Hypothesis Confirmed

Torin

Well-known member
I made a thread recently asking CARM posters what their political leanings were and whether they were more concerned by the Far Left or the Far Right. I had a hypothesis that Left leaning posters would be more concerned with the Far Right and vice versa. All or nearly all of the responses to the thread confirmed my hypothesis.


I'm curious what people make of this.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
If you start with politics this makes perfect sense. The far left is focused on achieving and maintaining power. When you look at the potential democrat field in 2020 their bench was extremely thin. So they ended up nominating this old fossil Joe Biden, because no one else on the field is ready for prime time.

The left-wing agenda is not a majority agenda, so when it comes election time they can't run a positive campaign of any kind. That means for every group they consider to be a constituency they have to write a narrative to terrify that group about the prospect of a Republican being elected.

The left is not particularly interested in seriously religious people, so they make a convenient target to terrify people about. In order to make all of this fear mongering seem poignant election after election, and not just come off as more of the same, they have to raise the hysteria level continually.

This is why every leftist revolution ends up with people being lined up against the wall and being shot. You can only ratchet up hysteria to a certain point before that's the next logical step.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
I made a thread recently asking CARM posters what their political leanings were and whether they were more concerned by the Far Left or the Far Right. I had a hypothesis that Left leaning posters would be more concerned with the Far Right and vice versa. All or nearly all of the responses to the thread confirmed my hypothesis.


I'm curious what people make of this.
At least one of the two groups is stuck in their own self-curated media environment.

Both could be - in which case each would believe the other is a grave threat simply because both only listen to media which tells them to fear the outsider.

It's also possible that only one consumes primarily self-curated media, while the other has objective evidence of grave threats from many different directions - and has used this evidence to accurately establish which one of these is the gravest.

---

Regardless of which scenario you think is more likely, "the media" is certainly central to both - which suggests that a smarter approach to media consumption would be useful.
 

Torin

Well-known member
At least one of the two groups is stuck in their own self-curated media environment.

Both could be - in which case each would believe the other is a grave threat simply because both only listen to media which tells them to fear the outsider.

It's also possible that only one consumes primarily self-curated media, while the other has objective evidence of grave threats from many different directions - and has used this evidence to accurately establish which one of these is the gravest.

---

Regardless of which scenario you think is more likely, "the media" is certainly central to both - which suggests that a smarter approach to media consumption would be useful.
Thanks, I think this is the most "practical" response I am likely to get. Read smarter!
 

Thistle

Well-known member
At least one of the two groups is stuck in their own self-curated media environment.

Both could be - in which case each would believe the other is a grave threat simply because both only listen to media which tells them to fear the outsider.

It's also possible that only one consumes primarily self-curated media, while the other has objective evidence of grave threats from many different directions - and has used this evidence to accurately establish which one of these is the gravest.

---

Regardless of which scenario you think is more likely, "the media" is certainly central to both - which suggests that a smarter approach to media consumption would be useful.
I would agree with that. Of the two conservatives are better informed.
 

Furion

Well-known member
I made a thread recently asking CARM posters what their political leanings were and whether they were more concerned by the Far Left or the Far Right. I had a hypothesis that Left leaning posters would be more concerned with the Far Right and vice versa. All or nearly all of the responses to the thread confirmed my hypothesis.


I'm curious what people make of this.
You actually think you've confirmed some kind of hypothesis?

How many respondents did you get?
How many people viewed your question?
How many decided not to address you?

Perhaps you've only managed to confirm your bias rather than confirmed a hypothesis.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
You actually think you've confirmed some kind of hypothesis?

How many respondents did you get?
How many people viewed your question?
How many decided not to address you?

Perhaps you've only managed to confirm your bias rather than confirmed a hypothesis.
I think we all understand that @Torin was not claiming to have drawn a statistically valid conclusion.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
Maybe. I don't see that conveyed. In fact the title says it.

Plenty of righties are quite concerned with the far left.
Well that kind of thing happens when you have mob tearing down the gate in your front yard, and threatening to pull you out and string you up in the tree. Then when you hold them off with your personal firearms, you're arrested not the mob. I don't know, how would you feel about that? I'm just spitball in here, but I expect that would unsettled a lot of people.
 

