Support NeoGAF

[Mammoth Jones]

Well, it's foreign policy where things differ here, mostly. I think that while the tea party is often in support of foreign intervention, it tends to be almost exclusively in support of Israel rather than out of any broad support for the democratization of the world that characterizes real neoconservatism. It's a lust for violence rather than a belief that violence is a tool to achieve a more peaceful world.

Maybe that's too subtle a distinction to matter, but I think it does.

Also, the libertarian side of things is pretty firmly opposed to neoconservative ideals and it's pretty much undeniable that that wing of the party is on the rise, even if they weren't able to get Ron Paul much in the way of official victories.

What am I if I just think the US should stay out of foreign military situations and save its own money and invest it in peaceful endeavors?

 

[RiccochetJ]

Can someone sum up the differences between both parties for someone that is extremely uneducated and doesn't want to read wikipedia articles?

All I know is that republicans hate gays.

Even openly gay republicans hate homosexuals!

 

[sphagnum]

Okay, where do you get that idea from? Can you prove it?

As a former neoconservative myself, I can attest that much of it is born out of hatred for "the enemy".

 

[Perspicacity]

well, I tend to frequent more heavily moderated forums such as SA. Reading Youtube or news article comments usually doesn't seem like a good idea to me. But really, I'm having a hard time thinking of a large online community that tends to be more conservative.

Stormfront

 

[Genesis Knight]

Because the hate for conservatives is so fucking virulent here that I don't even want to try to say a damn thing. If you don't support a leftist view on this forum you're uneducated, you're a bigot, you're a bad person, etcetera. I've never even had to post in a politicial/social/religious thread to see this. It's clear as day just from lurking.

I'm not going to be able to change anyone's mind, so I keep my mouth shut and try to ignore it. I assume other people who share my mindset act similarly, since I'm sure some conservatives exist here.

Edit: Add "insane" to that list.

 

[Bornstellar]

What am I if I just think the US should stay out of foreign military situations and save its own money and invest it in peaceful endeavors?

Libertarian.

 

[Freezie KO]

What am I if I just think the US should stay out of foreign military situations and save its own money and invest it in peaceful endeavors?

Isolationist.

If you're voting for a party on that one issue alone? Libertarian.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Stormfront

I went there once. I literally cried. Broke my soul to realize (not that I ever forgot...but just a nasty reminder) that no matter what I do as an individual. No matter how I behave. No matter how much I treat those around me with kindness, compassion and respect that I'll still be considered a sub-human ape not fit to breath air to some people.

*sigh*

 

[Draxal]

Honestly, I think the political discussion on Gaf is extremely shallow from both sides.

 

[Czigga]

Will we ever have a real 3rd party ? I can't see this country surviving without one at this point.

Libertarian Party. Once the GOP self-destructs with their bullshit the Libertarians will fill in the void, which will be better for everyone. While many here would obviously not switch over, I think most would agree it's a much better opponent than today's GOP.

Which side is it that supports:

1. No discrimination against LGBT community?
2. Gay marriage?
3. Decriminalization of Marijuana?
4. Teaching theory of evolution in school?
5. No racism subtle or otherwise?
6. Further research into curbing global warming as opposed to denying it?
7. Pro choice (and pro life to a reasonable extent)?
8. No war with Iran or backing Israel if they are the belligerent party?

And many others I can't think of. In US, the right wing party is represented by certain right wing extremists and the democratic party is largely right wing on certain key policies lending a rather central right characteristic. However, GAF is largely left wing as its expressed ideologically. Tomorrow if the right and left switched sides so would GAF.

EDIT: Note that I am not an American and so most of what I have seen of America is from blogs, news as an outsider.

See above, you've pretty much descibed the Libertarian Party! With some exceptions, but many of your points are genarlly accepted amongst Libertarians.

I get the feeling that a lot of the "left" in America is pragmatic when it comes to outcomes and aren't necessarily axiomatic in their ideology.

Like, if an outcome is medical care for everyone, do we really care if the private sector provides it as opposed to the government? Whatever gets the job done proper and well, you know?

I find the American right to be, at least in words, more aligned with "The state shouldn't do things" while I feel the left is more "if the state can do something better, why shouldn't it?" as opposed to "The private sector shouldn't do things".

I disagree. I think the argument is that the public sector DOESN'T doesn't do must things better than the private sector.

