Some Deep Thought

[davisev5225]

So I've had a question for a long time, but I've never been able to figure it out. Why are the majority of people who regularly use the internet liberal and/or democrats? I'd like to see some thoughts on this one.

Also, leave the smart-ass comments elsewhere. I don't want to hear anything like "because we're right", "because we're smart", or any other bullshit like that. I want honest thoughts, not some screwed up debate over who's political ideals are "better" or "right".

[Kev-o]

Left-wing politics are a lot more expansive these days, I think because of the current administration.

[Me-Patch]

Id'e say because young people tend to be more liberal and computer literate. So thats what you get liberals on the internet.

[Thread-Killer]

It is because of the influx of users from liberal Canada and Europe. Also, it is a shame because the Internet used to be hugely conservative.

[Begoner]

I'd attribute it mostly to the openness of information on the internet. If you are subjected to a more varied news source as opposed to the conservative-leaning US media, you are more likely to be farther to the left of those who rely on such traditional media. Demographics also play a role (young people, who are more progressive, are more active on forums such as these).

[Everlasting-Elements]

Mere coincidence, I'd say.

[SuperDeagle]

At 8/16/07 08:46 PM, Me-Patch wrote: Id'e say because young people tend to be more liberal and computer literate. So thats what you get liberals on the internet.

It's this one for sure.

[davisev5225]

At 8/17/07 12:09 AM, Begoner wrote: I'd attribute it mostly to the openness of information on the internet. If you are subjected to a more varied news source as opposed to the conservative-leaning US media, you are more likely to be farther to the left of those who rely on such traditional media. Demographics also play a role (young people, who are more progressive, are more active on forums such as these).

Well, I'd argue that the media has a liberal bias (except some stations like Fox, that can't be trusted to give the news properly), but you do have a point about the openness of the internet. Perhaps the liberal sites are able to promote themselves better than the conservative sites?

[Draconias]

At 8/17/07 07:43 AM, davisev5225 wrote: Well, I'd argue that the media has a liberal bias (except some stations like Fox, that can't be trusted to give the news properly), but you do have a point about the openness of the internet. Perhaps the liberal sites are able to promote themselves better than the conservative sites?

The apparent liberal bias of people on the internet is influenced by the nature of what a conservatives and liberals are individually like.

In general, conservatives tend to be adults with significant obligations: this can range from being a middle class suburbanite supporting your family of five, to a farmer out in the country maintaining 100 acres, to a business owner or entrepreneur working in the city. However, they are almost always adults above age 25 who live a relatively busy lifestyle. As a matter of time, preference, and habit, they don't go to generic public websites for "kid stuff" like flash animations very often. They do have a strong presence on the internet, but it is a focused one, usually on specifically political or business-oriented websites, and they usually demand some level of quality from discussions.

On the other hand, college students and younger people who have never held a job or lived on their own are much more likely to be liberal and have a large amount of free time. These younger liberals are the ones most likely to go to generic or "time waster" websites and forums, and they also tend to be highly vocal (spam). When it doesn't take any thought, you'll have a large presence of these people, but if you start a real discussion, such as the Heathenry one, these people will quickly draw back into the murk and hide because "well thought-out" and "young liberal" don't go together well.

Besides that, everyone also knows that the liberal side is always the highly vocal, more visible one, regardless of the forum (in the real sense), and that's just part of the ideology.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 8/17/07 12:09 AM, Begoner wrote: I'd attribute it to the fact that the internet has all of the information, And liberals, being smart and open minded would thus be found on the internet. Conservatives are idiotic and have no basis of information for they're extremist opinions, and thus would not be found on the internet. :

::
::

I totally agree begoner.

[davisev5225]

At 8/17/07 11:09 AM, Draconias wrote: The apparent liberal bias of people on the internet is influenced by the nature of what a conservatives and liberals are individually like.

