The Trump drama never stops...

[Johnny Dangerr]

That would explane a lot.

So me reacting in a jumpy way to a Copperhead on the driveway and brutally killing it is wrong?

I should act like a liberal and try to determine its intentions, direction of travel, temperature for sluggish behavior, and date of mating and cicada season before formulating a strategy..

Who wants to go hang out with me on the driveway and drink a beer????

[Vermin93]

Azarian repeats a pattern of interpreting study data from his own, highly biased viewpoint, then writes a click-bait article designed to draw in the Trump-haters. Hence, he's still fake news. Both your posts are thinly veiled ad hominem attacks that seem to push the conservatives-can't-help-themselves, they-have-brain-abnormalities meme straight out of Rules for Radicals.

If we take Azarian's biases out of the links you posted and fairly interpret the study findings it completely changes the outcome and leaves the reader with only ONE reasonable conclusion:

1. Conservatives and liberals brains are different. (Pretty sure we all knew this already).

You spent a lot of time becoming decoupled from the original point, which was my suggestion that psychological research may explain the continued allegiance of Trump's hardcore base despite his actions and behavior. Azarian's article references this research in a discussion specifically focused on conservative political attitudes, and he was complimentary on more than one occasion. Nevertheless, I suggested dismissing the author and his article and focusing on the actual research. You chose to go back to the author and the article, largely ignored the research and grossly oversimplified the conclusion.

Azarian's political leanings do not change the cited research. The cited research supports the 4 key points Azarian noted in his article and my point about the unconditional support of Trump's legion.

1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative.
2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat
3. Conservatives fear new experiences (referred to as "Openness to Experience" in the study)
4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear

The relevant findings are identifiable in the research papers.

Azarian concludes with a message to the political ideologues on the left and right, both of whom I find disturbingly stubborn, uncompromising and problematic. On a related note, I'm not sure how declarations of click-bait and fake news from either side aren't almost always hypocritical.

You must be new to the P/CE forum, because the irony of you accusing me of ad hominem attacks in this hornet's nest of political ideologues is so amazing I had to chuckle.

[Smell the Glove]

You spent a lot of time becoming decoupled from the original point, which was my suggestion that psychological research may explain the continued allegiance of Trump's hardcore base despite his actions and behavior. Azarian's article references this research in a discussion specifically focused on conservative political attitudes, and he was complimentary on more than one occasion. Nevertheless, I suggested dismissing the author and his article and focusing on the actual research. You chose to go back to the author and the article, largely ignored the research and grossly oversimplified the conclusion.



Azarian's political leanings do not change the cited research. The cited research supports the 4 key points Azarian noted in his article and my point about the unconditional support of Trump's legion.



1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative.

2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat

3. Conservatives fear new experiences (referred to as "Openness to Experience" in the study)

4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear



The relevant findings are identifiable in the research papers.



Azarian concludes with a message to the political ideologues on the left and right, both of whom I find disturbingly stubborn, uncompromising and problematic. On a related note, I'm not sure how declarations of click-bait and fake news from either side aren't almost always hypocritical.



You must be new to the P/CE forum, because the irony of you accusing me of ad hominem attacks in this hornet's nest of political ideologues is so amazing I had to chuckle.

This is going to be great.

[100%TtId]

You spent a lot of time becoming decoupled from the original point, which was my suggestion that psychological research may explain the continued allegiance of Trump's hardcore base despite his actions and behavior. Azarian's article references this research in a discussion specifically focused on conservative political attitudes, and he was complimentary on more than one occasion. Nevertheless, I suggested dismissing the author and his article and focusing on the actual research. You chose to go back to the author and the article, largely ignored the research and grossly oversimplified the conclusion.

Azarian's political leanings do not change the cited research. The cited research supports the 4 key points Azarian noted in his article and my point about the unconditional support of Trump's legion.

1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative.
2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat
3. Conservatives fear new experiences (referred to as "Openness to Experience" in the study)
4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear

The relevant findings are identifiable in the research papers.

Azarian concludes with a message to the political ideologues on the left and right, both of whom I find disturbingly stubborn, uncompromising and problematic. On a related note, I'm not sure how declarations of click-bait and fake news from either side aren't almost always hypocritical.

You must be new to the P/CE forum, because the irony of you accusing me of ad hominem attacks in this hornet's nest of political ideologues is so amazing I had to chuckle.

How does one "decouple" Azarian's conclusions from your argument that YOU posted?

Ad hominem? Pot/kettle.

Reread the last two paragraphs in my post.

[Vermin93]

How does one "decouple" Azarian's conclusions from your argument that YOU posted?

Ad hominem? Pot/kettle.

Reread the last two paragraphs in my post.

Reread the research papers.

[systemnt]

Reread the research papers.

You got ****in owned by your own post.
And your response is "reread".
Db.
To the list.

