U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-30-2010, 12:14 PM
 
3,115 posts, read 6,150,331 times
Reputation: 1797

Advertisements

Spoiler
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagocubs View Post
Under that definition, I guess that every country in the free world is "liberal" (except for the USA anyway)
Yes, they just about are. Now I wonder why these countries have such high standards of living, health, longevity and life satisfaction...hmmm...

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 06-30-2010 at 01:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-30-2010, 01:55 PM
 
308 posts, read 530,746 times
Reputation: 278
I think that liberals have lost lots of support due to the current Washington administration. I think that voters from now on will look at what a person has to bring to the table, ie. experience, success, and dedication rather than physical characteristics. I am hearing changes in attitudes in Charlotte from those that have generally leaned towards the left. I think that Charlotte is generally a pretty liberal city that is getting away from liberalism for the sake of being liberal. I think that it is always beneficial to be in the middle. I can't understand how people vote straight ticket without examining individuals from both parties.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:10 AM
 
1,253 posts, read 4,170,778 times
Reputation: 622
Perhaps this poll in today's Charlotte Observer might answer the question:


(the graph is off the chart, LOL)
Attached Thumbnails
Charlotte a Liberal or Conservative town?-dnc.jpg  
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:35 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,154,265 times
Reputation: 22373
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankTheTank2 View Post
Perhaps this poll in today's Charlotte Observer might answer the question:


(the graph is off the chart, LOL)
Frank . . . I don't think that opinion poll (besides being totally unscientific) means a thing about whether or not the folks here are conservative or liberal.

My DEM friends are just as concerned about having ANY convention here b/c of impact to businesses, traffic and city budget. One of my friends in Raleigh teased me (she is a very active DEM) and said she was surely glad that it was Charlotte in the running and not Raleigh - that Raleigh was bad enough (traffic, especially) without the nation descending on it.

So being turned off to the idea of having a national convention here has a lot to do with people being concerned about cost and inconvenience and very little to do with party affiliation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
7,041 posts, read 13,127,296 times
Reputation: 2324
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
Frank . . . I don't think that opinion poll (besides being totally unscientific) means a thing about whether or not the folks here are conservative or liberal.

My DEM friends are just as concerned about having ANY convention here b/c of impact to businesses, traffic and city budget. One of my friends in Raleigh teased me (she is a very active DEM) and said she was surely glad that it was Charlotte in the running and not Raleigh - that Raleigh was bad enough (traffic, especially) without the nation descending on it.

So being turned off to the idea of having a national convention here has a lot to do with people being concerned about cost and inconvenience and very little to do with party affiliation.
seems like cost and inconvenience are a small price to pay for the economic and recognition boost that it will bring. And, therein lies the liberal/conservative bent. Many times conservatives are focused on the here and now and don't look at the whole picture. Liberals are more prone to dreaming and seeing the big picture. Obviously, that is not applicable to EVERY conservative/liberal, but, it is a general thought. I am thinking about the whole TARP thing; conservatives were hysterical that this was going to be horrible, etc., ends up that we (as the tax payers) are actually making money on the Citi stock that we bought, most of the banks/automotive places have paid back what was borrowed and we didn't even use the whole amount. SO, the "liberals" that crafted that program saw the whole picture and saw that this would end up OK, whereas the conservatives just saw what was going on at the moment.

I guess just one more point for the theory that being Democrat does not necessarily mean being "liberal" no more than being a Republican means being "conservative".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 07:54 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,154,265 times
Reputation: 22373
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagocubs View Post
seems like cost and inconvenience are a small price to pay for the economic and recognition boost that it will bring. And, therein lies the liberal/conservative bent. Many times conservatives are focused on the here and now and don't look at the whole picture. Liberals are more prone to dreaming and seeing the big picture. Obviously, that is not applicable to EVERY conservative/liberal, but, it is a general thought. I am thinking about the whole TARP thing; conservatives were hysterical that this was going to be horrible, etc., ends up that we (as the tax payers) are actually making money on the Citi stock that we bought, most of the banks/automotive places have paid back what was borrowed and we didn't even use the whole amount. SO, the "liberals" that crafted that program saw the whole picture and saw that this would end up OK, whereas the conservatives just saw what was going on at the moment.

