A new study (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6227/1243) suggests that left-wingers are more content than their conservative counterparts. Instead of relying on self-reporting — like previous studies that showed right-wingers to be happier — psychologists used objective mood indicators such as word choices and genuineness of smiles. They concluded that conservatives tend to be less truthful about their happiness level, while liberals experience more actual joy. How could anyone reading this forum conclude that conservatives are less happy?

Some people like to spend other people's money (particularly when they sop off the system), some don't.

Liberals will never be happy until the income tax rate is 100% and we are all slaves to the nanny-state government.

Happy Days Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberals will never be happy until the income tax
> rate is 100% and we are all slaves to the
> nanny-state government.

You are confirming the part in the original poost about conservatives being "less truthful." You would no doubt call me a liberal because I think government should stay out of people's lives, but I favor a flat tax at a low rate.

simple explanation here Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Some people like to spend other people's money
> (particularly when they sop off the system), some
> don't.

Which states are the biggest net recipients of federal dollars? Red states.

The mentally retarded must be happier too. They always have that shit eatin grin.

I'm only happy when I'm dictating what people may eat, how much they may drink, what they're allowed to say and think, where they're allowed to live, and how they're allowed to spend their free time. I am liberal, hear me roar!

Libs are happiest when they're protesting something - anything - and spitting on conservatives, burning the flag, and eliminating individual rights.

I am libertarian.

Basically, I would like to be left alone and I would like to leave other people alone. I think government should stick to traditionally governmental things, like building roads, running schools, policing the streets, and defending our borders. I do not want government establishing religions, either right wing (Christian Conservatives) or left wing (Environmentalism, Progressivism). I think abortions are morally wrong, but I don't want to impose my judgement on you. I think the entire libertarian push on marijuana laws is misguided (we don't need more stoned people in this country), but people will figure that out (or they won't). I think we have too many laws, we are taxed too much, and government is way too big and intrudes into our lives way too much.

I am happy because I don't spend a lot of time judging other people or worrying about their actions. I get unhappy when I am compelled to do things or am taxed for things in government that seem like government should stay out of.

"They concluded that conservatives tend to be less truthful about their happiness level"

Makes sense. Considering they're so focused on bashing libs (and governement) I guess its' hard to be happy with ones self. You need to look no further than the immature anti-lib posts above.

As long as we put Jews, gays, blacks, Christians, Muslims, women and retarded people in camps and we get dope uniforms, then I'm content

my creed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am libertarian.
>
> Basically, I would like to be left alone and I
> would like to leave other people alone. I think
> government should stick to traditionally
> governmental things, like building roads, running
> schools, policing the streets, and defending our
> borders. I do not want government establishing
> religions, either right wing (Christian
> Conservatives) or left wing (Environmentalism,
> Progressivism). I think abortions are morally
> wrong, but I don't want to impose my judgement on
> you. I think the entire libertarian push on
> marijuana laws is misguided (we don't need more
> stoned people in this country), but people will
> figure that out (or they won't). I think we have
> too many laws, we are taxed too much, and
> government is way too big and intrudes into our
> lives way too much.
>
> I am happy because I don't spend a lot of time
> judging other people or worrying about their
> actions. I get unhappy when I am compelled to do
> things or am taxed for things in government that
> seem like government should stay out of.

Thank you for adding intelligent thinking to this thread, beyond the typical mudslinging. To take you to task on one thing you said:

"I do not want government establishing religions, either right wing (Christian Conservatives) or left wing (Environmentalism, Progressivism)."

The thing is your mixing religion with political philosophies (consvervative vs. liberal) and movements (environmentalism). Govt. doesn't really establish any of these things, but the *people* in govt. may pass bills/laws/etc... supporting (or refuting) these things.

Knowledge is happiness. It allows you to appreciate the wonder of the world while opening doors to its improvement. As Conservatives are all but universally lacking in knowledge, it is no surprise at all that they would be more fearful and superstitious, and of course, less happy.

Umm, just read the stuff that average conservatives write in the media and on the interenet. They sound like a bunch of fearful, ignorant, racist malcontents obsessed with war, bigotry, and being openly hostile to anything that doesnt support the teabagger republican message.

kev Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The thing is your mixing religion with political
> philosophies (consvervative vs. liberal) and
> movements (environmentalism). Govt. doesn't really
> establish any of these things, but the *people* in
> govt. may pass bills/laws/etc... supporting (or
> refuting) these things.

