Why are stanch conservatives so vindictive towards liberals?

Question

First off let me say that I am non-partisan at the start of every election. I weigh in the strength of the candidate and their position on the issues then make a decision.

However, all I see on here is conservatives bashing liberals insted of asking logical debatable questions. If you want to sway voters then make a point insted of ranting like a fanitical lunatic. Bashing will only alianate you futher from the undicided vote like me. I see it on the liberal end too but not as much.

So why are the conservatives so vindictive insted of using logic and reason to support their party?

Answer 1

They have nothing solid to fight the Democrat on, so they resort to name calling and BS.

Answer 2

And you think that the liberals have demonstrated any tolerance for conservative viewpoints?

You need to get out more.

Answer 3

Residual issues from roommate conflict from the 1960s.

Answer 4

They really all want to get a room but can't admit it...

Answer 5

Good question-and here's the answer (in my not-so-humble opinion!):

The people on the rright who are being so vicious are not "staunch conservatives" in the traditional sense.  This, incidentally,is a non-partisan answer, as your question merits. I'm speaking professionally (historian/sociologist).

Traditional conservatives were civil (or at least reasonably so) as were liberals.  In the late 1970's the "neoconservative"/religious right set out --deliberately and with publicly stated intent--to take over the GOP and impose their ideology.  The most well -known (but far from the only) originators of this movement were a man named Levi Strauss (whose motives may have been honest if misguided) and evangelist Jerry Falwell.

What evolved from this effort, regardless of its original intent, was what morphed into the current neoconservative control of the GOP.   Their viciousness is not an accident--it is deliberae policy--particularly as formulated by political strategist Karl Rowe.  He stated (again, publicly) that  winning political power by any means was the only goal, and devloped the use of "wedge issues" designed to appeal to specific groups of voters on emotional/ideological grounds and bring in votes by inflaming differences among groups of Americans. Rove also stated--publicly--the stated goals of the neoconservative  movement/leadership: to oust any moderate  Republicans adn to  establish a permanent Republican majority in Washington (one-party rule,to all intents and purposes).

I don't think Strauss had anything like this in mind (no comment on Falwell).  But in tappping into the highly emotionalized branch of American culture we call the religous right, this neoconservative movement also tapped into elements of religoss and racial intolerance that quickly turned into intolerance for anyone expressing a different political viewpoint. And unscrupulous politicians were only too happpy to capitalize on this.

Not (as you observe) that the nastiness is entirely on the right--there are liberals who are doing this as well--but not in the organized , consistent way the right does.  Partly its that any group has some extremists. Partly its that when faced with the kind of rhetoric that the neoconservatives have leveled against the liberal side, a lot of people will conclude that it's necessary to "fight fire with fire" so to speak.

But what about "staunch conservatives."  Conservatives,  in the traditional American sense,whether strongly co or moderate, have virtually no voice in today's GOP.  That may change in the next decade--it's pretty clear the neoconservative movement is becoming less and less popular. This may offer a chance for more traditional conservatives to regain control of the Republican Party.

Answer 6

Wow, if you had stated it the opposite way, I would have believed you.

Watch Chris Matthews sometimes, and just watch the venomous hatred to anyone who disagrees with him.

Answer 7

Hey Dude, You wreak of liberalism. I will continue to give liberals h**l. Because I can't stand them. Also, I could care less who you vote for!

Answer 8

Do you expect to get a logical answer to this?

It's a catch 22.. you are asking someone why can't they be logical and yet you will not get a logical explanation.

My only theory is that it's easier to be irrational.

Answer 9

You must not look at many questions.  I see at least as much nonsense coming from the liberal side.

Answer 10

What?  You're not talking about this site.  This site is infested with liberals who rant and rant and rant and never provide any facts or historical perspective to reinforce their arguments.

When I post legitimate thoughtful questions all I get from liberals is rants because it's typically all they have to offer.

Answer 11

Crabby, you nailed on the head.  The religious right and the neocons have taken over my party.

Answer 12

They are terrified of change and free-thought, which liberals openly espouse. Not only that, I think it stems from some deep-seated personality problem, no doubt psychosexual, involving repression (You know the old expression about Rebublicans and Democrats and s*x...what? Well, I can't write it HERE!).

Anyway, the conservatives are merely practicing exactly what their name says: CONSERVING the status quo, no matter how repressive and awful, while liberals practice LIBERATING (or trying to) the human race. I'd ALMOST feel sorry for cons if they weren't SO oppressive and didn't violate the Constitution so often!!!