Is America a mainly Conservative Country?

[Treblaine]

AWWW HELL NO!

Nearly the entire media is left wing, and the media controls the people.

I myself am mostly right wing, except for the religious shit.

For more details on my politics, ask...

Except Fox is the biggest Media outlet in the country, and is the biggest, craziest shit I have ever had the displeasure to watch. I would watch it for laughs, if it's obvious homophobia and racism didn't get me mad.

Yes, SINGLE LARGEST news network... but it doesn't cater to any where near the majority of Americans. All the other networks, which are quite liberal, make up the majority of news that Americans watch.

BTW, I've caught fox news being sexist, homophobic, prudish and xenophobic but never racist. And no, I don't count dissing Islam as racism, that is a RELIGION, not a race. BTW, I don't know the word for "prejudiced bigotry against a religion" but that is pretty bad in itself.

 

[Xanadu84]

Its actually pretty even.

First, lets address elections. Last one, a Dem won. Before that, Bush won because he was an incumbent during a war, and traditionally, that all but guarantees your success: however, the vote was obscenely close. Close enough that you can't reasonably say that there was a significant difference. Election before, a Dem one. Yes, Gore beat Bush. But because they cheated in Florida, and the electoral college is dumb, Bush was shoehorned in by the Supreme Court. The 2 before that, a Dem. But all of this gets thrown out the window, along with all the conservative presidents before, when you realize that less then half of the people vote. An election is a measurement of how a party can mobilize there base, not an accurate representation of the breakdown of America. As it turns out, religious zeal is more effective then optimism when it comes to getting people into the voting booth.

Next its worth pointing out that in most issues, Americans lean a bit towards liberal. Republicans fundamentalist bent has roped in a lot of religious moderate lefts without them even realizing it. And also, Republicans have done very good with PR, and tend to present a very loud, single, unified voice, while the Dems are more fragmented.

And lastly, you can't really say its a conservative country because in many places, that just doesn't make sense. Yes, go deep into Texas and your going to see the conservative America stereotype you hear about. Go over to California, or up into New England, or basically into most any population center, and you will find people more Liberal then you. In my neck of the woods, you could say something like, "At least we got that asshole Bush out of the Whitehouse", and you are way more likely to offend for useing the word asshole then hating Bush. Some of my local politicians ran there entire campaign by pretty much not presenting any platform except, "My opponent likes Bush, and I hate him, vote for me".

Overall, the split is pretty 50/50.

 

[ZeLunarian]

Im gonna say quite decisively: MAYBE
They're a bit inconsistant to me. America always did seem like a spoiled child amongst the UN

That's probably because we fork up 51% of the UN's annual budget.

So you're saying USA act like a spoiled brat amongst the UN because they're richer?
Come now, i thought the UN was centered towards peace. Would you also believe you can BUY the right to kill people if you had the $$$$$s?
Aww so the lil rich kid thinks he can take what he wants so long as he says 'b-b-b-b-but they started iiit T-T'

 

[Jsnoopy]

The USA is very conservative, that should be rather clear.

The people are slightly to the right, the government is naturally left. Ask the people whether they want more or less government intervention in their lives, and usually you will get a less response.

Actually, polls show that 50something% of Americans support the Health Care Bill.

None that weren't passed down straight from the White House. The vast majority of polls would suggest upwards of 65-70% against.

Source?
Because I've quite sure only fox news is giving out those numbers, and those numbers were wrong.

http://politics.polls.newsvine.com/_question/2010/03/21/4048693-the-house-has-passed-an-historic-health-care-overhaul-are-you-excited-or-angry?GT1=43001

MSNBC the most liberal of the liberal

I live in Australia and can vote in that poll. A online poll isn't worth much and isn't what I was talking about.

Considering people in other countries ***** so much about how America didn't have socialized medicine its pretty funny to see that the "yes" column is so damn low even though anyone on the planet can vote for it.