I guess just one more point for the theory that being Democrat does not necessarily mean being "liberal" no more than being a Republican means being "conservative".
When I was in Kansas City, I was ecstatic about national conventions coming there, b/c KCMO had the infrastructure to support them.

Sometimes, it is exactly what it appears to be - no hidden meaning, no philosophical bent.

If we can afford to do what it takes to properly host ANY convention of that magnitude here in Charlotte - excellent! If we can't afford it, then it would be foolish.

There is no dark side to the discussion, Cubs, lol. The world doesn't have to always be divided into "us and them." Sometimes, folks can come together b/c they recognize that the bottom line really is the bottom line. Either we can afford it or we can't.

Anyone would thinks it is a good idea to take on millions in debt to host a convention is not a liberal - they would simply be foolhardy. Likewise, anyone who wouldn't support an revenue-generating idea (despite inconveniences) is also foolhardy. It has nothing to do with "conservative vs. liberal."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 10:09 AM
 
3,115 posts, read 6,150,331 times
Reputation: 1797
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
When I was in Kansas City, I was ecstatic about national conventions coming there, b/c KCMO had the infrastructure to support them.

Sometimes, it is exactly what it appears to be - no hidden meaning, no philosophical bent.

If we can afford to do what it takes to properly host ANY convention of that magnitude here in Charlotte - excellent! If we can't afford it, then it would be foolish.

There is no dark side to the discussion, Cubs, lol. The world doesn't have to always be divided into "us and them." Sometimes, folks can come together b/c they recognize that the bottom line really is the bottom line. Either we can afford it or we can't.

Anyone would thinks it is a good idea to take on millions in debt to host a convention is not a liberal - they would simply be foolhardy. Likewise, anyone who wouldn't support an revenue-generating idea (despite inconveniences) is also foolhardy. It has nothing to do with "conservative vs. liberal."

I understand what you're saying, Ani, but I would argue that in order to grow and develop the type of infrastructure you refer to, we need to not only be a candidate, but also host large events. Now on the other hand, I think a lot of people, especially on this forum, don't want Charlotte to grow into that type of city, and that's fine too - but that opinion should be part of their reasoning not to hold ANY convention. I think in this case most are simply blinded by their hatred of all things liberal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 10:14 AM
 
Location: Uptown CLT (4th Ward)
2,560 posts, read 7,718,743 times
Reputation: 423
BOTH!

You have conservative & liberal. OBAMA won Mecklenburg County...so it can't be that conservative!

Mecklenburg (which is Charlotte maybe a little more liberal)...counties surrounding Mecklenburg (not really Charlotte) tend to be more conservative.

Last edited by the 7 oh 4; 07-02-2010 at 10:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
10,401 posts, read 19,417,510 times
Reputation: 11278
Most of this "argument" comes down to the simple fact, mentioned a few times above, that you cannot possibly paint a whole area, certainly not a city as large and diverse as Charlotte, as either "liberal" or "conservative"! Whatever "case" you make, you will be able to find evidence for it. There are Bible-thumping street preachers who will say women are going to Hell for wearing pants, and there are hippie-crunchy liberals who live essentially in communes. Neither personifies Charlotte as a whole, of course.

Quote:
And I would definitely say Charlotte is liberal because the people vote Democrat, and there is really no such thing as a moderate Democrat anymore. Democrats now lean far left and the Republican party has become too progressive.
OMG, that's the funniest thing I've heard yet! The GOP, becoming more progressive?? Yeah, tea partiers (more and more taking over the more "sensible" parts of the party) are real progressive now! LOL.

