The political bubble and how it affects your opinion

[Dill]

(07-24-2019, 11:35 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh, you're including the author of the author of the article in OP in your assertion?  I'm afraid they don't post here. 

The left leaning author of the article in OP did.

Yes, when comparing Republican to Democrats I am very comfortable describing Democrats as left leaning.  The fact that you do not seems to be indicative of a failure to understand basic American politics (which would honestly explain a lot).  I put the article out there for discussion, I didn't realize it would whip you into such a froth, I do humbly apologize (maybe it was the muslim bias thing that hit too close to home?).  In any event, please do enhance your calm and hopefully return to us tomorrow able to discuss this issue in a rational, adult manner.

Your chance to address a counter argument to the claim that the More in Common survey "demonstrated clear bias towards insulation on the left," your chance to demonstrate your skills in rational argument, and you whiff and cover with a joke.

Then more bald assertion. You are "comfortable" describing Democrats as "left-leaning." So they are no longer "the left"?

That I am not in YOUR "comfort zone" indicates MY failure to understand basic American politics?  And would explain a lot--of some unnamed something. Thus you continue to pile up unsupported statements,  as if just saying them made them true.

And after claiming a point I made "must be disregarded" because of my "pro-Muslim bias"--a point you yourself grant unaffected by any bias--you now, whiplash-fashion, shift to calls for rational, adult discussion. 

If you do come back to post tomorrow, in rational adult manner, perhaps you can answer this question: if "living in a bubble is bad," why have you "comfortably" mapped yourself right into one? The primary evidence of that being your openly affirmed practice of reading through labels ("left leaning agenda" "pro-Muslim") which appear obvious to you, but cannot be effectively defined or defended beyond mere assertion. (People who venture outside bubbles understand when their terms cannot be taken for granted, are comfortable with definition.) Add to that the preference for banter over the risk of argument shown in post after post.

You've started a thread with an article about a survey whose results you apparently cannot summarize or articulate, but would nevertheless selectively incorporate into your labeling project. That is, you could use a survey which describes groups living in different bubbles to protect your bubble, while speaking as if bubbles are what others have. ("Leftist bias! So says this article, from the usually unbalanced Guardian!")  Never mind that is exactly this behavior the survey describes as typical where the perception gap is widest, at the extremes where opponents are presumed motivated by bad intentions--liars, hypocrites, "willfully obtuse."

So once again we are at the point where I must ask you to forgo the impressions and one-line "refutations." Respond with something substantial. If you cannot refute my points about the survey or answer the questions I have raised, demonstrate, at least, that you understand both goal and method of the survey. Revise to eliminate filler before posting (feelings, well wishes for the day, apologies, imagined enjoyments etc.).