Timeline for Why are American liberals more prone to in-fighting than conservatives? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
41 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 2, 2023 at 14:02 | comment | added | Jared Smith | @SQB FWIW I think "opinion based" is a better close reason here if one is needed. I don't think I'd vote to close this personally, but as I said in my comment to the OP I can hardly blame people that do, and I haven't voted to reopen it either. | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 8:26 | comment | added | SQB | @JaredSmith And lastly, querent seems to conflate liberals with the Democratic Party and conservative with the Republican Party which is another flawed premise in the sense that a part of your Democratic Party is a touch conservative to say the least while parts of the Republican Party are more libertarian rather than conservative. 2/2 | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 8:24 | comment | added | SQB | @JaredSmith to me, yes. I could've gone with "opinion based" as well, because the premise is opinion based. It's hard to quantify the amount of infighting and any cut-off point will be arbitrary and will no doubt leave one party at a disadvantage. To top that off, the querent's examples are limited to presidential elections, while the rest of the question is not. 1/2 | |
| Jun 2, 2023 at 1:58 | history | closed |
computercarguy curiousdannii SQB hszmv Azor Ahai -him- |
Opinion-based | |
| Jun 1, 2023 at 18:13 | answer | added | Ted Wrigley | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 1, 2023 at 18:13 | answer | added | robert bristow-johnson | timeline score: -1 | |
| Jun 1, 2023 at 14:07 | comment | added | Jared Smith | @SmartBulbInc RE: close votes you have to understand that we get rants disguised as questions, leading questions that make it clear that the OP is looking for a specific answer they already have in mind, or questions that presume a partisan viewpoint all the time. You may not have intended it, and indeed I disagree with the close voters, but it smells a little fishy the way you've written it. | |
| Jun 1, 2023 at 14:01 | comment | added | Jared Smith | @SQB is that a reason to close a question? Typically I would prefer to see an answer that challenges the flawed premise, and lo and behold there are multiple upvoted answers doing just that. | |
| Jun 1, 2023 at 8:40 | comment | added | SQB | I’m voting to close this question because it seems to be based on a flawed premise. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 23:05 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jun 1, 2023 at 14:58 | |||||
| May 31, 2023 at 19:44 | history | reopened |
Be Brave Be Like Ukraine convert Morisco SurpriseDog David S |
||
| May 31, 2023 at 18:51 | history | edited | SmartBulbInc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 56 characters in body
|
| May 31, 2023 at 18:39 | comment | added | SmartBulbInc | I don't really understand the reason for the closing of this question. "In-fighting," might have been a little too dramatic of a word, which I apologize for. But, in itself, it does not imply that liberals are inherently inferior to conservatives for disagreeing publically with each other on a more frequent basis. It could just as easily mean that liberals are more accepting of dissenting views, or that conservatives are more likely to bend their beliefs to fit a collective. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 12:22 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| May 31, 2023 at 19:49 | |||||
| May 31, 2023 at 11:49 | comment | added | T Hummus | @TedWrigley I agree with Kevin. Using Federalist 10 to explain your down vote is appropriate. Close voting because the question is pushing an opinion is appropriate. But close voting because OP disagrees with Federalist 10 is inappropriate, and that's what your comment sounded like. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 10:30 | comment | added | CGCampbell | @SmartBulbInc "there are tons of views that nearly all conservatives share" ... not true at all. Simple google searches for each of the main topics show that there are splits among conservatives. Sure those are the views of conservatives, in general, but there are many dissenters. I believe your questions is invalid on its face, and/or you are indeed pushing a point. Note that I don't wish to start or continue a debate about this, I am simply explaining my VtC. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 10:21 | history | closed |
James K Joe W Ted Wrigley Kevin CGCampbell |
Not suitable for this site | |
| May 31, 2023 at 8:53 | answer | added | Steve | timeline score: -9 | |
| May 31, 2023 at 8:23 | history | protected | Philipp♦ | ||
| May 31, 2023 at 7:50 | answer | added | alamar | timeline score: -2 | |
