupting health care bill town hall meetings? Not violent? Only because police were there!
Republicans seem to want to impersonate others so as conceal their true identity as Republicans. But sometimes they do it overtly, as in Wisconsin recall elections when they ran as fake Democrats to disrupt the orderly electoral process. It seems like those “conservative” Republicans are all about disrupting things.

As for the author, not exactly unbiased is he . . .
Unbiased? Nobody is. Everyone has preferences. Just because his might happen not to match yours is no reason to discount the objective study findings.

George P. Lakoff (play /ˈleɪkɒf/, born May 24, 1941) is an American cognitive linguist and professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, where he has taught since 1972.
At least he’s credentialed, not some yahoo they picked up off of Beach Blvd.

He is a member of the scientific committee of the Fundacion IDEAS, Spain's Socialist Party's think tank.
The Scientific Committee of Fundacion IDEAS reads like the cream of world scientists and scholars.
Fundacion IDEAS

He was the founder of the now defunct progressive think tank the Rockridge Institute.
At least progressives had one to counter the well-financed plethora of those on the right.
Check out his new one, Cognitive Policy Works.

And TNF? I’m still in the midst of my complete, thorough, and scientific study of what makes some of them tick. I’ll report my findings when available.
Back to top Go down
lmm
Epic Author
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 1873
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Colbert County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:40 am

Both sides have violent participants, and both sides had infiltrators to ruin the public image.
You claim the author is not categorizing people but i don't see how you cab state that with his comments like this;

He also states (p. 110) that conservatives actually tend to come from one of these family backgrounds, and liberals from the other.


Your professor is trained in linguistics, not behavior therapy, sociology, or psychiatry. . While he can give all the speeches he wants, his own background of being a socialist is going to skew his results.

To be completely fair, if a devout Christian psychiatrist did the study, he would show the conservatives as the good family model and the liberal as raising a horde of juvenile delinquents who will end up in jail for life.

This is as reliable as the 'liberal gene' that was 'found' a few months ago.

There are risk takers and those that don't, they can be from any background, race, religion, or status. I'll watch his videos later.
Back to top Go down
lmm
Epic Author
avatar

Aquarius

Posts : 1873
Join date : 2011-05-19
Location : Colbert County

PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   Mon Jul 18, 2011 3:13 pm

After watching his video, it seems his liberal/conservative statements are wrong. He basically said that all people have all tendencies, they are just expressed in different areas. I'm not even sure that you can put a metaphorical family up as an example.

I get the impression what he is trying to say is a form of imprinting from our parents but even that seems off. He did bring up associations of thoughts and feelings, such as his warmth and love, but how that relates to politics is beyond me. His wrong assumption is the type of two families. Very few people in the real world would identify with either type.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL   

Back to top Go down
 
Liberals vs Conservatives for EG! LOL
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Liberals are simply bat-shit crazy loons
» The Programme of the Nationalists by Edward Bellamy
» The Narcissistic Style in Liberal Politics
» Response To Improvement of NVC
» What can Veterans expect from the Liberal Majority Government

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Alabamian :: Politics-
Jump to: