Polls

The Most Politically Intolerant Americans Tend To Be Urban, Highly Educated Whites, Survey Shows

An Atlantic article makes the case that some very privileged people don't want to hear from the other side.

|

Intolerance
Douglas Christian/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Here's a sentence that may surprise many readers: "In general, the most politically intolerant Americans… tend to be whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban, and more partisan themselves."

That's according to a recent article in The Atlantic, which cites the results of a survey conducted by the polling firm PredictWise. The authors were interested in gauging political intolerance—where in the U.S. are people more likely to disassociate from members of the opposite political party?—and were able to assemble a county-by-county index of American intolerance based on poll results.

The findings are certainly interesting. Florida, it seems, is just a horribly intolerant place—or at least contains a large number of intolerant counties—and Jefferson County, New York, is extremely chill. The single-most politically intolerant large county is Suffolk County in Massachusetts, which includes the city of Boston.

It turns out that being white, highly educated, urban-dwelling, and older all correlate with political intolerance. The authors think this might be because such people are best able to segregate themselves into like-minded bubbles where they may never encounter someone who represents a different political tradition. Less privileged Americans, on the other hand, "have more diverse social networks, politically speaking, and therefore tend to have more complicated views of the other side, whatever side that may be."

Of course, it's very important to note that political intolerance is not the same thing as, say, racial intolerance. Race is an immutable characteristic, whereas membership in a political party is voluntary. We do not choose our skin color, but we can choose our political beliefs (at least in theory; The Atlantic piece notes that the "vast majority of people" stick with whatever party their parents chose for them). If someone has particularly awful political views, it's not necessarily wrong to show them intolerance.

But if wide swaths of the population routinely refuse to engage with anyone who occupies a different position on the political spectrum, they will probably be more ignorant about what those people actually believe. They will tend to demagogue each other, and assume the worst. It's very easy to find examples of this: Relatively privileged, elite media folks were among the most eager to wrongly assume that a bunch of MAGA-hat-wearing teenagers were harassing a Native American man on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial.

I wouldn't overinterpret PredictWise's findings, since the questons they asked (how would you feel if a family member married someone from another political party, do you think members of the other party are compassionate, etc.) probably don't fully capture the nuances of people's beliefs. But they are worth keeping in mind as we race toward 2020.

Advertisement

NEXT: Federal Judge Orders San Francisco To Fix Bail System that Keeps Poor People Trapped Behind Bars

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I believe the correct phrasing is “slouching towards.”
    What rough beast indeed.

    1. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
      >>>>>>>>>> http://www.Aprocoin.com

  2. I live in SF; this is not surprising in the least.

    1. Exactly. A resident of the Bay Area I could have saved some of the effort behind this poll. Bay Area liberals are probably the most intolerant people in America.

      1. Yes, but they always have some good weed, and the city is gorgeous! I knew a Chip back in the day and he was super cool and always had good stuff. However, you are right, because people are always convinced they know better than your or me, or anyone else. Urban areas are young, and wisdom has not had a chance to set in with the crowds.

        1. “a chance to set in”? Wisdom is permanently on vacation.

          1. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

            click here =====?? http://www.payshd.com

        2. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do…..

          click here =====?? http://www.Aprocoin.com

          1. No they’re not. It’s a scam.

    2. Whem I lived there meeting another conservative was like living a spy movie. I once jokingly suggested a secret handshake and the others in the room, a Sunset bar long after hours, became nervous and explained why that was a bad idea.

      1. I’ve met a number of libertarians but very few conservatives if any.

        1. “I’ve met a number of libertarians…”

          Among the citizens of SF, that term is a bit flexible. One guy was on Pelosi’s staff, and claims to be a libertarian.

          1. Pelosi is the Libertarian WIng of the D Party, because she said “Green Dream”

      2. I spit up my beer that was so funny.

    3. Yeah…I can walk out my door and confirm this poll today.

      1. Meh. The poll is based on a scientifically insignificant sample size (2000 people? C’mon).

        1. Polling 7 or 8 people per county – yeah it could’ve gone anyway the wind decides to blow. I was looking for if they even took population ratio considerations into the ‘white’ factor.

        2. I don’t think that’s how they did it. I think they polled a bunch of people, determined that factors like age, race, etc. can determine political tolerance/intolerance, and then made the map based on demographics – not actual political affiliation or surveys of actual people in those actual counties. In other words, take the map with a grain of salt.

          1. in other they pulled it out their asses

          2. in other they pulled it out their asses

        3. And affirmed by every commenter herein.

    4. Hell you personify it

      1. “Hell you personify it”

        Poor, poor lefty ignoramus; always being called on bullshit.
        Hint: Quit posting imbecilic comments.

    5. Here in NOLA, the divisions are largely job based. Working in construction, I generally assume that I’ve become a political pariah because I have vented anti Republican sentiments. No one asked me what party I favor, so I can’t explain that I’m a libertarian who hates authoritarianism above all else (that’s a a big Fuck You to the catholic church and religion in general, but I digress). The whiplash tendency among the general population is to immediately make judgments based on nothing and hold those idiotic tropes close. I’m just glad they can’t fire me yet, because nobody else can do what I can do.

  3. I fucking hate white people.

    1. This is what most people say after visiting an Intelligentsia Coffee shop

      1. Go back to watching Friends and eating a cheese sandwich, cracker ass cracker.

        1. Enjoy your GAP, colonizer!

          1. Seriously though it’s hard to argue AGAINST white genocide after visiting Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Let’s be honest here

            1. I like a bike with one gear.

              1. You would

          2. Africa The United States, as a post-colonial economy, still hasn’t recovered to the point where it can be held responsible for the effects of its behavior.

            /leftists

    2. “I fucking hate white people”
      Seriously this, what the hell happened.