Furion

Well-known member
Well that kind of thing happens when you have mob tearing down the gate in your front yard, and threatening to pull you out and string you up in the tree. Then when you hold them off with your personal firearms, you're arrested not the mob. I don't know, how would you feel about that? I'm just spitball in here, but I expect that would unsettled a lot of people.
Goodness, they want to take my livelihood, make me suffer, perhaps not medically treat me, maybe even forbid the ability to buy or sell, who knows with some of them. So ya, dictators and those who support their actions are quite thought provoking, let's just say.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
Goodness, they want to take my livelihood, make me suffer, perhaps not medically treat me, maybe even forbid the ability to buy or sell, who knows with some of them. So ya, dictators and those who support their actions are quite thought provoking, let's just say.
Indeed!
 

vibise

Well-known member
If you start with politics this makes perfect sense. The far left is focused on achieving and maintaining power. When you look at the potential democrat field in 2020 their bench was extremely thin. So they ended up nominating this old fossil Joe Biden, because no one else on the field is ready for prime time.

The left-wing agenda is not a majority agenda, so when it comes election time they can't run a positive campaign of any kind. That means for every group they consider to be a constituency they have to write a narrative to terrify that group about the prospect of a Republican being elected.

The left is not particularly interested in seriously religious people, so they make a convenient target to terrify people about. In order to make all of this fear mongering seem poignant election after election, and not just come off as more of the same, they have to raise the hysteria level continually.

This is why every leftist revolution ends up with people being lined up against the wall and being shot. You can only ratchet up hysteria to a certain point before that's the next logical step.
None of this is remotely true.

Biden won the election by 7 million votes so he was the clear candidate of choice. Dem policies are highly popular including climate change, immigration reform, healthcare reform, preservation of Medicare/Medicaid/SS, raising the min wage, pro-choice on abortion, increasing taxes on the rich.

It is the far RW that is focused on gaining power despite their minority status, which they have to do through voter suppression, gerrymandering, and convincing people that free and fair elections are fake and should be easily overturned.

It is also the RW that keeps referencing 2nd amendment solutions when they don't win, and frequent mention of a second civil war. Which side has stocked up on guns and ammo?
 

Thistle

Well-known member
None of this is remotely true.
Every bit of it is unassailably true.
Biden won the election by 7 million votes so he was the clear candidate of choice.
Joe Biden couldn't get two dozen people to show up to any of his public appearances; spare me the unadulterated balderdash.
Dem policies are highly popular . . .
Critical theory, re-introduction of segregation, excluding African-Americans from places of business in New York City, separating children from their parents, full indoctrination as a substitute for education, religious persecution, stranding Americans in foreign countries under hostile circumstances, forced vaccination, proliferation of homelessness, encouraging the importation of hundreds of thousands of Covid infected illegal aliens over the southern border, using American tax dollars as a lure and increase illegal immigration, arming terrorists with the most sophisticated weapons on the face of planet earth, deliberately making American citizens hostages, deliberately preventing private efforts to extract hostages from Afghanistan? These are not popular.
It is the far RW that is focused on gaining power despite their minority status,
Translation: following the constitution and what it says about elections in the United States to guarantee our Republican democracy.
which they have to do through voter suppression,
That is completely false. Both the Texas law and the Georgia law will not be noticed by voters, but will definitely be noticed by cheaters.
gerrymandering,
Excuse me? It is blue Illinois that is gerrymandering in spite of the absolute assurance from governor JB Pritzker that he would not permit that.
and convincing people that free and fair elections are fake and should be easily overturned.
There was nothing free or fair about the 2020 election.
It is also the RW that keeps referencing 2nd amendment solutions when they don't win,
Excuse me is the left that actually shoots people in the chest whom believe they voted for the other candidate, not the right.
and frequent mention of a second civil war.
The left is actually fighting it. Pointing to what's going on and saying, hey pay attention to this, is not cheerleading for it. Actually trying to burn federal court houses to the ground, and burning police stations to the ground, is actually fighting it.
Which side has stocked up on guns and ammo?
The side is most likely to be put on the back of trucks and hauled off the gulags. Do you have any other pertinent questions?
 

BMS

Well-known member
Perhaps it would be worth considering the USA and UK and Europe of the last century. Were they left or right? When Winston Churchill is under attack and the society had Turin penalised and women were still without the pill and not prominent in business or politics. How would peope judge that in terms of right or left?
Have we moved nearer Hitler or nearer Stalin?
 

Torin

Well-known member
Perhaps it would be worth considering the USA and UK and Europe of the last century. Were they left or right? When Winston Churchill is under attack and the society had Turin penalised and women were still without the pill and not prominent in business or politics. How would peope judge that in terms of right or left?
Have we moved nearer Hitler or nearer Stalin?
This is a reason why we need a better way of thinking about politics than the conventional left-right spectrum. It is silly to have more or less indistinguishable dictatorships at both ends and liberty as some kind of middle ground between the two.
 
Top