In general, conservatives tend to be adults with significant obligations: this can range from being a middle class suburbanite supporting your family of five, to a farmer out in the country maintaining 100 acres, to a business owner or entrepreneur working in the city. However, they are almost always adults above age 25 who live a relatively busy lifestyle. As a matter of time, preference, and habit, they don't go to generic public websites for "kid stuff" like flash animations very often. They do have a strong presence on the internet, but it is a focused one, usually on specifically political or business-oriented websites, and they usually demand some level of quality from discussions.

On the other hand, college students and younger people who have never held a job or lived on their own are much more likely to be liberal and have a large amount of free time. These younger liberals are the ones most likely to go to generic or "time waster" websites and forums, and they also tend to be highly vocal (spam). When it doesn't take any thought, you'll have a large presence of these people, but if you start a real discussion, such as the Heathenry one, these people will quickly draw back into the murk and hide because "well thought-out" and "young liberal" don't go together well.

Besides that, everyone also knows that the liberal side is always the highly vocal, more visible one, regardless of the forum (in the real sense), and that's just part of the ideology.

I can tell you've been observing this sort of interaction for a while.

Everything you have said makes sense, and fits what I've observed in my dealings. This is exactly the sort of answer I was looking for. Thanks.

I'd also like to thank everyone for staying mature in this thread. I really didn't want the silly arguments flying back and forth about which political view is better, and you've kept them out. It's nice that we can all work together towards a positive, informative thread without tearing each other apart.

[cellardoor6]

Because the internet is filled with a lot of bullshit, which creates liberals, and which liberals are more receptive to.

The Internet is one of the few methods of exchanging political views where these views go almost entirely unchecked.

[GeoGWM]

Becuase I am a faceless name on here, one can feel safe wording thier own opinions as opposed to what they might say to friends and family. I did the same thing on myspace for awhile. I could write what ever I felt becuase noone really knew me on there and you can just block people's ideas easily. Freedom is a great thing, but just becuase we are "free" doesn't mean that we don't fear others ideas and thoughts on ourselves. Good topic starter btw lol.

[Buffalow]

Because when a few select people (Ahem, Maddox) have a liberal bias, and they also have a popular website on the Internet, shazzam, drones who surf the internet looking for a laugh or two stumble upon your site and then get your message, no matter how liberal or conservative it is.

[davisev5225]

At 8/18/07 01:26 AM, GeoGWM wrote: Good topic starter btw lol.

Why thank you. I figured it would make some good discussion.

[tony4moroney]

At 8/16/07 08:39 PM, davisev5225 wrote: So I've had a question for a long time, but I've never been able to figure it out. Why are the majority of people who regularly use the internet liberal and/or democrats? I'd like to see some thoughts on this one.

Also, leave the smart-ass comments elsewhere. I don't want to hear anything like "because we're right", "because we're smart", or any other bullshit like that. I want honest thoughts, not some screwed up debate over who's political ideals are "better" or "right".

Not necessarily. [here]

1. www.freerepublic.com 5.72% --> R
2. www.huffingtonpost.com 5.7% --> L
3. www.dailykos.com 3.95% --> L
4. www.townhall.com 2.39% --> R
5. www.buzzflash.com 2.17% --> L
6. politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com 2.17% -->N/A
7. www.antiwar.com 2.01% --> Slightly L (77% of americans believe the war is a piece of shit and 65% disapprove) [1]
8. www.truthout.org 1.99% --> L
9. www.democraticunderground.com 1.97% --> L
10. www.humanevents.com 1.8% --> R

[SlithVampir]

Dems have more time on thier hands. What symbolizes the democratic party? College student. What symbolizes the Reps? The college student's grandmother from Tennesse. Who is more likely to use a computer?

[Pheidippides]

Liberals tend to be younger, and therefore, have more time on their hands to visit forums such as these.

[morefngdbs]

At 8/18/07 10:01 AM, SevenSeize wrote: Because most of the conservatives have jobs, and don't have enough time for the internet.
Whereas most liberals sit at home living off the government smoking pot and have the time for internet fun.