Quote:
Because most everyone who posted here have been an easy mark for this sort of thing. Everyone has their own idea of what conservative and liberal means and without an exact definition, then there can never be any agreement on a question about it. This is why it comes up constantly in the mass media and by politicians as it leads to endless false arguments that really have nothing to do with the difficult issues at hand.

Sadly it stems from the fact that most people won't take the time to understand the issues and want them distilled down into a binary choice of good vs bad, so they don't have to do any thinking for themselves. Elections have become team sports of the red team vs the blue team and who is right vs who is wrong, instead of how is each going to do the job of government. This is why this country is so screwed up now because those in power, understand this, and use it to keep people focused on this nonsense to detract from their own records.
^This sums it up better than anything. NO one politician is likely to match any constituent's views on EVERY issue, but polarization in politics (on both sides) has made the whole "either youre with us, or you're against us--NO room for middle ground!!" philosophy more prevalent, with people eager to call others "unpatriotic" or "traitors" if they don't follow a certain "party line hook, line, and sinker". and since few people actually do, that leaves the public as a whole more and more disillusioned.

Not to mention that there is fiscal conservatism/liberalism and social conservatism/liberalism. The two actually have little to do with each other. Fiscal conservatism is a hands-off policy while social conservatism actually increases government's role in people's lives, telling them they can't do this or that (have an abortion, smoke pot, etc). Those who TRULY believe in small government would be classified as fiscal conservatives and social progressives. But you can't measure that with a simple "is Charlotte liberal or conservative?" question.

Quote:
I'd say this little incident [Athiest billboard being defaced] places Charlotte on the conservative side of the fence.
I'd say that what ONE person does says very little about an entire city's views. You could also claim that Charlotte is "liberal" for putting up the billboard in the first place, eh?

Quote:
I think anyone who defaces a billboard probably has way too much time on his/her hands . . . I don't think you realized that what you essentially said, Urban, is that only conservatives would vandalize a billboard.
Oh, get over it--what he said was, the fact that someone disagreed enough with an athiest billboard to deface it shows that that person is what most would call "conservative" (although in a classic sense, a true conservative wouldn't care what someone's religion was and would support anyone's freedom to be any, or no, religion. But modern "conservatism" is very, very, right-wing Christian-oriented). He was not saying that the act of defacing ANY billboard is something a conservative would do, just that it was a "quote unquote liberal" billboard, and since someone didn't like it, this poster seems to think that one person speaks for Charlotte as a whole.

If a "Focus on the Family" billboard had been defaced, the same poster likely would have claimed it meant Charlotte was "liberal". It's the ideology, not the act of vandalism.

Quote:
CONSERVATIVES - believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense. Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.

Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.

LIBERALS - believe in governmental action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all, and that it is the duty of the State to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Believe that people are basically good.

Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve people's problems.
These are (roughly) "classic" definition, but the modern parties do not adhere to these definitions. Otherwise, you'd have conservatives rallying FOR a woman's right to choose, since a small-govt supporter would say the government cannot force someone to have a baby she cannot care for or at the expense of her own health. But being anti-abortion is among the most "sacred" tenets of modern conservatism--when it's not "small government" at all.

To answer the main question:

NC as a whole, while majority Democratic, is "Southern Democratic" which can be more "conservative" than Northeastern Republicanism. Also, it is true that African-Americans vote predominately Democratic but are also generally quite conservative on issues relating to religion (abortion, gay rights) so just because an area is "blue" on the map doesn't mean it is "liberal" in the sense most use in conversation. At the same time, Charlotte and most NC urban areas have many "country club Republicans" who are fiscally conervative but don't really care about hot-button issues such as abortion or gay rights, or indeed might even be quite liberal on those issues. But they vote GOP because they want lower taxes more than they want the right to smoke pot or whatever.

In any state, especially the South, rural areas are quite conservative while urban areas are more Left-of-center. Charlotte has its urbanity AND its substantial transplant (often Northeastern) population both pulling it towards the "Blue" side of the spectrum, but at the same time, upper-middle class suburban folks tend to be ("country club") Republicans. Thus Sue Myrick, a fairly conservative Republican, has represented Charlotte in Congress for many terms.