      Now it’s all self-flagellating, tight-panted totalitarians jockeying to see who can denounce who the quickest, and cowed milquetoasts hiding the fact that they’re keen of Jesus so they don’t get unpersoned. And neither group of white people does anything really creative, or fun, or good anymore.

      1. Look whitey is upset at being outed.

        Your time is over, you white motherfucker – it’s our time.

        1. Is that you Flavo Flav?

    3. Shouldn’t it really be “I hate fucking white people”
      BTW you appear to be very intelligent

    4. what a brilliant statement!

  4. “In general, the most politically intolerant Americans? tend to be whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban, and more partisan themselves.”

    In all seriousness, who would be surprised by this?

    1. The whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban, and more partisan people who live in DC / NY / LA and write for Reason?

      1. I think that description would go for most journalists. And I really feel like “educated” is being used extremely loosely in this study

        1. You’re probably just using an outdated definition of “educated”.

    2. White, highly educated, older, urban partisans?

      I’m a little surprised by the “older”, only because I might expect age to engender a certain pragmatism. Intolerance correlating to “more partisan”, on the other hand, is kind of a tautology.

      The fundamental problem being, once a large enough group turns politics into an existential crisis, its opponents are effectively forced to respond in kind, and I’m not sure there’s anything that can affirmatively be done to defuse the situation.

      1. I think the notion of religious dogma should really be considered here. Intersectionality is more similar to a faith than anything resembling a policy position. The faith of the yuppie is not “universal” (not all are afforded salvation) and lacks any type of redemption and places no premium on forgiveness. Intolerance is central to their faith and so naturally its adherents would display this attribute.

      2. Yeah, I’m a little unsure about “older”, too. How much of that statistical effect can actually be attributed to age and how much of that is a proxy for affluence? In other words, being older generally means that you’ve accumulated more wealth and therefore am, as the article above hypothesizes, more able to self-segregate into like-minded communities.

        Did they really test for affluence (and it has no effect) or did they skip affluence, forcing the effect to show up through proxies?

    3. The study on anti Semitism that came out post tree of life shooting that all the media ran with as evidence hate crimes were up under trump…

      Actually stated that violent anti Semitic crimes were way down. But what was WAY up was harassment crimes. And when you looked into the incidents the VAST majority were reported on the campuses of liberal arts colleges.

      So the actual increase in anti Semitism is being caused by the largely white liberal children of rich liberal white parents.

  5. H&R’s faux-trolls are the epitome of this.

  6. You mean people like the staff of The Atlantic?

    I think we knew that already.

  7. I’m sure Robby was being sarcastic.

    There’s no way he reads the comments on here and thinks we don’t already know that.

  8. The single-most politically intolerant large county is Suffolk County in Massachusetts, which includes the city of Boston.

    *gasp*

    Nooooooo way!

    1. Overheard in a Boston cab like five years ago: “can you do me a favor and pick up a load of coal in Dorchester?”

    2. Some things never change.

  9. “Of course, it’s very important to note that political intolerance is not the same thing as, say, racial intolerance.”

    It’s also very important to note that political intolerance is not the same thing as a veal cutlet. And it’s about as relevant to the story as the point Robby is making.

    1. Well, people who are racially intolerant generally have to hide that fact in polite company. People who are politically intolerant do not. That is a difference.

      1. Except that wasn’t Robby’s point. He was trying to draw a distinction between voluntary and involuntary characteristics, not between feelings that people try to conceal.

        1. Havent social liberal dummies been trying to prove scientifically that conservatives are predisposed to fear and other inherent traits?

      2. Your point goes to the validity of the survey. It may well be that the less educated feel that they need to hide their political intolerance as well. It’s a valid point you make. But Robby didn’t go there.

      3. Agreed. But, I think that there is a lot of overlap between white urbanites and racial bigotry, even if we don’t want to admit it. Nothing riles up a yuppie quite like the idea of black kids going to their child’s school via vouchers.

        1. I think you’re wrong about that. White people who have never experienced living alongside Black people are unlikely to harbor racial prejudice. They have no reason to. It’s whites who can’t afford to separate themselves from minorities and have actually experienced racial friction in their lives who are likely to hold racial prejudices.

          1. Well the white urbanites have a strange way of showing their love of diversity. Even Samantha Bee (the progressive darling) and her husband were fighting against the merger of a minority school district with their own pasty white NYC school district. I don’t think we should discount how much racial animus played a part in that opposition.

            Lower-income whites cannot afford to be bigots, though, since they have to live with diverse neighbors and work in diverse occupations. I think they probably dismiss the talk of diversity more so than their wealthy counterparts, but I think you’d be hard pressed to find them actually act bigoted in their daily lives even if they harbor animus.

            1. She’s not racist. She just hates poor people.

              1. Yeah that argument can be made, except that race and income are usually closely correlated in most northern cities. Which is one of the things that I have always found curious about the people who love diversity and the places where they live.

                1. Why is it that poor blacks can afford to live in high cost urban areas, but Poor white people can’t?

              2. Progressives do not love the poor, they hate people who are rich(er than them).

            2. I think you’d be hard pressed to find them actually act bigoted in their daily lives

              You would be wrong.

          2. Are there any black posters here? ever?

        2. See study last year that this same group modulates their speech when talking down to other races.

  10. It’s very easy to find examples of this

    Right here in the H&R comments every day.

  11. The authors think this might be because such people are best able to segregate themselves into like-minded bubbles where they may never encounter someone who represents a different political tradition.

    “Why would I associate with someone who is *wrong*?!”

    Less privileged Americans, on the other hand, “have more diverse social networks, politically speaking, …

    Citation needed. (One supposes some of those networks are for dealing with “The Man”.)

    … and therefore tend to have more complicated views of the other side, whatever side that may be.”

    Please define “more complicated”. (One supposes “highly educated” folks might have such views.)