Do you have any real poll or just funny one liners?
(Note: What you said really was funny, but I'm trying to be serious)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_favor_repeal_of_health_care_bill
55% of the country wants to repeal it and I really do think it should have went up to a national vote instead of "representatives".

How about you do a non biased poll sight. It is well known rasmussen advances right wing talking points. But hey while were throwing poll numbers out there

Uh oh son, looks like we have conflicting reports.

Well you used a liberal bent source. So I guess we take an average. Thats from USA Today, you might as well ask Obamas cabinet what they think. It totally depends on where you poll.

So when the polls don't go your way Gallup becomes liberally biased? Hell most liberals consider gallup to have a conservative bias. I decided to list that as an example because even gallup had a majority favoring healthcare. Rasmussen on the other hand is just a joke. First of all they do not even use actual people but machines. Next they load up their questions with as much bias as they can contain. Here is how most pollsters asked a question
"What do you think would benefit the economy more at this time: cutting taxes on individuals and businesses, or increasing spending on items like infrastructure and other programs?"
Here is how Ramussen asked it "Do you agree or disagree with the following statement... it?s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money?

Hell if I asked questions like that I could get any issue to go my way.
If I asked the question "Do you think that insurance companies, who make money from denying you care, should have a monopoly on the market and deny competition from a not for profit enterprise.
Hell I could get 75%+ of the population to inadvertently support a public option or single payer based on the way I asked a question.

Take a lesson from yourself there mate. USA Today is openly liberal. Rasmussen asks tough questions. It asks what do you believe. Do you believe in bureaucrats or the people. Its an opinion question that's no more slanted than any other polling source out there. Besides its asking the truth. The government bought the auto industry, the banks and the next step is controlling health care. Its asking who the people want in charge and the people give the answer.

1. So now if you "ask the tough questions" you suddenly have no political bias or agenda? And why the fuck is he asking "a tough question" that has only two fucking answers? That's like asking "Do you support the Iraq war or are you un-patriotic?"
2. How you word a question in a survey is vastly important to the answers you will get, and even small changes in words can make a few percent difference. Thats why you had a Fox survey reporting only about 40% of people being for a healthcare reform bill while The New York Times reported around 67% of people being for one.You can't even compare the government "buying" the auto industry and the banks to healthcare because the car companies and banks wanted to be bailed out and actively campaigned to do so while the health care lobby has spent millions dragging it feet in opposition to any kind of change what so ever.
3. You can't even compare the government "buying" the auto industry and the banks to healthcare because the car companies and banks wanted to be bailed out and actively campaigned to do so while the health care lobby has spent millions dragging it feet in opposition to any kind of change what so ever.
EDIT:

"after Nixon the Republican and Democratic parties switched sides"

I'm intrigued by this. I know the Nixon-Watergate scandal hit the Republicans harder than a god damn tactical nuclear strike and Neo-conservatism seemed to grow out of those ashes... but how precisely do you see it as the Republicans and Democrats "switching"? Like what did one do/believe that then they no longer did to be taken up by the other side?

...

I think the democrats and republicans basically switched ideologies between the time Wilson was elected president and the time FDR was elected president, at least in the areas of fiscal and social responsibility (Before that you had Teddy Roosvelt + Taft, both Republicans, doing stuff like the EPA and FDA. Then you reach FDR, a Democrat who does a bunch a shit like the WPA and what not), but you still had a group of Southern Democrats, left over from the days of Reconstruction, who remained Democrats in mostly name only until Nixon wooed them into changing parties.

 

[Decabo]

it is more conservative now, but with the integration of more and more minorities, it's becoming more liberal to promote equality. For example, Obama wouldn't be president if he was a white, heterosexual male. he's too young and inexperienced to be president of the country.

i do not mean that to have any sort of racial undertones so please no flaming. just my POV.