Yeah, the conservative party in america is bat shit insane, they will stick to their bullshit talking points even if shown to be patently false (obama's a muslin, Kenyan, communist, anti-Christ). This is why Neogaf leans left, not because conservatism is wrong, but rather because PoliNeoGaf has maintained its sanity.

This to a certain degree, although I would place some of the blame on today's media cycle. People get a lot more clicks when they blow some dumb ass racist thing way out of proportion which unfairly lables others. I think it's safe to say that most 'conservatives' on this site aren't actually racist, homophobic, birther, war-mongers. The generalization the left-leaners spew is pretty insensitive and is really no more tolerant than the ones they chastise.

Agreed, I've noticed this as well.

As I've gotten older, it has become more and more apparent how ridiculously left-leaning GAF actually is, to the point that the people who think they're so enlightened and open-minded actually aren't. Some of the things coming out of the "mouths" of left-leaning posters are nearly as bad and close-minded as anything a conservative could say. Some of the folks here are so young, short-sighted, and limited in their experiences and views, yet think they have it all figured out. "I'm liberal, I'm educated, I'm SO smart!" Yeah, sure.

Yeah the whole 'logic / educated' meme is pretty annoying. Personally I think the idea of endless spending and perpetually increasing indebtedness is pretty illogical, and am not sure how an educated person can logically deduce that that's a good long-term solution, but I wouldn't use some snarky phrase about logic to support my opinion.

The bottom line is that there are plenty of random stats and demographics that favor one side of the other. I think pointing to "Well the more educated you are the more liberal you are, so I'm right because I'm educated" is actually a pretty weak argument and espouses the very same intolerance to other ideas that left-leaners claim to put on a higher pedestal than right-leaners.

EDIT:

Isolationist.

If you're voting for a party on that one issue alone? Libertarian.

You mean Non-Interventionism. There is a big difference.

 

[Bornstellar]

As a former neoconservative myself, I can attest that much of it is born out of hatred for "the enemy".

If you are serious, one persons experience does not proof make. I'm waiting for the cold hard facts that many here claim do not come from the conservative side. Or perhaps the truth is that members of both sides are full of crap, but only one gets called out for it.

 

[Freezie KO]

Stormfront

Their rhetoric on Israel is much closer to the European left than the American left or American right.

 

[Wazzim]

Conservatives rarely survive the liberal wrath of OT GAF.

 

[bill0527]

I consider myself to be a centrist. I'm for gay rights and many other leftist issues, but I'm also diehard limited small government and low taxation. These are always the two biggest issues for me and they trump all of my leftist leanings. I have no problems voting for either a democrat or republican if I don't think they are batshit insane.

That said, I stay out of any and all political threads because if you show any leanings to the right, you get absolutely pulverized by people who have much more time than I do to sit on the Internet, learn their talking points, and back it up with an army of links, of which their are plenty of counter links and arguments to made against from the other side. But at the end of the day, I just really don't care all that much and don't take it near as seriously as other people on this forum. And..I've been here 8-9 years and there is no doubt that this forum leans pretty hard to the left and so does the moderation here. That's why it's best that if you don't toe the company line, and you value your account, best to keep your fucking mouth shut (or your hands off the keyboard).

 

[Gregorn]

Even openly gay republicans hate homosexuals!

Yeah, ok.

Seriously no one has ever told me what the difference is and there's no way I'm going to care enough to find out on my own.

 

[maharg]

What am I if I just think the US should stay out of foreign military situations and save its own money and invest it in peaceful endeavors?

Definitely not a neoconservative. Also definitely not a communist or even some forms of socialist.

But that's a bit like asking "I'm not in any country that has a red flag on its government buildings, what country am I in?"

Okay, where do you get that idea from? Can you prove it?

Prove something about the emotional premise of the political views of potentially millions of diverse people? Well that's a mighty high standard. I'll retract your bolded bit if you want, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Wolves Evolve]

Because the hate for conservatives is so fucking virulent here that I don't even want to try to say a damn thing. If you don't support a leftist view on this forum you're uneducated, you're a bigot, you're a bad person, etcetera. I've never even had to post in a politicial/social/religious thread to see this. It's clear as day just from lurking.

I'm not going to be able to change anyone's mind, so I keep my mouth shut and try to ignore it. I assume other people who share my mindset act similarly, since I'm sure some conservatives exist here.