  12. There is absolutely no reason why the law should treat political beliefs any differently than religion. Both are deeply-held beliefs and tenets of faith that can technically be chosen.

    1. The idea that one’s religion is freely chosen is almost uniquely American. In most of the world, religion is seen as an element of culture or ethnicity, and converting is a huge deal, requiring a major change in one’s way of life and a forsaking of family, friends, and associates for a new community.

      1. In America we consider(ed) different forms of Christianity to be different religions.

        1. In Europe they fought actual wars over it.

        2. Well, they will be separated by walls and barbed wire in heaven.

      2. I’d be interested in seeing an actual study. I don’t think it’s unique to the US at all.

    2. Yes. And people should also be afforded reasonable accommodations for their political beliefs, much like the religious.

      And religious accommodation has historically expanded into that realm (as an example: “conscientious objector status” which was originally only offered to Quakers and other religious adherents; not standing for the pledge of allegiance which was originally only offered to Jehovah Witnesses, and home schooling which was originally only offered to the Amish).

      1. Originally everyone had home schooling…

    3. “no reason why the law should treat political beliefs any differently than religion” — Not really; All US Law should be based and guided on the Supreme Law (U.S. Constitution). Otherwise the U.S. has no definition and certainly wouldn’t attempt to guarantee individual rights / freedom.

      The assumption is actually the very downfall of this nation – Destroying the Constitutional Republic (USA) and replacing it with a Democratic “Socialist” Revolution without actually bringing any attention to its destruction.

      In Congress; There is a sworn Oath to Office – it’s not a what-ever-they-choose “beliefs” are all equal system.

  13. This study does not show what it is being reported to.

    “Konitzer projected this profile onto the broader American population, under the assumption that people with similar demographics and levels of partisan loyalty, living in neighborhoods with comparable amounts of political diversity, tend to hold similar attitudes about political difference.”

    Ie the county-level stats are projections made with a relatively simple model not based on any direct empirical observation of the counties the values are attributed to.

    1. Thus, it is highly misleading to say “Jefferson County, New York, is extremely chill”. No actual observation of its residents likely occurred (the sample size was 2000 across the USA), nor does there appear to have been any localized surveying to validate the model can make accurate county-level predictions. The model predicts that they are, but they could very well be the douchiest partisans in the country and the study wouldn’t detect it if it was due to a factor not correlated with the factors in the model.

      1. The county by county ratings are meaningless clickbait and you should be at least mildly ashamed about propagating them.

        1. So present some data saying that. You haven’t done so, as much as you’ve pointed out that these results should be taken with a grain of salt. Not really news. It is untrue to say these results are nothing, and similarly untrue to say they are everything.

          1. MattXIV’s critique of the survey methodology are valid and don’t need data to back them. He’s only highlighting the limitations of their methodology and error risks in the way they generalized it down to US county level. If you’re surveying 2,000 humans and extrapolating the results to 3,100+ counties, any errors or confounds in your variable correlations will result in wildly distorted “findings” for the counties.

            I still think the article provides useful information. But I would not rate their evaluations of the relative tolerance of SPECIFIC counties as very reliable.

            1. “MattXIV’s critique of the survey methodology are valid”

              I said that.

              “and don’t need data to back them”

              Cool, that wasn’t what I asked for. He made affirmative claims beyond his critique.

              Did you even read my post? Is he your sock?

            2. “I still think the article provides useful information. But I would not rate their evaluations of the relative tolerance of SPECIFIC counties as very reliable.”

              That. Is. Exactly. What. I. Said.

              JFC what do you think “It is untrue to say these results are nothing, and similarly untrue to say they are everything.” MEANS?!?!?

          2. I’m not claiming to know how accurate the model is for counties – I’m claiming the study authors don’t either and that it is irresponsible for them to make it look like they do.

            I think they did the unjustified extrapolation to counties because the “look up your county” angle is good for getting clicks despite not being supported by the methodology.

            I’m also frustrated that this got past 2 reporters and at least one editor between here and the Atlantic without anyone pointing it out. This is the value add I expect to get from journalism – mind as well just read press releases otherwise.

            1. “I’m not claiming to know how accurate the model is for counties – I’m claiming the study authors don’t either and that it is irresponsible for them to make it look like they do.”

              And I’m making the point that they have SOME data to back their claim, so what your arguing is basically a preference on how definitive a claim can be based on the given data.

    2. I’m glad I’m not the only one that picked up on this. The county residents were not studied. They made a ton of assumptions in order to make this map and journalists, doing what journalists do, completely misreport on the story and generate fake, sensationalist headlines.

      Just another hack journalist.

  14. Lib media, polling, social science… need I say more?

  15. The Most Politically Intolerant Americans Tend To Be Urban, Highly Educated Whites, Survey Shows

    There’s a word missing here, Robby.

    And it’s not ‘older’.

    It’s ‘left-wing’ or ‘liberal’ or ‘Democrat’

    We NEED to just say it. Openly, without fear that they will use their power to deplatform us from civilization.

    1. Progressivism is necessarily intolerant.
      It’s a crusader ideology – that is, it seeks to rectify historical/genetic “error” through centralized social planning.
      Thus it is also necessarily totalitarian – the Amish concept of rumspringa is literally terrifying to progressives, as “bad ideas” are potential infection, and must be shunned as existential threats.
      Therefore dissent cannot be tolerated.
      On top of that, modern progressivism is built of intersectional paradigms, historical Marxism, and ultimately altruistic gospel – so it is internally inconsistent.
      The only logically consistent progressivism is Nazism, which explicitly rejects universal altruism in favor of power promotion and racial mythology. So “good” intentions can be kept consistent via the primacy of a singular set. Sacrifice is justifiable for a creation of a new type – the evolutionary overman.
      But extend that to universal altruism and the utilitarian greatest good for greatest number, while also protecting minorities? Logically impossible.
      So progressivism cannot tolerate anything outside progressive mythology, otherwise inherent contradictions are exposed and the radically unstable ideology falls apart.
      That’s why a good progressive, these days, must be psychotic.

