American cities, ranked by conservatism

Suck it, Portland! :stuck_out_tongue:


Wow. Having grown up in the Buffalo area (but having been gone for almost 20 years), I am a bit surprised. I imagine their negative score might shift to positive if it included the vast suburbs…


The Nolan chart is horribly broken if you are a Libertarian-Socialist, although considering David Nolan’s politics that might be by design.


I prefer that people have many opinions and be free to express them rather than being lumped into two competing camps.
3D Venn diagramming is probably the best way to describe a persons politics.
Conservative vs liberal is oversimplification for easy thoughtless fandom based wasted voting rather than considered choices, intelligent striving for change, and appropriate outrage.

1 Like

The link I provided is to an updated chart for 2012 (I know, that’s not very up to date anymore…) but that does not invalidate your concern. For example, the current quiz still seems to have no way to call out the fact that I favor a universal stipend for all adult citizens.

My results

FWIW, my own position on the chart has not changed much on the old vs. the new quiz, but the proportion of respondents in the same region of the chart as I am has declined.

Also, I live in one of the cities near the top of the conservative rating in the chart from the article we’re talking about, so I shouldn’t be too surprised that my politics are a bit off from most of my neighbors.

Actually, there are 10 kinds of people: people who understand binary, people who don’t, and people who understand ternary.




Yeah, but my joke still works, except in binary.

I don’t get it. 1 is supposed to be “most conservative”, but the most conservative city has a score of less than 0.5.

I suspect that the cities that had a score of 1 had a population < 250000. Presumably this is a subset of the whole data.


Cities are virtually always less conservative than rural areas. So even the most conservative city is going to score low on a well balanced chart. A similar chart of farming communities would probably be jammed all the way to the right.

I note that Virginia Beach is up there. I’m not surprised. I went to a convention there once and was warned that the cops would be patrolling and that hugging someone in public could land you in jail for solicitation.


Agreed. What I noticed from the chart – based on personal knowledge – is that many of the cities listed would be at a very different place on the continuum if their suburbs (which are often more than 50% of the population for the greater metropolitan area) were included.

To use the most obvious Canadian example, there’s a reason Rob Ford kept getting elected to run Toronto, and it wasn’t because he was voted in by people who actually lived in Toronto.

1 Like

Dobby. This is a post about what people identify THEMSELVES as.

I think your problem is with… most people, and not the author. Is that a possibility?

‘‘easy thopughtless fandom’’ - also a bit of an oversimplification, no? Could you elaborate on what the oversimplification is ‘‘for’’? You may have oversimplified, yourself, yes?


There were no options I could agree with 100% in the first few questions, so I gave up. And I’m neither a libertarian nor a socialist. It seemed to be as unsubtle as most political quizzes.

1 Like

I’ve heard this about Ford before, and I’ve always wondered how that compares with, say, London - where Boris Johnson has also been predominantly elected because of suburban support (I think this is the 2008 result).

Boris was elected for his image (at least first time round) and because he appears to be fairly moderate compared to the rest of the Conservative party.

If Boris wins his seat at the next general election I can easily see Labour winning the mayoral election. I can’t think of any other Conservative who could win it for them.

Johnson certainly isn’t moderate. People just don’t notice because he’s ‘a character’.

He won in London because he’s charismatic, and because Ken Livingstone was hardly a less divisive character.

But yeah, if they put up someone like Stephen Norris again they’re wasting their time. Zac Goldsmith? Seb Coe?

The funny thing about Johnson running as an MP for Uxbridge is that he’s been campaiging against Heathrow for years and now he’ll have to perform a complete 180 on that.

Libertarians are the Furries of the political world. They ruin perfectly good threads with their weird fetishes.


I meet too many people who with their busy lives prefer to IMHO approach politics or policy as a team sport, choose one of two teams, often because of locality, personality cult, or their education; and stick to the party line for the most part because their team supports policy XYZ.
There are also the occasional libertarian, socialist, anarchist, or other nutjobs who if they are educated can actually espouse an interesting personal policy choice menu rather than picking form the big two.
I think our alien overlords said it best.


Libertarian-socialists are strongly opposed to libertarian-capitalists, who falsely claim to be the only true libertarians.

Basically Libertarian-socialism is a spectrum from the Green parties to most of anarchism (“anarcho”-capitalism and some individualist-anarchism excepted).