Not being facetious, but thank you for your self-censorship. It's appreciated. I'm a jack-booted Trotskist and I have to censor myself here too, save the occasional chime.

Honestly, I think the political discussion on Gaf is extremely shallow from both sides.

Oh, oh so very shallow. The Men's Rights thread is perhaps your best example. Nobody really willing to talk about the politics involved, or context. So of course people get angry at each other, veer away from issues and rush towards generalisations in lieu of anything to debate. I wouldn't say there's a coherent base of discussion on the American-liberal type here, but certainly not enough actual Left people to form a coherent dialogue.

 

[The Technomancer]

Personally I think the idea of endless spending and perpetually increasing indebtedness is pretty illogical, and am not sure how an educated person can logically deduce that that's a good long-term solution,

I...can't think of a singel liberal on GAF who honestly thinks that. I doubt even Empty Vessel would take a position like "increasing debt indefinitely will never ever become a problem"

 

[Conciliator]

I consider myself a moderate leftist, but living in deep-ish South, US, my politics are so insanely far left of the status quo that I just never bring them up and avoid conversations about it in public. I'm hesitant to say stuff like 'I think we shouldn't have a regressive tax system' because of the way people look at me. I've just figured that GAF(and other gaming communities that are...uh, a little more articulate than others, like Penny Arcade, Rock Paper Shotgun, etc.) are more like the status quo in some other places of the country/world.

EDIT: Also I'm sure someone already mentioned this but you should read up on false equivalency OP.

 

[QuiteWhittle]

Already addressed but still quoted. So I ask, prove it.

I don't really care but...

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/17/in-search-of-ideologues-in-america

Libertarians are much more likely to be male (59%) and young (33% are under age 30) than are any of the other groups; they are also more numerous in western states. Liberals are far better educated than other groups (48% college graduates, compared with an overall average of 27%). By contrast, populists are less educated, with just 16% holding college degrees, and nearly half of them live in the south. They are less affluent as well: only 13% live in households with incomes of $75,000 or higher - 8 percentage points lower than the national average.

http://prospect.org/article/back-future

PROFESSIONALS: Professionals, who are, roughly speaking, college-educated producers of services and ideas, used to be the most staunchly Republican of all occupational groups. In the 1960 presidential election, they backed Richard Nixon by 61 percent to 38 percent. But in the 1980s these voters -- now chiefly working for large corporations and bureaucracies rather than on their own, and heavily influenced by the environmental, civil-rights, and feminist movements -- began to vote Democratic. In the four elections from 1988 to 2000, they backed Democrats by an average of 52 percent to 40 percent.

http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/04/section-3-demographics-and-news-sources/

Educational experiences of groups within the same partisan coalitions also are varied. For instance, half of Solid Liberals (50%), the most educated group, have college degrees. They are joined in the Democratic base by one of the groups with the least amount of educational experience, Hard-Pressed Democrats (68% of whom have a high school degree or less). And the two Republican-oriented independent groups are another study in contrasts when it comes to education—66% of Disaffecteds have no more than a high school education, while 70% of Libertarians have attended at least some college.

Though I'm making a distinction between Liberals and the general "left".

 

[Genesis Knight]

Not being facetious, but thank you for your self-censorship. It's appreciated. I'm a jack-booted Trotskist and I have to censor myself here too, save the occasional chime.

Thanks for serving up just the right mixture of snarky arrogance to illustrate my point.

 

[Christine]

Someday you'll have to accept that you're posting on an internet forum, and you can't force someone to do your two-hour research for you.

If you give that much of a shit, go through my posting history. If you don't give that much of a shit, ignore the post. Tons of posts have been made in this thread regarding education/politics correlations, age/politics correlations, etc. and nobody has offered a citation.

The comment made against me was ridiculous anyway. As if I'm "against left-leaning GAF"... I'm an atheist for healthcare and gun-control, but my bigger political standing is against hypocrisy, which I see oozing from a whole lot of PoliGAF.

I didn't even ask you to do research, much less attempt to force you. It's not "my" research, for that matter; it's yours, entailed by your claim that "GAF lean so much to the left in politics" due to "moderation policies and reactionary banning."

Ultimoo's comment was very ineptly worded, but the point stands that if you assert something in support of an opinion but can't be bothered to evidence the assertion, then your opinion probably ought to be ignored as per your suggestion.

