Dartmouth Survey - Democrats more likely to "friend discriminate" based on politics

http://www.thedartmouth.com/article/2018/05/a-survey-of-dartmouths-political-and-free-speech-climate

I find that interesting. I wonder why this might be?

From my own experience here on Wordforge, anecdotally, I find that the "Left Leaning" individuals seem to be less tolerant of the "Right Leaning" individuals than the Righties are of the Lefties, so I find this plausible.

Yeah, I know, you guys are such huggable kissable little marshmallow peep type creatures.
Who could ever find fault with your adorable hi-jinks and shenanigans?
()

So based on this is it a safe assumption that you would be with the 55% of polled Democrats who wouldn't befriend someone because of their politics?

I've noticed that recently too, but I wonder if it's been that way historically.

I seem to remember a time when it was more evenly split on both sides of the aisle, but who knows? Memory is a funny thing.

It would depend on your shenanigans.

That seems a reasonable result considering the context.

Keep in mind this is not some kind of national survey done by Dartmouth, but a survey just of the students.

Which brings us to the makeup of the student body:

Dartmouth’s student body is about two-thirds Democrat (67 percent) with small minorities of Republican identifiers (19 percent) and Independents (14 percent).

This means that it is much easier for a Dem student to avoid R students than the other way around.

Next, is the climate in general that these kids have been exposed to in their life. As conservative ideology has become more and more discredited and less and less folks will buy it, Republicans have had to make sure they whip their base into disproportionate turnout. The issues used to do this are generally cultural, social and racial. The modern Republican brand has become tied to homophobia, racism and acceptance of mass shootings. I can see why young folks could come to the conclusion that people who choose to identify with the modern Republican brand are either supportive of homophobia, racism and acceptance of mass shootings or at least just don't care. And who wants to hang with those kind of people?

Probably because it's an Ivy League university. Not to stereotype, but there is going to be a noticeable difference between the personality types at an Ivy League university vs. a public university or even the general public. Different life experiences, different social circles, different social customs and behaviors, different economic backgrounds, etc. can all influence the behaviors examined in this survey.

Also, it was the issue of friendship and dating that had the biggest differences. There is a world of difference between working with, trusting, respecting, and otherwise tolerating someone with different political opinions vs. going out of your way to choose them as a friend or significant other. Still, nearly a quarter stated they would not work with or study with students of other political ideologies, which is a bit alarming. Those students are going to learn the hard way once they're working in the real world that you need to be able to work with others who don't necessarily view the world the same way as you do.

And as @Ancalagon points out, the modern Republican movement is more so based on discriminating based on identity, and these students grew up in this hostile climate, and so Democratic students probably want to avoid this especially if they belong to one of those discriminated groups (LGBTQ, minorities, women). Why attempt becoming friends with someone who chooses to belong to a political party which doesn't think you deserve the same rights as they enjoy?

TL;DR: we shouldn't extrapolate a survey of Ivy League students to be reflective of the general public.

Republicans more likely to live in areas where they don't meet anyone other than other Republicans?

Usually too drunk or sun-addled to care?

Focus too much on wedge issues (i.e. if Bob is pro-gun, then he's OK even if he is a fag-lover)?

The Undesirables of society (ie, POCs, LGBTQ, ect) tend to vote Democrat and have a short tolerance for whitesplaining and discrimination and just plain ignorance that some people want to hold onto despite everything we point out.

So, there's that.

After Trump, conservatives/Republicans have lost the right to blow their trumpet and wave their flag.
For a long time.
I mean, I know you guys shrugged off Watergate in just 4 stinking years, but you've really gotta pay for this one.

You're crying about less Democrat friends?
Shit, I've been openly recommending divorcing Trump voter spouses.
You should lose custody over this shit.

Rightie politics have become increasingly disgusting and dehumanizing lately. It's one thing to remain friends with a leftie even though they support higher taxes for billionaires, it's quite another to remain friends with the rightie who's politically opposed to basic rights for you or your loved ones.

"Agree to disagree" is some high-level privileged apathy for when you know somethjng won't effect you personally.

This should probably be called out more. Who wants to be friends with someone who thinks you are a second class citizen?

This seems particularly true for women:

Only gender plays nearly as strong of a role in dividing responses. For example, 83 percent of women said they would be less likely to date someone with opposing political views compared to 56 percent of men.

You apparently have the issue backwards.

But there's nothing wrong with that, as long as I'm pro-gun, right?

FTFY.

Because we're elitists, this limits the number of people able to talk to us.

It'd bear out Sean's theory. I'm not sure how much tolerance I'd have for someone I know supporting the conservatives this election. Much like the last time they held the reins, people will suffer under their governance while others profit from that suffering.

This is disingenuous, and you either knew it was when you made the edit, or you don't realize it and are actually that brainwashed.

It's not at all disingenuous. Left-leaning politicians always want to raise taxes on "the rich." Make them "pay their fair share." The problem is in how they define "rich." It might start out with actual millionaires, but by the end it always winds up with anyone making more than about twice poverty level.

In practice, it's quite the opposite--conservatives wind up enacting policies far more economically detrimental to the middle class.

So, not "everyone", then?

"Policies detrimental to the middle class" =/= higher taxes. Republicans have other creative ways to accomplish that goal.

Close enough to everyone. I've seen you guys do it right here on Wordforge, basically saying you think anyone with "too much" should be taxed more.

Again, you're still missing the point.

The Republicans (according to the survey) are the ones most likely to not care about the politics of prospective friends, while Democrats are more likely to "stick to their own kind".

Yes, because Republicans are predatory scumbags. I bet pedophiles and cannibals are less likely to care about the sexual and dietary habits of their friends as well.

I now make probably six times more than I did at my first job. I'm taxed considerably more too. And I'm fine with that, because fat, middle class, fancy coffee drinking Ray can afford it a lot more than young, thin, barely scraping by Ray. Sorry not sorry if that makes you shit blood.

Left-leaning politicians =/= leftists in general. If you can shift the goalposts, so can I.

Yes, but that doesn't mean the middle class, which is what you asserted we all believe. I can't speak for everyone on "the left," but once one's adjusted gross income levels start getting beyond $200k/300k or so, it makes sense for those individuals to pay higher taxes on money earned in excess of that amount. They're the ones benefiting most from society and they should pay a fair share.

My first jobs in high school and college were part time, and I wound up not owing any taxes because I didn't make enough. And the first job I held where I actually ended up owing taxes, it wasn't much in taxes. But with subsequent pay increases and jobs, I've had to pay more in taxes. But I've also earned more income overall. I'm benefiting more, and my tax dollars go towards increasing the economic productivity of my state and country, thereby increasing the chance that I continue to make more money later in life.

It depends on the specific policies.

Debates over tax rates, government spending, whether or not a mine should be built, public transport spending versus roads - neither myself or most of my lefty friends would have that influence a friendship.

If someone starts talking about how gay people are sinners and corrupting our children and waging public campaigns calling them all manner of names? Well yeah, someone like that is getting defriended. Not because they are right-leaning, but because they're an arsehole.