      1. I disagree with your final conclusion “That’s why a good progressive, these days, must be psychotic.
        ” But I like the idea. Crusaders, are by definition, a hot mess. Sometimes awesome. Sometimes, the opposite.

        1. When I say “good progressive” I mean the base, not those with power – acolytes and believers.
          1. Total devotion and support is required. One must back all plans and pronouncements.
          2. The world, reality, doesn’t match the progressive paradigm. Therefore, fantasy (the world as progressivism says it is) must be superior to reality (the world as it is). The progressive paradigm supersedes and alters perception.
          3. Cognitive dissonance is a constant state. This is the culmination of 1 and 2.

          The psychotic is one who mistakes fantasy for reality. Something absolutely necessary to modern progressivism.

    2. Absolutely true about left wing.

    3. And “women”, or more accurately “wymyn”

  16. >>>because such people are best able to segregate themselves into like-minded bubbles

    whiteness irrelevant to this ^^

    1. And within heavily populated Urban areas can almost completely dissolve reality in the process.

  17. The Most Politically Intolerant Americans Tend To Be Urban, Highly Educated Whites, Survey Shows

    Trust me on this, my neighborhood is filled with virtue signalling yard signs about who doesn’t belong.

  18. Even if political views are a choice that affects the moral character of a person, modern classical liberal society is based on the idea that people can live and work together in peace. It’s based on the idea that everyone is a human being with certain rights, and that they don’t lose those rights just because they are a bad person. Modern political intolerance is antithetical to this.

    Even if you think someone’s views are harmful, and that it would be a disaster if they were fully implemented, you and they would both be better off if you choose to live and work together in peace. The crimes that merit punishment in a liberal society are crimes against that peace, like murder, assault, and theft.

    The idea that there are some views and people so terrible that it is acceptable to bend or break the truce is anti-civilization. It hearkens back to the bad old days of the past (and the present in some unfortunate parts of the world), when societies attempted to achieve unity through forced conformity, rather than tolerance and truce.

    1. Wrong — This is just more ’empathy’ calls for a Democratic Revolution into Socialism.

      “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”, Jefferson. Your stance is that Democracy rules in “tolerance” instead of having a Supreme Law that attempts at guaranteeing individual life, liberty and property.

      Maybe you can tolerate being enslaved by the slavers; under some notion of “tolerance” but some of us don’t accept those terms of “kindness”.

      1. I would rather the slavers are removed from the picture. Don’t care how. My preference is they all just leave quietly, but am not opposed to forcing the issue.

    2. You have just described the NAP, which is itself a political view. Libertarianism’s greatest flaw is that it does not account for the influence of people who do not believe in the NAP.

  19. It makes perfect sense. Urban, highly educated people are smarter than the rest of us and know better than the rest of us what we should be doing. Why should they tolerate backwardness and stupidity?

    1. That might be true if ALL of the “highly educated” wasn’t living off of Uncle Sam. Strangely enough; a vastly majority of them still haven’t been able to sustain themselves while Steve Jobs and Michael Dell were I guess under that same premises were “uneducated” idiots yet brought more VALUE to society than dare I must say – probably the collective total of all those “highly educated”.

    2. If they’re so smart, why do they live in million dollar shoebox condos with hobos crapping on their sidewalks and shooting up in their alleys? I left shit city and live like a king on half the income. Urbanites are idiots.

  20. Duh, what part of “highly educated” didn’t you get?

    Our betters don’t have to put up with the bigotry of uneducated rubes and goobers.

  21. With regard to racial intolerance, I suspect you would find the opposite?that upscale whites who live in these upscale white bubbles would express the least racial prejudice, due to their rarely having to deal with anyone but other well-off whites; and lower-income whites would be the most racially intolerant, due to their having to live, work, and go to school with racial minorities all the time, and therefore personally experiencing racial friction and tension.

    1. I think the opposite is true. I think you would see upscale urban whites virtue signal more about how much they love diversity, but then mobilize if their city ever tried to merge their school with a poor black school (there are so many examples of this that it isn’t even funny).

      The lower-income white would probably role his eyes at a question about diversity, but he can’t afford to segregate himself. The upscale white lives in the whitest parts of the country, but he looks down on the lower-income white who lives and works in more diverse environments. It’s projection more than anything. A nice way to divert people from the bigotry of the so called “educated”.

      1. I think I misread what you said and just rephrased your point. Sorry

    2. that upscale whites who live in these upscale white bubbles would express the least racial prejudice, due to their rarely having to deal with anyone but other well-off whites

      I disagree. You know why they moved into those upscale white bubbles? To get away from the darkies.

      1. No. Some of their grandparents moved from the cities to the suburbs to get away from Blacks, but today’s upscale whites have never lived with the “darkies”.

        1. Of course not; What sane upscale person white or black would move into the Hood? They’d just be asking to get robbed and probably shot. If “darkies” want a prosperous future the first thing they need to do is byte the bullet that their actions lead to either consequences or rewards. I could be wrong; but it seems most of their actions revolve around “blaming” anyone or anything else besides their own actions.

          1. DC is slowly being gentrified but you can still buy houses for almost nothing in SE. Why haven’t all the white progressives done this? Because they know they’d get their asses capped and raped over there.

            1. Meh. Just set up some LLCs, and start quietly buying up housing there. Then after a few years, give the locals the boot and rebuild the neighborhoods.

      2. They do “express” the least racial prejudice. Whether they harbor true racism is another story.

      3. No. For better schools, with data driven evidence of good school outcomes.

      4. No. For better schools, with data driven evidence of good school outcomes.

      5. No. For better schools, with data driven evidence of good school outcomes.

  22. So who is less tolerant Robby? What conclusions can we draw? Does one political faction disproportionally represent these hateful assholes?