Do you know who the last president was? George Bush was very inexperienced, and he was *gasp* white. If Obama was white, I doubt people would be acting like the world was about to explode. You can say "It's not because he's black, I just don't like his policies.", and maybe that's true for you, but with all Obama's been through, you have to admit that no white president has been put through this, and Obama hasn't even done anything to warrant it.

he hasn't done jack to help unemployment. he's stimulated government spending, but he hasn't stimulated the economy. unemployment is still through the roof and he's more concerned about democratic pet projects and his healthcare bill...not that I could do any better or that mccain would have been better, just sayin...

He JUST passed the jobs bill, and the stimulus is still being used. Unemployment last month was the lowest it's been since July of last year. You have to admit we are recovering from this recession, and excuse him for thinking healthcare is a big deal, especially since our current system is the number 1 source of bankruptcy. The DOW was in the 6 thousands when he took office, now it's over 10,000. The point is, he's done nothing to warrant you "hating his white half and black half," to warrant death threats, being compared to Hitler, or called a terrorist.

 

[ZeLunarian]

Im gonna say quite decisively: MAYBE
They're a bit inconsistant to me. America always did seem like a spoiled child amongst the UN

That's probably because we fork up 51% of the UN's annual budget.

So you're saying USA act like a spoiled brat amongst the UN because they're richer?
Come now, i thought the UN was centered towards peace. Would you also believe you can BUY the right to kill people if you had the $$$$$s?
Aww so the lil rich kid thinks he can take what he wants so long as he says 'b-b-b-b-but they started iiit T-T'

I didn't say we were richer, although, I could see why you'd take that approach, because going the other way really doesn't provide as much humor for your response. No, I never said we're richer, I just said we fork up 51% of the UN's annual budget. There's a difference. I'm sure the rest of the world _could_ do it. But....alas, we're still covering 51% of it.

Ok I got my coffee so no more bad sarcasm outta me~
Anyway, why do you think that this 51% figure (im unfamiliar with mind you) is justification for being like the spoiled child of the UN?? Well considering how much revenue america is persistantly investing in war efforts, that 51% doesn't seem like a whole lot.
Now I'm not a man for america bashing, my sarcasm just got the better of me, however I really don't see how you're defending being 'a spoiled child amongst the UN' by saying that american government is forking up more money than others? Considering how much is persistantly invested in war efforts.
Also I wouldn't use 'WE' or 'THEM' when it comes to a talk about governments. Unless you, personally, are responsible. But I must say. I reckon the netherlands are doing it right IMO.

 

[Jsnoopy]

Im gonna say quite decisively: MAYBE
They're a bit inconsistant to me. America always did seem like a spoiled child amongst the UN

That's probably because we fork up 51% of the UN's annual budget.

So you're saying USA act like a spoiled brat amongst the UN because they're richer?
Come now, i thought the UN was centered towards peace. Would you also believe you can BUY the right to kill people if you had the $$$$$s?
Aww so the lil rich kid thinks he can take what he wants so long as he says 'b-b-b-b-but they started iiit T-T'

1. We are paying for a majority of the budget, so yes we are entitled to some special privileges. Any country in our position would demand the same. Besides, we just had the worst president in recent history for 8 years, so give us a break.
2. Buying the right to kill people? Dude, that's called WAR. The government supplies you with clothing, housing, training, weapons, transportation and maybe a pension IF you survive. In return the government gets valuable resources. Any powerful country in modern history has done this. If you were talking on a more personal level about how $$$ can give you the right to kill someone, just look O.J. Simpson or the many other cases were a probable murderer was let off due to a fantastic lawyer.
3. I don't know what your trying to say with "but they started it comment" but I'm guessing its a reference to either WW2, where Europe did start it and we tried to avoid it for as long as possible, or a reference to the wars in the Middle East, where with the exception of the Iraq war, we more or less had to go in and went in with good reason.

 

[ZeLunarian]

-big snipe-

Where am I defending America's BEHAVIOR?!!?!?!?!? For fuck's sake, all I said was maybe it's because we fork up 51% of the budget. That's IT! Even when you responded in a crass fashion, I still let it roll off my back. God. Have you never dealt with kids before? Ever? When a kid acts up, you don't continue to allow them privileges and responsibilities. You take them away. IE, treat them like a kid.