Someone had to try to balance it out guys. sorry. lol
I <3 you all, conservative or liberal

;
Seven I believe I could take offense to that, if my skin was thinner.
I have never lived off the goverment, I'm around so much lately because of my damn leg injury.
Smoking pot , in my case is more for pain than anything else. Ever read what morphine given to you legally by your doctor can do to you?

My mother & Father are about as Conservative as you could possibly get, they are against gay marriage, against Sunday shopping ; they were dismayed that interracial relationships have happened in their family.
Although once they realized people , no matter where from, or what color, are people very similar to themselves. They did re-evaluate that narrow minded view.
Unfortunately the shopping & marriage issue can still cause an argument if I bring it up.

They are on the internet all the time, I get e-mails almost daily. When they travel ,they make a point of contacting us regularly, with a note & a photo or 2.
So conservative or not , technology doesn't seem to phase them. They have embraced it & use it as the tool it can be.

[SEXY-FETUS]

Well everyone has heard why liberals protest and consrvatives don't. Same reason.

[Memorize]

At 8/18/07 03:22 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

7. www.antiwar.com 2.01% --> Slightly L (77% of americans believe the war is a piece of shit and 65% disapprove) [1]

Bullshit alert.

Slightly, my ass. lol

[tony4moroney]

At 8/19/07 01:13 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 8/18/07 03:22 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

7. www.antiwar.com 2.01% --> Slightly L (77% of americans believe the war is a piece of shit and 65% disapprove) [1]

Bullshit alert.

Slightly, my ass. lol

65% of americans are against the war and 77% believe it's a failure and you think this is completely partisan? i never realized 65% of americans were liberal, man that's a refreshing change from all the purple and red ive seen.

[Memorize]

At 8/19/07 01:16 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

65% of americans are against the war and 77% believe it's a failure and you think this is completely partisan? i never realized 65% of americans were liberal, man that's a refreshing change from all the purple and red ive seen.

37% of Americans can't even name the Vice President.

Why should their opinions matter?

lolz

Besides, I was refering to the site. As we all know, well-informed people wouldn't be anti-war.

[tony4moroney]

At 8/19/07 01:20 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 8/19/07 01:16 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

65% of americans are against the war and 77% believe it's a failure and you think this is completely partisan? i never realized 65% of americans were liberal, man that's a refreshing change from all the purple and red ive seen.

37% of Americans can't even name the Vice President.

whoa wait.. so 37% = 65% oh ok thanks for the math lesson.

Why should their opinions matter?
Besides, I was refering to the site. As we all know, well-informed people wouldn't be anti-war.

which is specifically anti-war and possesses some anti-neoconservative sentiment which is shared amongst traditional conservatives. and youd find the reverse in that, anybody with half a brain knows that war =/= peace.

[Memorize]

At 8/19/07 01:26 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

whoa wait.. so 37% = 65% oh ok thanks for the math lesson.

I'm not even sure what you just tried to do.

Anywho, in case you're failing reading comprehension, the 37% was a completely seperate poll.

which is specifically anti-war and possesses some anti-neoconservative sentiment which is shared amongst traditional conservatives. and youd find the reverse in that, anybody with half a brain knows that war =/= peace.

Sure. However, doing nothing =/= peace either.

Just look at the US only. Revolutionary War, Civil War, WWI, WWII.

Oh lookie, war bringing a form of peace.

Sitting around didn't exactly work during those wars either, haha!

[GeoGWM]

At 8/19/07 01:20 AM, Memorize wrote:

37% of Americans can't even name the Vice President.

Why should their opinions matter?

lolz

Besides, I was refering to the site. As we all know, well-informed people wouldn't be anti-war.

Yeah, yeah... we all know that even Bush can't find Dick so why should anyone else? I know that is really corny.. but oh well.

[Memorize]

At 8/19/07 01:34 AM, GeoGWM wrote:

Yeah, yeah... we all know that even Bush can't find Dick so why should anyone else? I know that is really corny.. but oh well.