[Lostacresranch]

Reread the research papers.

Why? How many times does it take to see it a survey based on questions? It's a BS report using opinions gathered, not anything based on actual physiological scientific studies. Maybe YOU should reread it.

[Lostacresranch]

The Trump drama never stops...


1. Conservatives focus on the negative.
Yes, because the last 8 years has been dismal for American economy and workers. That's a negative we see.
2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threats.
Yes. Because we understand the nature of threats and what needs to be done to prevent them from becoming actual HARM.
3. Conservatives fear new experiences.
Yes, if those "experiences" involve new taxes, government policy infringing on rights, changing the constitution, and allowing the world to use us as a personal money pit to dip out of.
4. Conservatives brains are more reactive to fear.
Yes. Because any "smart brain"does that. If you don't react to fear, your not doing it right. And that is opinion anyway. Your "research" did nothing to prove that other that say it.

[100%TtId]

The discussion of click-bait is relevant here.

There are two reasons why Azarian had this article originally published on www.rawstory.com 1. It likely wouldn't have passed peer-review on a scholarly site,(Psychology Today isn't a scholarly site either) and 2. Click-bait sites pay more. He knew he could write a conservatives-are-bad article and get paid. Any reader can check out Raw Story and see it is a far left fake news site. Note that I'm not picking on just left wing fake news sites, there are plenty of right wing fake news click-bait sites as well and readers across the political spectrum should be skeptical.

Any Sean Hannity-wannabe could take the same studies Azarian cited and make the opposite, equivalent conservatively-biased claims for a right wing click-bait site article:

1.Liberals can't focus on negatives
2.Liberals have a weaker psychological response to threats
3. Liberals are unorganized, undisciplined slobs
4. Liberals brains are ill-equipped to deal with fear.

Such an article would be biased click-bait and just as useless.

For the sake of discussion, let's temporarily ignore click-bait/Azarian's biases/dubious study methodology and focus on the big picture:

Studies were done that claim:
1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative.
2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat
4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear

(I'm flat-out ignoring #3 because a study that claims they can determine that "conservatives fear new experiences" by examining the contents of college kids' dorm rooms is simply not worthy of serious consideration).

Let's also temporarily accept these 3 claims are true.

Is this a bad thing or a good thing?

If self-preservation is a virtue for an individual, a family, a community, or a nation, wouldn't it be desirable to have fear as an inherent trait?
The lack of fear would likely lead one into potentially harmful situations that a healthy fear trait would avoid. (BTW, how do old deer become old deer? They fear everything.)

As one of the studies noted, we live in dangerous times with real, existential threats that must be addressed. It therefore stands to reason that a nation would be better served by having leaders in charge of dealing with these threats who are biologically better equipped to deal with them and that liberals, as proved by scientific studies, aren't equipped.

If liberals don't focus on threats, can't muster a strong psychological response to threats, and don't have a strong reaction to fear, then how in the wide, wide world of sports are they going to address them?

This would mean conservatives, because their brains are better equipped, should be tasked with things like national defense, healthcare, foreign policy, economic matters, and other similar areas that threaten our existence. Those with liberal brains can focus on areas that don't involve threats, such as the arts, fashion, and other similar areas.

In my opinion, Trump's unwaivering support from some on the right derives more from the average Joe and Jane America being so frustrated with Washington-as-usual that they will overlook Trump's tweets and boorish behavior simply because he's not a typical politician. Not because of their brain composition.

[Livin'2hunt]

Nice post. However, you are wasting your time on someone who's only measurable purpose is to poke a stick in your eye. He hates Conservatives, Conservatism and has no basis for doing so other than hating for the sake of hate. I, too tried to reason with him but the next thing you know, he'll be running down another rabbit hole in a drug-addled haze. He doesn't stand for squat other than self interests and he changes with the popular winds. He will basta*dize facts to justify his baseless assertions thus, he cannot be reasoned with. He is a primo example as to why the ignore function is the greatest tool on TBH.

[100%TtId]

Nice post. However, you are wasting your time on someone who's only measurable purpose is to poke a stick in your eye. He hates Conservatives, Conservatism and has no basis for doing so other than hating for the sake of hate. I, too tried to reason with him but the next thing you know, he'll be running down another rabbit hole in a drug-addled haze. He doesn't stand for squat other than self interests and he changes with the popular winds. He will basta*dize facts to justify his baseless assertions thus, he cannot be reasoned with. He is a primo example as to why the ignore function is the greatest tool on TBH.

Well, I encourage rebuttals. I could be wrong.

[Livin'2hunt]

Well, I encourage rebuttals. I could be wrong.

As do I.

[Leemo]

How can you be a Liberal and bow, never mind

[Traildust]

How can you be a Liberal and bow, never mind

Same-sex parents maybe?

[Livin'2hunt]

Same-sex parents maybe?

Now, that's funny!