    Can’t we take this to it’s ultimate conclusion?

    1. You know who else took things to their ultimate conclusion?

      1. Myra Breckinridge?

      2. Every person ever?

  23. “It turns out that being white, highly educated, urban-dwelling, and older all correlate with political intolerance.”

    They correlate with a seat on the supreme court even better.

    1. You think? Do Clarence Thomas, RBG, Kagan, and Sotomayor look white to you?

      1. Clarence is a bit iffy, but the others, sure. Eight, maybe (8 1/2 giving Clarence the benefit of the doubt) out of nine is pretty good correlation.

  24. Of course, it’s very important to note that political intolerance is not the same thing as, say, racial intolerance. Race is an immutable characteristic, whereas membership in a political party is voluntary. We do not choose our skin color, but we can choose our political beliefs

    It’s comforting to know that if I want “older”, educated white people to like me better, all I have to do is change what I believe in.

  25. “It turns out that being white, highly educated, urban-dwelling, and older all correlate with political intolerance.”

    Those wonderful coastal dwelling Beemer driving latte sipping dip shits who supposedly were all in for Hilldog apparently. And they think they can afford to virtue signal via the voting booth with no fear of any real consequences to themselves.

    1. I would love to live on the coast, drive a BMW, and have my lattes, if I didn’t have to vote for Hillary.

      1. The worlds getting pretty tired of buying BMW’s and Lattes for “latte sipping dip shits” – Democrats are just to involved in their “bubble of echo chambers” (urban) to realize all their “socialistic” welfare is buying all those BMW’s and Lattes while getting mostly NOTHING in return from them. Instead of supporting Capitalism in which NOTHING returned yield nothing given.

  26. This will not surprise anyone living fifty or more miles away from a coastline.

  27. I can’t believe this article has 80 comments already and no one has mentioned Kirkland.

    1. I was shadowing him yesterday posting the Atlantic article after every one of his comments

      1. Nice move doing that to him.

  28. And most urban black democrats are illiterate.

  29. “Race is an immutable characteristic,” No, it’s not, you idiot. Race is an abstract, non-existent, conceptualized classification of one immutable physical characteristic, that of color, coupled to the stupid idea that human values and their actions in pursuit of same are determined by colors, not personal choices, regardless of skin color.

    What kind of libertarian magazine hires people who don’t know that the only immutable characteristic, universally shared by all people of every color, but not instinct driven animals, is a uniquely human mind that must individually choose what to think and how to act and can do nothing else, including using their skin cells to make these decisions.

    1. Ask Rachel Dolezal.

      1. That sick bitch lives about ten minutes away from me. Melissa Click not much further.

        I wish they would stay out of my town.

    2. Someone else pegged this pretty good by calling it race-baiting. In some aspects though it’s a little more pure than just race-baiting like immigration. There just isn’t any denying that most (almost all) Mexican immigrants are Hispanic.

    3. “What kind of libertarian magazine hires people who don’t know that the only immutable characteristic”

      An American one. Americans, regardless of their political affiliation, allow concepts like race to permeate their entire world view. I think it’s safe to say it’s always been the case. It’s something akin to original sin. Look at Thomas Jefferson, his ideas were completely at odds with his behaviour as slave owner and rapist.

      1. I think Sally Hemmings was proud as hell to be fucking Thomas Jefferson and she enjoyed it.

        1. How could anyone, especially a slave, possibly object to being raped by a founding father?

          1. Jefferson was also paying her with ‘TJ Bucks’. They could be redeemed for hugs, back rubs, and if she played her cards right, maybe even a full body massage. Jefferson knew how to treat the ladies.

            1. It was Gore Vidal who brought this to wide public attention in one of his historical novels back in the 1970s. He was vociferously attacked at the time for libel (though there’s nothing illegal about libeling the dead). Now we accept it, even make jokes about it. The times have changed.

  30. ‘ Here’s a sentence that may surprise many readers: “In general, the most politically intolerant Americans? tend to be whiter, more highly educated, older, more urban, and more partisan themselves.” ‘

    Who can possibly be surprised by this?

    SJWs are puritanical theocrats. They get that way through lengthier indoctrination at the monasteries of the SJW theocracy – universities. They call their indocrtination “education”.

  31. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  32. People say that there are two sides to the truth.

    Only if you’re not talking about the same thing.

  33. I’d like to see how they defined ‘political intolerance’.

  34. I liked Austin back in the early 90s when it still maintained its Texas flair along with its quirky libertarian artsy side. Plus it had actual “diversity” in its population and you could rely on the Butthole Surfers playing out on a regular basis. Years later it’s like being in a room full of Tonys – obnoxious, aggressively stupid white idiots who think they’re brilliant for their one-dimensional by-the-book “left” view of everything but possessing zero substantive knowledge of any topic. I found many more interesting, intelligent, tolerant, sociable people of all backgrounds in the small towns of the surrounding counties.

    1. ” I found many more interesting, intelligent, tolerant, sociable people of all backgrounds in the small towns of the surrounding counties.”

      Friendlier, more sociable, no doubt. For interesting, intelligent, ambitious people, the cities would be the place to search.

      1. Is it “intelligent” to stay in urban areas where all intellectual thought is censured?

        Interesting is in the eye of the beholder. If find bigoted snobs with narrow minds to not be interesting at all.

        1. Avoiding snobs or anyone else is much easier in the city than in the country. The city offers anonymity. I don’t know any urban area where all intellectual thought is censured. Where did you have in mind?

  35. College educated leftists are by far the lest “tolerant” people in Western society and they almost exclusively live in urban echo chambers.