So what if it's corny?

We elected leaders by the names of: Bush. Dick. Colon. Gore.

Put all this together and you have one very bloody porn film.

[tony4moroney]

At 8/19/07 01:31 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 8/19/07 01:26 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

whoa wait.. so 37% = 65% oh ok thanks for the math lesson.

I'm not even sure what you just tried to do.

Anywho, in case you're failing reading comprehension, the 37% was a completely seperate poll.

which is specifically anti-war and possesses some anti-neoconservative sentiment which is shared amongst traditional conservatives. and youd find the reverse in that, anybody with half a brain knows that war =/= peace.

Sure. However, doing nothing =/= peace either.

actually going into iraq with lax reasoning and an incompetent administration caused the current situation. if we hadn'tdeclared war oh lookie, no war.

Just look at the US only. Revolutionary War, Civil War, WWI, WWII.

yeah because those were all completely the same as the iraq war. revolutionary war - freedom from british. civil war - state rights. ww2 - defending against nazism.

Sitting around didn't exactly work during those wars either, haha!

well it wouldve, we just wouldve had a totalitarian, fascist europe possibly split between nazis and soviets.

[Memorize]

At 8/19/07 01:38 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

actually going into iraq with lax reasoning and an incompetent administration caused the current situation. if we hadn'tdeclared war oh lookie, no war.

We haven't officially declared war since WWII.

Oh lookie, no war anyway.

yeah because those were all completely the same as the iraq war.

Nope.

They were all worse than Iraq.

Which is why I said that any well-informed individual wouldn't be anti-war.

revolutionary war - freedom from british.

Which was overexaggerated.

The British weren't brutes. People got pissed because they were taxed even when the price was lower WITH the taxes.

Of course there were many many other reasons such as "not having a jury" and being jailed with no proof and soldiers stationed in people's homes of course.

But the real reason: We were seperated by miles and miles of ocean and didn't feel like being told what to do.

civil war - state rights.

And that war lead to many great things, wouldn't you say?

ww2 - defending against nazism.

No. We were thrust into war when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and declared war on the United States.

well it wouldve, we just wouldve had a totalitarian, fascist europe possibly split between nazis and soviets.

Doubt it. They probly would've killed each other first. Especially considering that the Soviets were already fighting Germany before we entered into the war anyway when Germany broke their contract with the Soviets and attacked them.

[tony4moroney]

At 8/19/07 01:44 AM, Memorize wrote:

At 8/19/07 01:38 AM, tony4moroney wrote:

actually going into iraq with lax reasoning and an incompetent administration caused the current situation. if we hadn'tdeclared war oh lookie, no war.

We haven't officially declared war since WWII.

no, we declared war on iraq.

Oh lookie, no war anyway.

okaAaAaayy

yeah because those were all completely the same as the iraq war.

Nope.

then why mention it as though it had any relevance to the circumstances in iraq?

Which is why I said that any well-informed individual wouldn't be anti-war.

youre an idiot. ill be a little more specific for you. people are against the iraq war.

revolutionary war - freedom from british.

Which was overexaggerated.

so by your own admission the revolutionary war was a farce and providing this as an example of a good war was stupid of you. incidentally i dont agree with you. i, nor you should be paying any interests to a 'queen' thousands of miles away.

civil war - state rights.

And that war lead to many great things, wouldn't you say?

no, not necessarily i wouldve much rather had the south separated. but hey to each his own opinion.

ww2 - defending against nazism.

No. We were thrust into war when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and declared war on the United States.

i never knew japan was the center of a european war.

well it wouldve, we just wouldve had a totalitarian, fascist europe possibly split between nazis and soviets.

Doubt it. They probly would've killed each other first. Especially considering that the Soviets were already fighting Germany before we entered into the war anyway when Germany broke their contract with the Soviets and attacked them.

no im saying if there was no opposition to hitler there technically wouldnt be a war.