I think you're probably smart enough to be aware of all this, which explains your insistence on pointing at other people's posts. They're completely irrelevant to any of the claims you've made, which means that mentioning them is merely an attempt at creating a distraction to cover your exit.

 

[SnakeswithLasers]

See above, you've pretty much descibed the Libertarian Party! With some exceptions, but many of your points are genarlly accepted amongst Libertarians.

Before anyone gets any crazy ideas about joining the libertarian side, it would be remiss to not remind them that while libertarians may hold socially liberal ideas, they would also tear away all the social safety nets that exist in our society and let the markets decide everything.

So on one side you have a party that says, "People should be able to do what they want, and the government should just butt-out because it's terrible at everything" and another that says, "People should be free to be themselves within reason, but the government needs to have the resources to provide for the poor and less fortunate through taxation."

Either side is intellectually valid, but are there any successful libertarian governments? I can think of several successful social-democratic ones.

 

[Perspicacity]

Conservatives rarely survive the liberal wrath of OT GAF.

For all of this sentiment I've never actually seen someone banned for "being conservative". I'll consent that conservatives are banned at a higher rate than liberals, but conservative views are not the cause.

 

[Genesis Knight]

For all of this sentiment I've never actually seen someone banned for "being conservative". I'll consent that conservatives are banned at a higher rate than liberals, but conservative views are not the cause.

I thought he was talking about getting shouted down rather than being banned.

 

[The Technomancer]

For all of this sentiment I've never actually seen someone banned for "being conservative". I'll consent that conservatives are banned at a higher rate than liberals, but conservative views are not the cause.

The only times that I've probably seen people get banned for "conservatism" are probably gay rights issues, and even then only when things get heated (there are several posters who believe gay behavior is sinful who post frequently)

Well, and Kosmo for being a very very special kind of deliberately obtuse.

 

[maharg]

Libertarian Party. Once the GOP self-destructs with their bullshit the Libertarians will fill in the void, which will be better for everyone. While many here would obviously not switch over, I think most would agree it's a much better opponent than today's GOP.

The only chance libertarians have of doing anything like this is by hijacking the GOP. The barriers against a third party entering the system and succeeding are extremely high and largely entrenched through law and a bipartisan civil service.

 

[Conciliator]

Yeah dudes/dudettes who express far-right views do tend to get absolutely torn apart here. That's true. I don't know of anyone being banned for being conservative, exactly. Unless they're on some shit like 'my conservative ideology supports putting all gay people on an island and nuking it'.

 

[Jimothy]

I...can't think of a singel liberal on GAF who honestly thinks that. I doubt even Empty Vessel would take a position like "increasing debt indefinitely will never ever become a problem"

Dude goes all in on MMT.

And he backs his shit up with logic and empirical evidence. I've yet to see another poster on the forum who knows his shit as well as EV.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Being an independent myself, it seems GAF has always leaned very far into the left.. Why is this?
Is it an age thing? Younger people tend to be more liberal
Is it a location thing? More gaffers on the west and east coast?
Is it an ideology thing? Anti-religion

I feel that both parties have very stupid stances on certain issues and that the only way this country can move forward is if we govern somewhere in the middle. The two sides have become so distant from each other. I pray a relevant 3rd party makes it onto the scene at some point.

Actually, most of the current Dem ideas were considered to be in the middle back in 1994. So, if you are really looking for the middle, Democrats are already there today.

Just because GOP keeps moving more and more to the right, doesn't change where the middle is.

 

[Red Blaster]

Most right-wingers who get axe here throw false equivalencies everywhere and love reducing complex and nuanced situations into bumper sticker phrases

 

[Zaphod]

I thought he was talking about getting shouted down rather than being banned.

Most often, the guys who get shouted down say ridiculously uninformed things like 'If I make a dollar more to move me into the next tax bracket I'll owe thousands more to the IRS'

 

[Darobick]

In the mods' defense, it's hard to believe someone isnt trolling when they say a conservative talking point with a straight face. A person's first reaction is usually "you can't seriously believe that". So the only logical conclusion is they're trolling.

I do the same thing when I read a liberal talking point, so...

 

[Czigga]

Before anyone gets any crazy ideas about joining the libertarian side, it would be remiss to not remind them that while libertarians may hold socially liberal ideas, they would also tear away all the social safety nets that exist in our society and let the markets decide everything.