Ahh! S:
I am quite good with children btw~ but i've never dealt with a kid who could point a gun at my head.... or one bigger than me... Or one that could buy me out.
Imagine if the america's had their privileges and such reposed.... BOOM everyone else is an enemy.
Are you suggesting that america should be concerning itself more with internal affairs or what?
Im sorry, but you do seem to be trying to correct me on everything i say. So how could i not think you were acting defensive~

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

From a British standpoint, even their middle of the bench politicians seem further to the right than what I would term as the middle, so yes, I would say America is a primarily Conservative (with a large C) nation. Seriously, anyone who can straightfacedly assure me that Barack Obama is a socialist doesn't actually know what that term means.

Not to say that I think it's bad in any way, I just think it's something the world, especially Britain, should be aware of. We tend to think the Americans are like us more than any other nation (or vice versa or whatever) because we look alike, therefore anyone Middle Eastern or otherwise is out, and they speak English, which is why we consider ourselves different to the rest of Europe, but it should always be remembered that despite these seeming similarities, the beliefs and political organisation of America is so wholly different to ours as to be perhaps even more foreign than our different looking, different language allies and enemies.

Not that any of this is bad, I think it would be awful is America was like Britain, it wouldn't even run as a country in my view, but I do think it's dangerous to assume that because we speak the same language, we are the same.

 

[Alphavillain]

People in general are pretty conservative, wherever they come from. But I always think of Americans being led by a primarily Puritan impulse (I don't mean that in a perjorative way, in fact quite the opposite).

 

[ZeLunarian]

1. We are paying for a majority of the budget, so yes we are entitled to some special privileges. Any country in our position would demand the same. Besides, we just had the worst president in recent history for 8 years, so give us a break.
2. Buying the right to kill people? Dude, that's called WAR. The government supplies you with clothing, housing, training, weapons, transportation and maybe a pension IF you survive. In return the government gets valuable resources. Any powerful country in modern history has done this. If you were talking on a more personal level about how $$$ can give you the right to kill someone, just look O.J. Simpson or the many other cases were a probable murderer was let off due to a fantastic lawyer.
3. I don't know what your trying to say with "but they started it comment" but I'm guessing its a reference to either WW2, where Europe did start it and we tried to avoid it for as long as possible, or a reference to the wars in the Middle East, where with the exception of the Iraq war, we more or less had to go in and went in with good reason.

Just so you know. It's nothing personal against america. The whole world is fkd up.
That O.J. Simpson trial is a perfect example.
And isn't buying your way to special privilages the same thing? xD

Ok now. Tell me, how many died in the 9/11? How many died warring with the middle east?
Oh and WAR is bad m'kay?

 

[Zani]

I'd say so, even the parties that aren't conservatives are conservative compared to many countries in Europe.

 

[Cptn_Squishy]

Conservatives get the most airtime, so that would definately make people think that the US leans to the right. And while the conservative media SAYS over and over and louder and louder that the liberal media dominates, it really doesn't. Keep in mind that there are conservatives who say that wikipedia is too liberal (like the guy who created conservapedia).

 

[oppp7]

There has been primarily more Republican Presidents than Democratic Presidents. Even in the 1960's, the US has been primarily conservative, despite the very VOCAL liberal members. In the 2000 and 2004 elections, despite the pro liberal media blitz, Bush was elected. Is America a primarily conservative or liberal country? I think it's primarily conservative personally.

A good amount of those Republicans were liberal, like Teddy Roosevelt and Lincoln, or arguably middle of the road, like Nixon. Remember, Republican doesn't mean conservative.

On that note, I'd say yes, it does seem more conservative. But I'm not certain, since there's a lot of factors. I only think of a lot of conservatives in the US because my parents are liberal along with the stereotype being that we are. But I do see a lot of liberals, such as my sister, and Obama did get elected, so there's that.

The only solid evidence for more conservatives would be that Fox gets a lot of viewers.