I am surprised people haven't talked about this latest political analysis ...
The Hidden Tribes of America
--------------------------------
Progressive Activists - 8%
Traditional Liberals - 11%
Passive Liberals - 15%
Politically Disengaged - 26%
Moderates - 15%
Traditional Conservatives - 19%
Devoted Conservatives - 6%
A bit more description of the groups would be helpful.
Quote from: _Xenu_ on April 26, 2019, 07:20:13 PM
A bit more description of the groups would be helpful.
Ask and you shall receive from Google ...
https://www.moreincommon.com/hidden-tribes ... for downloadable report (from Oct 2018)
Full details ...
https://hiddentribes.us/profiles
My personal political evolution was from Passive Liberal, to Politically Disengaged, to Moderate. But I can make faux points from Traditional Conservatives ... rhetorically. But I simply don't trust Traditional Conservatives today, too out of touch. The other lines are too radical for me.
Quote from: Baruch on April 26, 2019, 06:44:39 PM
I am surprised people haven't talked about this latest political analysis ...
The Hidden Tribes of America
--------------------------------
Progressive Activists - 8%
Traditional Liberals - 11%
Passive Liberals - 15%
Politically Disengaged - 26%
Moderates - 15%
Traditional Conservatives - 19%
Devoted Conservatives - 6%
I'm between the 1st two...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 27, 2019, 05:21:07 AM
I'm between the 1st two...
And I think, consistently since youth ;-)
I think the only way to tell a traditional conservative from a devoted conservative is that the former do not wave nazi flags.
Quote from: Minimalist on May 01, 2019, 08:09:47 PM
I think the only way to tell a traditional conservative from a devoted conservative is that the former do not wave nazi flags.
Maniacs worry about flags. I worry about guns. Far Left or Far Right are both willing to use violence to get their way, by definition. Do you have a better definition?
Basically the extremes are psychopaths. The people in between are merely deluded ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on May 01, 2019, 08:42:15 PM
Maniacs worry about flags. I worry about guns. Far Left or Far Right are both willing to use violence to get their way, by definition. Do you have a better definition?
Basically the extremes are psychopaths. The people in between are merely deluded ;-)
The time of the US Left violent ones was brief and gone. Liberals and Progressives just don't like that stuff. Conservatives, on the other hand, LOVE that stuff.
Quote from: Cavebear on May 10, 2019, 01:57:16 AM
The time of the US Left violent ones was brief and gone. Liberals and Progressives just don't like that stuff. Conservatives, on the other hand, LOVE that stuff.
Yes, revolutions are temporary. 1775-1783 was a Middle Class Leftism. 1861-1865 was a counter-revolution. 1965-1972 was a sex/drug revolution. The average year is a status-quo year ... aka conservative (of the status quo). The Left is now moving toward violence. They want a one-party state like China.
Quote from: Baruch on May 10, 2019, 04:23:21 AM
Yes, revolutions are temporary. 1775-1783 was a Middle Class Leftism. 1861-1865 was a counter-revolution. 1965-1972 was a sex/drug revolution. The average year is a status-quo year ... aka conservative (of the status quo). The Left is now moving toward violence. They want a one-party state like China.
1775-1783 was a conservative rebellion led by impoverished high society landowners who were in debt to England and wanted to escape their debts. 1861-1865 was a fight of slave-owners who had controlled the US government since the 1776 Revolution to maintain what they had as human property (their Statements Of Secession say it outright). 1965-1972 was a movement against the Government that increasingly tried to control individual rights. I was there... The LAST thing the majority of us wanted was a one-party State.
Quote from: Cavebear on May 10, 2019, 06:15:20 AM
1775-1783 was a conservative rebellion led by impoverished high society landowners who were in debt to England and wanted to escape their debts. 1861-1865 was a fight of slave-owners who had controlled the US government since the 1776 Revolution to maintain what they had as human property (their Statements Of Secession say it outright). 1965-1972 was a movement against the Government that increasingly tried to control individual rights. I was there... The LAST thing the majority of us wanted was a one-party State.
Back in the 60s? Government control is much greater today (yes they threw a bone to the gays). No, but today, you want Chinese-style Internet dictatorship. One party, one indeterminate-gender-pronoun.
I don't agree with your hatred of the rich. Because I don't agree with hatred, it distorts judgement. And yes, back then, and now, Southern politicians control the Federal government, since Thomas Jefferson. He hated NY/Mass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=notJuFGXQ9w
The first tyrant was a New Englander, President Adams ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUH-xtkovxg
The first group of states wanting to secede was ... New England, in 1812.
Quote from: Baruch on May 10, 2019, 09:41:56 AM
Back in the 60s? Government control is much greater today (yes they threw a bone to the gays). No, but today, you want Chinese-style Internet dictatorship. One party, one indeterminate-gender-pronoun.
I don't agree with your hatred of the rich. Because I don't agree with hatred, it distorts judgement. And yes, back then, and now, Southern politicians control the Federal government, since Thomas Jefferson. He hated NY/Mass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=notJuFGXQ9w
The first tyrant was a New Englander, President Adams ...
The first group of states wanting to secede was ... New England, in 1812.
Lat to First...
The New Englanders were knocked down, being that they had no right to try to dissolve the Union.
Early Presidents, like current ones, attempted to increase their political power. See Southern Andrew Jackson, who when confronted by a Supreme Court decision he disliked, asked what army the Supreme Court had.
I do not hate the rich. I'm one of them. An accident of a life of saving and investing in capitalism. The concept of monetary velocity is a good thing. Within reason and sensible regulation...
I surely do NOT want "Chinese-style Internet dictatorship. One party, one indeterminate-gender-pronoun".
For myself, I am a bit Ayn Randian. But for society-at-large, that will not work. I want a progressive society; not because *I* need it, but because having one where most people have a good life is good for ME, too.
Generosity is wise, envy is unwise ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on May 16, 2019, 10:27:17 AM
Generosity is wise, envy is unwise ;-)
Pay the man, Shirley...