If you don't think environmentalism is a religion, you are wrong. Think of it this way:

Prophet - Al Gore
Sacred Texts - Earth in the Balance, Inconvenient Truth
Dogma - Climate Change, Sea Level Rise
Holy Days - Earth Day
Sainthood - IPCC Nobel Prize
Indulgences - Carbon Credits

You can no more have a logical, fact based discussion with a climate change adherent than you can discuss immaculate conception with a priest. Religions have immutable beliefs - so does climate change. Without climate change, what would these scientists be doing with their lives, which is the same question you can ask of a preacher without religion. They are so invested in the "truth" of climate change that it is no longer a science.

my creed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kev Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > The thing is your mixing religion with
> political
> > philosophies (consvervative vs. liberal) and
> > movements (environmentalism). Govt. doesn't
> really
> > establish any of these things, but the *people*
> in
> > govt. may pass bills/laws/etc... supporting (or
> > refuting) these things.
>
> If you don't think environmentalism is a religion,
> you are wrong. Think of it this way:
>
> Prophet - Al Gore
> Sacred Texts - Earth in the Balance, Inconvenient
> Truth
> Dogma - Climate Change, Sea Level Rise
> Holy Days - Earth Day
> Sainthood - IPCC Nobel Prize
> Indulgences - Carbon Credits
>
> You can no more have a logical, fact based
> discussion with a climate change adherent than you
> can discuss immaculate conception with a priest.
> Religions have immutable beliefs - so does climate
> change. Without climate change, what would these
> scientists be doing with their lives, which is the
> same question you can ask of a preacher without
> religion. They are so invested in the "truth" of
> climate change that it is no longer a science.

It's an ideology, not a religion. Religion involves supernatural deities, magic, life-after-death, spirits, ghosts, etc. That's a huge difference between batshit insane christianity and tree hugging animal rights idiots.

my creed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kev Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > The thing is your mixing religion with
> political
> > philosophies (consvervative vs. liberal) and
> > movements (environmentalism). Govt. doesn't
> really
> > establish any of these things, but the *people*
> in
> > govt. may pass bills/laws/etc... supporting (or
> > refuting) these things.
>
> If you don't think environmentalism is a religion,
> you are wrong. Think of it this way:
>
> Prophet - Al Gore
> Sacred Texts - Earth in the Balance, Inconvenient
> Truth
> Dogma - Climate Change, Sea Level Rise
> Holy Days - Earth Day
> Sainthood - IPCC Nobel Prize
> Indulgences - Carbon Credits
>
> You can no more have a logical, fact based
> discussion with a climate change adherent than you
> can discuss immaculate conception with a priest.
> Religions have immutable beliefs - so does climate
> change. Without climate change, what would these
> scientists be doing with their lives, which is the
> same question you can ask of a preacher without
> religion. They are so invested in the "truth" of
> climate change that it is no longer a science.

You could not be more incorrect. The vast majority of scientists go where the data take them. You are a victim of confirmation bias.

> You can no more have a logical, fact based
> discussion with a climate change adherent than you
> can discuss immaculate conception with a priest.
> Religions have immutable beliefs - so does climate
> change. Without climate change, what would these
> scientists be doing with their lives, which is the
> same question you can ask of a preacher without
> religion. They are so invested in the "truth" of
> climate change that it is no longer a science.


False equivalence. Sorry but climate change CAN be discussed with facts and data. If one so chooses. Since there is no proof or data about the immaculate conception then any discussion around that is purely based on belief and faith. No facts.

Many scientists undergo peer reviews, to make sure their thinking is in check. Any scientist who makes bold claims without documentation, testing, and some form of proof is viewed as a crackpot and not reputable. I think you have a basic, misguided understanding of how the scientific community works.

my creed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can no more have a logical, fact based
> discussion with a climate change adherent than you
> can discuss immaculate conception with a priest.
> Religions have immutable beliefs - so does climate
> change. Without climate change, what would these
> scientists be doing with their lives, which is the
> same question you can ask of a preacher without
> religion. They are so invested in the "truth" of
> climate change that it is no longer a science.

Sorry, assfuck. The overwhelming consensus among the world's millions of actually intelligent and scientifically literate people is that you are a worthless dumbass antediluvian derp.

kev Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Many scientists undergo peer reviews, to make sure
> their thinking is in check. Any scientist who
> makes bold claims without documentation, testing,
> and some form of proof is viewed as a crackpot and
> not reputable. I think you have a basic, misguided
> understanding of how the scientific community
> works.


You mean bold claims like the Arctic being ice free by 1970, 2000, 2012, 2013,... ?

Or polar bears disappearing (when it turns out that the population estimates from the premier group were based on "best guesses" and more granular reviews show them to be increasing)?

Or maybe that Antarctic ice is retreating due to "global warming" when it then increases and, based on evidence from a later submersible surveys, the forcing is believed to be due to the effects of a previously unknown undersea ridge on ocean currents?

Science routinely gets things wrong. Eventually the science itself generally does get things right but what's presented and/or misrepresented as "the science" along the way can be way off from the facts. Especially when ideology is involved. There's little to no difference in the faith of a typical believer of Al Gore's than there is in one of ISIS' followers. Both believe what they're told and want to believe and reject that which doesn't fit otherwise.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. No one says science is always right, especially considering things that are supposed to happen in the future.

