Info about study that reversed numbers on conservatives

Vanity

[Chicory]

I remember some years ago it came out that a social studies study on conservatives vs liberals came out looking bad for conservatives, and then a couple of years ago it was found they had reversed one of the numbers for conservatives which had made them look much worse than they were (and possibly they were actually better than liberals despite having been reported as worse, but I am not sure about that).

Does anyone remember this well enough to give me a clue how to find out more about it? I haven't been able to configure a search that works.

Thanks very much!

[The people have spoken]

Is this it? https://www.psypost.org/2020/03/new-study-suggests-conservatives-are-no-more-fearful-or-threat-sensitive-than-liberals-56305

[naturalman1975]

Liberals, Not Conservatives, Express More Psychoticism

[naturalman1975]

Conservative political beliefs not linked to psychotic traits, as study claimed

[tsomer]

I don’t remember hearing anything like that, but I consider myself a liberal-
I follow classic liberal tenets: property rights, legal protection of minority rights, freedom of religion and speech. This is what we are trying to conserve.

So called liberals are totalitarians who become violently indignant when you point that out to them. For that reason I find the designation “leftists” satisfactory, but we must never call them”liberal”. Words should mean something.

[Chicory]

Very interesting article, thanks! But not the one I was thinking of.

[Chicory]

Yes, this is it! Thank you NaturalMan! I may need it in discussion this Sunday, which is why I was looking for it!

[Chicory]

Yes,you are right, and now that I consider my aversion to being called a cis-woman, I will give up calling those like you classical liberals! Thank you for bringing this up :)

[Beowulf9]

I see these things from time to time but never put any stock in them. I mean, don’t you kind of figure it’s someone pushing an agenda?

[Chicory]

Oh, yeah. The article Thepeoplehavespoken in post 2 above shows a good example of what you are talking about. But if the person with I whom I may have a discussion on Sunday brings it up, I want to shoot it down .

[tsomer]

They insist they can stipulate which pronouns you may use for them, return the favor and insist that yours are “your majesty” or “your excellency.” At the very least we should object when they hide behind benevolent sounding labels. “Liberal” goes with “liberality”, and who doesn’t love a good dose of that?

This goes back to the debate where Gore Vidal called W. Buckley a “crypto fascists” Buckley threatened to punch him in the nose if he said that again. Leftists proclaimed victory because, I suppose ,they decided that Buckley violated the rules of gentility. That’s also about the time that the Marxists began a formal, scholarly program intent on exploiting language to move their agenda forward. They’ve followed this strategy for better than 60 years and it has paid off for them.

They can’t be contained as long as they control the vocabulary—any debate with them in their language accepts the implicit allegations carried in it. So it begins with definitions.

Sorry to go on so, but I’m procrastinating at the prospect of mowing the lawn.

[Chicory]

I hope you got your lawn mowed LOL! I agree with you. Luckily for them, no one has asked about my preferred pronouns... if after hearing my argument against my dictating which pronouns others should use to refer to me they insisted, I would say realshe, etc.