You cannot claim CLT to be either "conservative" or "liberal" in one fell swoop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2010, 11:37 AM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,690,104 times
Reputation: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois View Post
Most of this "argument" comes down to the simple fact, mentioned a few times above, that you cannot possibly paint a whole area, certainly not a city as large and diverse as Charlotte, as either "liberal" or "conservative"! Whatever "case" you make, you will be able to find evidence for it. There are Bible-thumping street preachers who will say women are going to Hell for wearing pants, and there are hippie-crunchy liberals who live essentially in communes. Neither personifies Charlotte as a whole, of course.



OMG, that's the funniest thing I've heard yet! The GOP, becoming more progressive?? Yeah, tea partiers (more and more taking over the more "sensible" parts of the party) are real progressive now! LOL.



^This sums it up better than anything. NO one politician is likely to match any constituent's views on EVERY issue, but polarization in politics (on both sides) has made the whole "either youre with us, or you're against us--NO room for middle ground!!" philosophy more prevalent, with people eager to call others "unpatriotic" or "traitors" if they don't follow a certain "party line hook, line, and sinker". and since few people actually do, that leaves the public as a whole more and more disillusioned.

Not to mention that there is fiscal conservatism/liberalism and social conservatism/liberalism. The two actually have little to do with each other. Fiscal conservatism is a hands-off policy while social conservatism actually increases government's role in people's lives, telling them they can't do this or that (have an abortion, smoke pot, etc). Those who TRULY believe in small government would be classified as fiscal conservatives and social progressives. But you can't measure that with a simple "is Charlotte liberal or conservative?" question.



I'd say that what ONE person does says very little about an entire city's views. You could also claim that Charlotte is "liberal" for putting up the billboard in the first place, eh?



Oh, get over it--what he said was, the fact that someone disagreed enough with an athiest billboard to deface it shows that that person is what most would call "conservative" (although in a classic sense, a true conservative wouldn't care what someone's religion was and would support anyone's freedom to be any, or no, religion. But modern "conservatism" is very, very, right-wing Christian-oriented). He was not saying that the act of defacing ANY billboard is something a conservative would do, just that it was a "quote unquote liberal" billboard, and since someone didn't like it, this poster seems to think that one person speaks for Charlotte as a whole.

If a "Focus on the Family" billboard had been defaced, the same poster likely would have claimed it meant Charlotte was "liberal". It's the ideology, not the act of vandalism.



These are (roughly) "classic" definition, but the modern parties do not adhere to these definitions. Otherwise, you'd have conservatives rallying FOR a woman's right to choose, since a small-govt supporter would say the government cannot force someone to have a baby she cannot care for or at the expense of her own health. But being anti-abortion is among the most "sacred" tenets of modern conservatism--when it's not "small government" at all.

To answer the main question:

NC as a whole, while majority Democratic, is "Southern Democratic" which can be more "conservative" than Northeastern Republicanism. Also, it is true that African-Americans vote predominately Democratic but are also generally quite conservative on issues relating to religion (abortion, gay rights) so just because an area is "blue" on the map doesn't mean it is "liberal" in the sense most use in conversation. At the same time, Charlotte and most NC urban areas have many "country club Republicans" who are fiscally conervative but don't really care about hot-button issues such as abortion or gay rights, or indeed might even be quite liberal on those issues. But they vote GOP because they want lower taxes more than they want the right to smoke pot or whatever.

In any state, especially the South, rural areas are quite conservative while urban areas are more Left-of-center. Charlotte has its urbanity AND its substantial transplant (often Northeastern) population both pulling it towards the "Blue" side of the spectrum, but at the same time, upper-middle class suburban folks tend to be ("country club") Republicans. Thus Sue Myrick, a fairly conservative Republican, has represented Charlotte in Congress for many terms.

You cannot claim CLT to be either "conservative" or "liberal" in one fell swoop.
I really like your observations, your points of view are really informative!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top