So on one side you have a party that says, "People should be able to do what they want, and the government should just butt-out because it's terrible at everything" and another that says, "People should be free to be themselves within reason, but the government needs to have the resources to provide for the poor and less fortunate through taxation."

Either side is intellectually valid, but are there any successful libertarian governments? I can think of several successful social-democratic ones.

This is sort of exactly what this thread is about. You write that libertarianism is intellectually valid, but only after you infer that it would be 'crazy' to join that side. While your overall post is light-hearted, it still has that aura of superiority. And that aura is pretty pervasive throughout GAF.

 

[Dynamite Shikoku]

lol @ posters saying 'most educated people are left wing'

 

[Czigga]

The only chance libertarians have of doing anything like this is by hijacking the GOP.

I got my fingers crossed

 

[Reuenthal]

I consider myself to be a centrist. I'm for gay rights and many other leftist issues, but I'm also diehard limited small government and low taxation. These are always the two biggest issues for me and they trump all of my leftist leanings. I have no problems voting for either a democrat or republican if I don't think they are batshit insane.

That said, I stay out of any and all political threads because if you show any leanings to the right, you get absolutely pulverized by people who have much more time than I do to sit on the Internet, learn their talking points, and back it up with an army of links, of which their are plenty of counter links and arguments to made against from the other side. But at the end of the day, I just really don't care all that much and don't take it near as seriously as other people on this forum. And..I've been here 8-9 years and there is no doubt that this forum leans pretty hard to the left and so does the moderation here. That's why it's best that if you don't toe the company line, and you value your account, best to keep your fucking mouth shut (or your hands off the keyboard).

Those are my observations as well as someone who has been quite shorter here and also has various views that some are nearer to the left and others to the right and I identift as center right wing.

 

[QuickSilverD]

I...can't think of a singel liberal on GAF who honestly thinks that. I doubt even Empty Vessel would take a position like "increasing debt indefinitely will never ever become a problem"

I don't claim to speak for him, but doesn't Empty Vessel believes debt is an illussion or something like that?

 

[Freezie KO]

but the point stands that if you assert something in support of an opinion but can't be bothered to evidence the assertion, then your opinion probably ought to be ignored as per your suggestion.

Then isn't it nice that I at least suggested it? I'm pointing out what a courtesy I'm doing, instead of the other 300 claims, anecdotes, and hyperbolic insults made in this thread that haven't been sourced.

I think you're probably smart enough to be aware of all this, which explains your insistence on pointing at other people's posts. They're completely irrelevant to any of the claims you've made, which means that mentioning them is merely an attempt at creating a distraction to cover your exit.

I'm not distracting. I'm flat out telling you that I'm not going to waste my time digging up the posts, and I don't care if you believe me. It's hardly a smoke screen, and I can bold it for you if you wish. Here it is again:

I saw a dude get banned for giving a conservative opinion that I didn't even agree with. Then I made snarky comments pointing out how he was banned for expressing an opinion, and then I got banned too. Take this or dismiss it. Either way, I'm not going to spend two hours finding the exact thread since I don't even remember what thread it was. After all, I took a little vacation from the forum for a while.

Other people have made the comment about moderation as well because anyone that's perused controversial topics in the OT for more than three months has probably seen people get banned for unpopular opinions. We can keep ignoring them as well, or we could enter these into the record as eye witness accounts.

 

[dabig2]

This Conservative persecution complex here is completely laughable. Like the mods on here are apart of the Red Army ready to send any dissenters to the gulag.

 

[Wolves Evolve]

What's interesting about internet politics discussions since 2005-2006 is the overwhelming culture of proof that now permeates. I can remember before that time that it was relatively common to have a discussion of abstract ethics, but many more people now need proof to be proposed.

This has some benefits, but the romance of the rational lets people absorb all sorts of inarticulate internet research. With more research being done at American Universities for political articulation, people can often find precisely what they're looking for.

 

[Tapiozona]

Most often, the guys who get shouted down say ridiculously uninformed things like 'If I make a dollar more to move me into the next tax bracket I'll owe thousands more to the IRS'

Oh come on now. I can find 1,000,000 stupid posts on GAF not made by conservatives. You'd be surprised how many people don't understand how the US tax system works. I'd bet over half the people on GAF don't.