    I suspect that their intolerance largely stems from their attachment to socialism. Reality is painful to people whose belief system to such a blatant lie.

    1. Intolerance isn’t a bad thing. I am intolerant to crime and lying etc.

      Personally I think being intolerant to politics, lying to people to get their votes then using those votes as a symbol of democracy and justification for corruption, is a good thing.

      But simply calling out someone’s lies isn’t synonymous with virtue. That requires that your spirit reflects the truth.

      1. It’s why I use air quotes with the term tolerance.

        It really isn’t about that. It is about claiming power over others.

        Many so-called educated people try to claim a kind of noble privilege over less educated people. The reality is that noble privilege is based upon noble obligation. And that obligation is something that none of them have fulfilled.

        It is why the Ivy leagues, and universities writ large, are collapsing. They no longer serve any purpose beyond indoctrination.

        The funny part to me, as in funny ironic not funny haha, is that if these twits get the society wide conflict they have been agitating for since at least the 1930’s they will be the ones who get killed. SJWs don’t own guns, don’t serve in the military and can’t fight for shit.

        1. Yeah, I don’t think they see the conflict getting physical. Even when it breaks out at protests, they deny their involvement and blame the easy targets they have spent the majority of their time creating.

          Through propaganda and lobbying they have made speaking the truth either meaningless or forbidden. They have created an environment of political correctness.

          In this, they have established fortifications with only one weakness, truth itself.

          Our strategy is clear. We can’t let truth be suppressed. We need to fortify truth with technology and human rights.

          When we cast away our armour of lies, their only weapon, we aren’t vulnerable, we’re invincible.

          1. The ANTIFA’s generally use numbers and prey on soft targets. When they are confronted with actual toughness (See Proud Boys in Portland and NYC) they get their asses kicked.

            However the urban police forces have picked sides and its with ANTIFA.

            Avoid but if you can’t come prepared. The police won’t help you.

            1. Another reason to cleanse America of it’s progressives.

  36. I guess journalism is dead, both at the Atlantic and at Reason. There are 3,412 counties in the United States. The survey contacted 2,000 people, yet it gives a political intolerance rating to every county. This means that they fabricated their ratings. Don’t you people even bother to do ANY thinking about what you publish?

    1. * Correction: 3,142 counties. Transposed a couple numbers there.

  37. “highly educated”

    What does this mean, now? Am I “highly educated” with an M.A. in journalism, or a Ph.D in _ studies? So much “education” to be had in our university is complete garbage.

    It would be refreshing to see political breakdowns among different types of undergraduate, graduate, and advanced degree-holders.

    1. “So much “education” to be had in our university is complete garbage.”

      You’d probably think otherwise if you were hiring young workers.

      “It would be refreshing to see political breakdowns among different types of undergraduate, graduate, and advanced degree-holders.”

      What are you waiting for? Or do you think you need an MA in journalism to do something so difficult?

      1. For fun, lets compile a list of worthless bachelor’s degrees.

        I’ll start: Women’s studies (low hanging fruit, I know)

        1. There’s a producer in Hollywood pulling down quarter million a year who has BA in woman’s studies. What’s worthless to you can be big bucks to someone else. Even the intolerant shouldn’t have any trouble understanding that much.

          1. Oh well, that settles it. Except Bill Gates never finished his degree, so that proves how worthless all college degrees are!

            1. The market has spoken. Colleges have never been so much in demand as they are today. Ely Whitney, rich and famous inventor had a degree in English literature.

              1. When you’re forced to pay for a college degree because you know your resume will be thrown in the trash if you don’t have one, even when applying for jobs for which the content of your education will be irrelevant, that is not the market speaking. It’s being extorted by a cartel.

                1. “When you’re forced to pay for a college degree”

              2. Another spurious analogy. What did the degree have to do with the inventions?

                You are incredibly stupid. You’re lucky to be tolerated at all here.

              3. Dumbass, the ‘market’ hasn’t spoken. The ‘market for college is so distorted with government money that people take useless degrees, along the same legitimate lines as phrenology and astrology. As is the price.

                Do you even understand how to construct a logical argument that involves employing a relevant example? It appears not.

                1. I’m not arguing anything. All I’m saying is you can get a perfectly good job with a degree in an area you disapprove of. You can whine about it all you like, but it doesn’t change the fact.

          2. Yeah Trueman, that degree got her that producing job. It’s still a worthless degree, other than teaching Women’s studies students. Thus completing the cycle.

            Saying shit like that just makes you look even dumber than you already did.

  38. “If someone has particularly awful political views, it’s not necessarily wrong to show them intolerance.”

    This opinion is a particularly awful political view. Not because I think its wrong to be intolerant but because you believe you can justify your intolerance with objective reason and others cant. Boo.

    1. Can’t or won’t.

      We never needed words like “intolerance” when people valued objective evidence and truth.

      Now it’s a punchline for ideologues.

    2. I saw a video lecture by Marxist philosopher Slavo Zizek. He pointed out that Rev, Martin L. King Jr never plead for tolerance. The civil rights movement of the 1960s never asked whites to tolerate blacks. Dignity, equality, justice, respect, yes. But never tolerance.

      Asking for tolerance is implicitly admitting to some lack or fault to be overlooked or discounted. This was not King’s bag.

      1. 1) Tolerance wasn’t the buzzword back then that it is today, so he probably wouldn’t have used it regardless, and 2) false. It’s an admission of no such thing. At most, it’s an acknowledgement of the possibility of mutual dislike and the virtue of coexistence despite mutual dislike.

        And why am I not surprised you like an avowed Stalinist and pathological obscurantist like Zizek. I suppose it does seem you aspire to be like him.

        1. “And why am I not surprised you like an avowed Stalinist ”

          Like him? I don’t even know him. I think his psychoanalysis is worthwhile. It’s probably not to your taste. I’ve also read avowed Fascists, (Celine) avowed Anarchists, (Kropotkin) and so on. I don’t know Celine or Kropotkin either. Both died before I was born.