| May 31, 2023 at 7:18 | answer | added | Wes Sayeed | timeline score: 70 | |
| May 31, 2023 at 6:32 | comment | added | SmartBulbInc | @TedWrigley That was not my intention at all. I was merely pointing out my observation, not at all implying that liberals should be more factional. Also, I don't believe that my language was un-neutral; perhaps a little too expressive though. If need be, I will edit the question to better reflect neutrality if that is a requirement. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 6:22 | comment | added | Kevin | @TedWrigley: IMHO the question deserves to be closed as opinion-based (and/or the "promote/discredit" custom reason), not as "go read Federalist #10." Close votes are means of enforcing site policy (and Federalist #10 is not a site policy). You shouldn't just cast them for whatever reason you feel like. That's what downvotes are for. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 5:51 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | @THummus: A close vote is just a close vote; it doesn't matter unless at least five people agree. If the question stays open I might write an answer, but I still think the question is misguided. And sorry; it's my right and responsibility to tell him what I think is wrong with his question and ask him to make changes. Poor questions breed poor answers, and who needs that... | |
| May 31, 2023 at 5:35 | comment | added | T Hummus | @TedWrigley Also it sounds like you could write an interesting answer about how conservatives have unified into a single faction while liberals have not | |
| May 31, 2023 at 5:33 | comment | added | T Hummus | @TedWrigley I agree that the question is not particularly neutral, but it sounds like you're asking OP to change their opinion about factions and agree with Madison before you're willing to withdraw your close vote, which seems inappropriate. I would suggest instead highlighting language in the post that you feel makes it not neutral (for example, phrases like "in-fighting" and "brought to it's knees" have negative connotations and portray liberal factions in a negative light) | |
| May 31, 2023 at 5:25 | history | became hot network question | |||
| May 31, 2023 at 3:13 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | @SmartBulbInc: You've framed the question in a way that makes it sound as though you think Democrats should be more factional (like Republicans), not less. It's not a neutral question by any means, though the pro-factionalism bias may not be clear to most people. Read Federalist #10, understand the problem with the question from that perspective, revise, and I'll withdraw my close vote. | |
| May 31, 2023 at 2:25 | comment | added | SmartBulbInc | @TedWrigley I'm a little confused why you want to vote to close. How does my question violate the rules of the site? | |
| May 31, 2023 at 0:42 | answer | added | Be Brave Be Like Ukraine | timeline score: 33 | |
| May 30, 2023 at 22:34 | answer | added | sfxedit | timeline score: 23 | |
| May 30, 2023 at 22:04 | history | edited | phoog | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| May 30, 2023 at 21:55 | comment | added | Ted Wrigley | Vote to close. Please read Federalist #10, which explains the dangers of political factions. The definition of a faction is in the second paragraph. Liberals have an assortment of smallish factions which often squabble amongst themselves, limiting their power (as Madison intended). Conservatives have unified into one single faction, whose members operate in lockstep for the singular purpose of increasing party power as a whole (which Madison considers a grave threat). | |
| May 30, 2023 at 21:46 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 30, 2023 at 22:42 | |||||
| May 30, 2023 at 21:40 | comment | added | David S | @ohwilleke I would tend to believe you that the premise is likely not true, there is something to be said if the question is changed slightly to speak about the perception of in-fighting, or taking the fight to the public. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 21:36 | comment | added | Barmar | Just looking at Presidential elections hardly seems to be a good way to judge a party. | |
| May 30, 2023 at 21:30 | history | edited | SmartBulbInc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 58 characters in body
|
| May 30, 2023 at 21:28 | history | edited | SmartBulbInc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 30, 2023 at 21:28 | comment | added | ohwilleke♦ | I'm not at all convinced that the premise continues to be true, even if it was for a number of years. Witness the large number of votes it took to elect a speaker and the many viable candidates for the GOP Presidential candidate. | |
| S May 30, 2023 at 21:25 | review | First questions | |||
| May 30, 2023 at 21:28 | |||||
| S May 30, 2023 at 21:25 | history | asked | SmartBulbInc | CC BY-SA 4.0 |