 

[Violet_0]

I don't think there's any social topic where I can agree with the conservative point of view - abortion, immigration, social net, gay rights, religion, ...

 

[SquiddyCracker]

They're under 40. Takes a few decades but people tend to alter their perspectives over time. I mean, I don't think I'll ever change how I feel about:

-A woman's right to choose
-Voter rights
-Freedom
-Capitalism
-Gay rights
-Racial equality

But I have noticed I've shifted slightly on other issues. Time and experience tends to do that.

I don't know about this.

When people say that older folks are usually conservative, I take it to mean that they usually hold onto beliefs that are old by their standards.

So someone who is okay with a woman's right to choose, voters rights, freedom, gay rights, etc today, will probably still be okay with those things tomorrow, but on the other hand not be okay with the latest stuff of the world of tomorrow.

 

[~Kinggi~]

Left has become the side of logic, right has become the side of 'fuck you! i gots mine!' and also 'i hate gays and women!'

 

[Joel Was Right]

Are there any members here that lean far to the right?

 

[maharg]

I got my fingers crossed

I have my fingers crossed for the opposite, personally. Or at least that a form of libertarianism that doesn't seem so prone to replacing the old 'masters' (government) with new 'masters' (corporations so large they make most countries look like fishing clubs) emerges first.

But I do think the bipartisan system of the US is a gross and disenfranchising thing, no matter who's in power at the moment.

 

[The Technomancer]

What's interesting about internet politics discussions since 2005-2006 is the overwhelming culture of proof that now permeates. I can remember before that time that it was relatively common to have a discussion of abstract ethics, but many more people now need proof to be proposed.

This has some benefits, but the romance of the rational lets people absorb all sorts of inarticulate internet research. With more research being done at American Universities for political articulation, people can often find precisely what they're looking for.

I agree with the point about political research, but I am glad to see (hopefully) an increase in recognition of the idea that arguing about how people should behave and why its their own fault for not behaving that way is inferior to arguing about how they actually behave and what to do about it.

 

[Zaphod]

Oh come on now. I can find 1,000,000 stupid posts on GAF not made by conservatives. You'd be surprised how many people don't understand how the US tax system works. I'd bet over half the people on GAF don't.

I was not implying that only conservatives make stupid posts, only that the ganging up tends to happen when stupid uninformed posts are made. I'm not saying GAF is nice to conservatism but it's not like its shoot on sight or anything around here. I tend to think people who quickly play the persecution card just have a hard time defending their ideas against a bit of vitriol.

 

[Bornstellar]

I don't really care but...

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/17/in-search-of-ideologues-in-america


http://prospect.org/article/back-future


http://www.people-press.org/2011/05/04/section-3-demographics-and-news-sources/


Though I'm making a distinction between Liberals and the general "left".

That's better. However, the first study uses only 7 yes/no questions to determine ideology and how it is determined based on those responses is not specified. This is a prime example of a poorly put together study (or poorly reported) but it essentially invalidates the results.

The second does not provide a reference to where it is pulling the data and comes from a political magazine dedicated to American liberalism. I think we can safely rule this out as well.

Both of these are also severely out of date.

The third again does not provide the criteria for each classification. Then there's this in the same quote:

For instance, half of Solid Liberals (50%), the most educated group, have college degrees. They are joined in the Democratic base by one of the groups with the least amount of educational experience, Hard-Pressed Democrats (68% of whom have a high school degree or less).

Going by the numbers provided in this link, conservatives and liberals have almost equivalent graduation rates (23% solid lib vs. 22% staunch con), but post-grad heavily favors solid liberals. This does not account for those factors I mentioned earlier (that of the types of professions represented and populated by those who pursue post-grad education - a post-grad education is highly specific) nor does it account for practical work experience. Yet college graduation rates are nearly identical.

If we were to accept the data given here (comparing solid libs vs. staunch conservatives) the question becomes, how important is a post-grad degree to ones overall education. In my opinion, pursuing or not pursuing a post-grad degree has little bearing on overall education because it is highly specific to one field of study. Graduating however, is far more important and provides a much better metric since it requires studies in many fields. If we use that as our metric of education - according to this study staunch conservatives and solid liberals are equally educated. Regardless, the classification of various ideologies is not explained on that page, so everything is in question anyway.