          “so he probably wouldn’t have used it regardless”

          If you can read the mind of a dead man, then I guess I’ve no choice but to defer to your superior abilities.

  39. CORRECTION: Should read, “The Most Politically Intolerant Americans Tend To Be Urban, Highly Indoctrinated White , Progressives Survey Shows

    You’re welcome.

  40. Rather than “highly educated”, counting all Bachelors/Masters/doctorates as equal, I’d like once for surveys purporting to link education with left-liberalism, to discriminate between the fields.

    P.J.O’Rourke once suggested (I think it was in “Parliament of Whores”) that Wm. Bennett, Reagan’s Education Sec’y always seemed to be on the verge of saying anyone who doesn’t know what’s wrong with education never screwed an Elementary Education major, and I’ll add that it’s a shame Bill Bennett didn’t. We have an education “system” that rewards seat time with automatic pay raises and therefore we have school districts top heavy with folks who have Masters and doctorates in Bullcrap.

    I’d love to see the Atlantic survey done with folks asked if they are certificated by a state education department. NO, an Ed.D. is not the equivalent of a PhD in math, physics, chemistry, engineering… or even a Ph.D. in English Lit. when it comes time to determine if you’re highly educated.

    1. “I’d love to see the Atlantic survey done with folks asked if they are certificated by a state education department. ”

      We don’t need a survey. We Libertarians believe in letting the market speak for itself. And there’s scarcely a decent job on the market that doesn’t require post secondary education. That’s why enrollment in colleges and universities has never been so high, and why the degrees they confer have never been so sought after, costing the students into the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

      1. That’s… not really relevant at all. And most education graduates work for the stare at some level, and the state often requires you to have the right degree/licensure to work in education, so no, not a market.

        Try reading the post you’re responding to. If someone is bummed that their favorite bar shut down bevause the state revoked their liquor license, saying, “I guess the market disagreed with you” isn’t a clever quip; it’s an indication of poor comprehension.

        1. ‘the state often requires you to have the right degree/licensure’

          I said it before and I’ll say it again. Any decent job requires post secondary degrees. The state isn’t alone here. If you want to fill that open surgeon’s position at the private hospital down the street, I promise you an MD will be your first concern. If it’s a job as a teacher in a state school, a degree in education will help you in that endeavor. A degree in architecture is recommended to those seeking work architecting, whether it’s private or public.

          “Try reading the post you’re responding to. ”

          You mean you want me to waste time reading someone else’s drivel while I could be crafting, posting, and sharing my own pearls of wisdom with my dedicated following? That’s not how I roll, amigo.

          1. mtrueman|3.7.19 @ 9:17PM|#
            “I said it before and I’ll say it again. Any decent job requires post secondary degrees.”

            I said it before and I’ll say it again: trueman is full of shit and has no cites for his bullshit claims.
            Stuff it, you presumptuous piece of shit.

            1. “I said it before and I’ll say it again”

              I always like it when you quote me. Keep your eyes peeled. I have a feeling that cites may be appearing soon.

          2. Absolutely untrue.

            The oil/gas industry, mining, the trades, 90% of the military, sales, hell even large sections of the medical system do not require this.

            Jobs provided by the state frequently do as they have no truly hard skill set. So they use “education” to reduce competition.

            And as for recent graduates. If they don’t have a background in engineering, note I didn’t say “sciences” or studies, they don’t have any actual skills. Math and physics majors can be taught how to do something useful, but do not bring job ready skills with them.

            Everything else is a waste as it has been turned into a giant indoctrination program. And this is coming from a history major. And anything ending in -studies is a complete waste of time. Smart employers generally disqualify these degree holders as they tend to be delusion leftists with no work ethic.

            1. “The oil/gas industry, mining, the trades, 90% of the military, sales, hell even large sections of the medical system do not require this.”

              A gas station attendant isn’t a good job, neither is the job of a black lunged coal miner. The military are tax parasites. Sales is boring, and doctors and nurses all need college educations.

              “they don’t have any actual skills”

              They still manage to get jobs. Go to Hollywood, home of America’s number one export. Few if any have the kind of degree you prize so highly, most have degrees you dislike for some reason. And the jobs are less work and better paid than you seem to believe.

              1. Except, in media you need no degree of any kind to work. You just need raw ambition with a side helping of talent.

                And FYI, both agriculture and manufacturing completely blow out media/entertainment in terms of export value.

                Nurses only need an undergraduate degree as well.

                Sales is where millionaires are made if you work for someone else.

                And as for the military. Well, they are reason why your exports happen at all. Without the US Navy it would be all piracy all the time as it has historically been throughout human existence.

                Since the American public is underwriting education, the need for a degree to provide verifiable skills is in fact important. If it is just adult day care, then we shouldn’t be paying for it. And people should just get to work.

                Just like the talent does in Hollywood. Since most successful start young and largely forgo formal education in the name of staying on the job.

                1. “Except, in media you need no degree of any kind to work. You just need raw ambition with a side helping of talent.”

                  People get them anyways in unprecedented numbers at enormous costs to themselves and their loved ones. You can ignore the market, but that’s shitty Libertarianism. Have you thought that the market might be a better indicator of value than your gut feelings? Or is that just too ridiculous?

                  1. Except it isn’t the market acting.

                    What you are seeing is a government funded distortion of the market. Without government support to fund most parts of post-secondary education, it would not exist outside of engineering, medicine and business.

                    Maybe you are the one who should get over their “feelings”?

                    And that, again, ignores the fact that these “educated people” actually received no tangible skills from their “education.” Which means they were merely propagandized.

                    As for people leveraging themselves, lot’s of cultural reasons exist for that. None of which involve finding employment or anything of any practical value.

                    The academic-governmental con game is coming to an end via the public getting fed up with their children being taught to hate their own society and online credentialing. Enjoy going to your alumni meetings at Denny’s in the future as the schoolhouse will no longer exist.

                    1. “Without government support to fund most parts of post-secondary education, it would not exist outside of engineering, medicine and business.”

                      Not sure what you are saying. Medicine, engineering, sciences all receive massive government funding.

                      “None of which involve finding employment or anything of any practical value.”

                      People want to pursue studies that interest them. Who are you to dictate otherwise?

                      “and online credentialing…”

                      University of Phoenix. Very big with certain powerful Democrats. They’ve also persuaded you? These places exist to act as a conduit for veterans education benefits to the dubious institution. It’s a scam and you should know it blathering on about government involvement in the market place.

          3. Saying any decent job requires postsecondary degrees and then citing examples of professions that are only available to those with specific post secondary degrees is another bad analogy(Teaching requiring a master’s degree for advancement).

            Goddamn you’re an idiot.

        2. Mark, Truman is the master of irrelevant examples. I don’t think he’s very bright/

  41. File under: “No shit” or “Easily observable”.

  42. Who is surprised by this? Not me having lived with these “So Called” Liberals who think they are smarter and morally superior to people who do not think as they do.

    These are the perfect Democrats that love Warren and Sanders and even though they benefit the most from the wealth of this country they are sure they deserve it and how to tell other people how to live.

  43. Oh, boy! Misek and trueman. Two of the most pathetic claimants to ‘knowledge’ ever posting here.
    Duke it out, assholes; the world would be a better place if you both died in the effort.
    It could only get worse if Hihn showed up.

    1. Well, they could all fuck each other. Maybe they will keep each other’s mouths full and they will shut up.

  44. Surprise surprise surprise. We deplorably exceptional are forced to tolerate the intolerable. Feel the H8!

  45. I live in Seattle, which perhaps with the exception of Portland, is home of some of the most arrogant green limousine liberal potheads on the planet. They didn’t wear Che Guevara tee shirts once upon a time, he’s tattooed on their backs. They think of Jane Fonda as the mother or grandmother figure everyone should have had, and AOC and Omar are the glowing daughters.

    Just for grins and giggles, I like to put on my NRA jacket and my MAGA hat and go in, order a grande sugar free vanilla latte, and sit at a table at a Starbucks in the most “woke” Seattle neighborhood I can find. When I sense that all the rest of the crowd are working up the courage to come dump their drinks on me, I’ll announce loudly, “Say, who is supposed to be enforcing that unconstitutional policy that concealed weapons permit holders must disarm before being served here? Isn’t a barista going to pat me down or something?”

    I won’t be packing anything but body cams, of course.

    1. Uppity Black people are even more arrogant.

    2. I live in Seattle too… I don’t own a MAGA hat, but it would be fun to have one to troll people with!

      I saw an older dude rocking one at a store the other day and just thought “What balls!”

      I am 110% positive that if one worse a MAGA hate here for saaay a few hours in a public place, they would be harassed several times if not outright assaulted by somebody.

      1. I had a custom t-shirt made that reads “Socialism is Treason”. If I go to western WA, I always take it with me to wear.

        1. Nice! If I ever see anybody wearing that shirt I’ll be sure to stop you and say hi!

  46. ALWAYS look at the source. Polls can be slanted by the questions, and by the views of the organization. If the pollsters have a hard political leaning, then their poll will obviously be biased for a specific outcome. Why do I bring this up?

    Here’s a quote from the website of PredictWise, the company that did the poll.
    “PredictWise Polling and Analytics provides some of the fastest, most accurate and actionable insights progressive organizations can find on the market today.”

    And what group is at the forefront of the male privilege and white privilege criticism? Progressive organizations.

  47. Well to do city residents think of themselves as better in all ways than “dopey” rural folks. Trump’s win shows that MOST of the population of the U.S. agrees with Trump, and have disdain for well to do folks living in the city, and for good reason. The “Queen” of WTD folks is HIllary, a career criminal, whose criminal actions continue to this day.

  48. “If someone has particularly awful political views, it’s not necessarily wrong to show them intolerance.”

    Awful is now defined is disagreeing with a liberal.

    The “old” surprised me in the poll but I’m sure iyts closely followed by young white urban folks. The “woke” crowd

  49. the left doesn’t tolerate intolerant trash. If that makes me intolerant and elitist, then please label me as such. When you are wealthy and educated, you get to be.

    1. LOL

      Sooo since I’m pretty educated and wealthy, and absolutely hate prog tards… You’re saying my opinion is righteous and correct???

      Funny thing about stats: It shows that people with more time in Uni tend to be leftists… But the MOST successful people of all, highly wealthy business owners, tend to be very conservative or libertarian.

      So if we’re just going to assume the most successful people are correct, then progs are still not correct. The upper middle class cubicle worker is the number one supporter of socialism, not actual smart and successful people.

    2. hayek > friedman|3.8.19 @ 4:32PM|#

      Fuck off, Hihn.

  50. My daughter’s white college educated western Massachusetts 4th grade teacher described her and her siblings as “spawn of capitalist Satan” because their mother ran the largest employer in town.

    We were out of there in four months, taking all the jobs with us. Up yours, you bigoted hateful people.

    1. Leftists like that teacher should be on a blacklist. Unable to secure a teaching position.

      1. Reagan’s biggest mistake wasn’t immigration. It was failing to clear the socialists out of the universities. He bought peace by allowing these low rent terrorists to hide out in academia so they wouldn’t be fighting in the streets the way they were in the 1970’s.

  51. I’ve felt that this was true for quite a while, so nice to see a study that affirms it. But I have to question the county by county data – where in the hell did they find a Republican living in Multnomah county (Portland, OR)?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.