But this; "no difference in the faith of a typical believer of Al Gore's than there is in one of ISIS' followers"

Is a little too much. Someone who blindly believes Al Gore, without doing their own thinking, is still on a better moral level than someone who blindly follows ISIS and their violent ways. However not all people who believe Al Gore does so blindly and without verifying the facts.

Church of Ideology Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kev Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Many scientists undergo peer reviews, to make
> sure
> > their thinking is in check. Any scientist who
> > makes bold claims without documentation,
> testing,
> > and some form of proof is viewed as a crackpot
> and
> > not reputable. I think you have a basic,
> misguided
> > understanding of how the scientific community
> > works.
>
>
> You mean bold claims like the Arctic being ice
> free by 1970, 2000, 2012, 2013,... ?
>
> Or polar bears disappearing (when it turns out
> that the population estimates from the premier
> group were based on "best guesses" and more
> granular reviews show them to be increasing)?
>
> Or maybe that Antarctic ice is retreating due to
> "global warming" when it then increases and, based
> on evidence from a later submersible surveys, the
> forcing is believed to be due to the effects of a
> previously unknown undersea ridge on ocean
> currents?
>
> Science routinely gets things wrong. Eventually
> the science itself generally does get things right
> but what's presented and/or misrepresented as "the
> science" along the way can be way off from the
> facts. Especially when ideology is involved.
> There's little to no difference in the faith of a
> typical believer of Al Gore's than there is in one
> of ISIS' followers. Both believe what they're
> told and want to believe and reject that which
> doesn't fit otherwise.

Conflating Al Gore with science shows just how dishonest you are. Tell me how wrong Bill Nye is, for example.

Depends...is it the liberal with his cock in the conservative bitch's unwilling ass? If so, then the liberal is certainly the happier of the two.

Generally overbroad statement, but here goes.

Conservatives make fun of Liberals, and of themselves.

Liberals make fun of Conservatives, but take themselves and Liberal talking points too seriously.

Conservatives are too busy working, raising families, and volunteering, so you see very few Conservative protests.

Liberals have lots of free time, so they go out and demonstrate for the news cameras.

Nice shot, They hate anything True.

Perspectives Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Generally overbroad statement, but here goes.
>
> Conservatives make fun of Liberals, and of
> themselves.
>
> Liberals make fun of Conservatives, but take
> themselves and Liberal talking points too
> seriously.
>
> Conservatives are too busy working, raising
> families, and volunteering, so you see very few
> Conservative protests.
>
> Liberals have lots of free time, so they go out
> and demonstrate for the news cameras.

Tha's why there are never protests at abortion clinics. Oh wait. You see, it is really easy to make your case when you are not concerned about the truth.

Protesting abortion crosses party lines. I attend the pro-life marches and vote Democratic. And no, that does not make me a traitor.

The facts of climate change are irrefutable. That's why dumbfuck deniers -- the slaves of corporate profiteering interests -- must resort to the naively contrived and assholish arguments that they do. They'll be bringing back Lord Monckton next.

Here's the thing. Liberals always go around with a grin on their faces,especially when it's directed towards a minority, LBGT person or crazy homeless dude. It's because they are phony. They need people to like them. They will frown and ridicule cops, military personnel and other stand up people in the community.

Look, who are the most liberal people in the country? It's the Hollywood stars and starlets of course. Those phonies on the left coast in the land of fruits and nuts. They are paid large sums of money to impersonate all other types of personalities, and they are good at it. It's reality they don't get.

The second most liberal are all those democrats from the inner cities on both coasts. Their cities are in terrible decline due to failed liberal social programs, etc. They are out shooting and cutting each other every night while using their Obama phones to set up drug deals....what's not to like?

Now on the other hand, the conservatives living and working hard in fly over country and others spread out through out this great land are busy working and supporting their families. They give smiles and friendly exchanges to the deserving, no matter what their wealth or station in life...

Libturds are only happy when the welfare check arrives.

Bank tellers call it mothers day when the beasties show up for their cash.

Conservatives are happy because they have talents and hobbies that bring them enjoyment. Libs are only happy if they are living up to the make believe standards that they see on TV.

The last four posts exemplify just how unhappy conservatives are.

try try again Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The last four posts exemplify just how unhappy
> conservatives are.


^ Whines the unhappy libtard.

Don't make me have to don my cape and school you fools again. Im too busy enjoying a happy life rooted in conservatism, but some of these idiotic liberal posts tempt me. Seems my friends have the situation well in hand though. Carry on.

happy happy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> try try again Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The last four posts exemplify just how unhappy
> > conservatives are.
>
>
> ^ Whines the unhappy libtard.

Msake that five in a row. You offer no substance, just a comment that actually applies to you.

LibtardEducator Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't make me have to don my cape and school you
> fools again. Im too busy enjoying a happy life
> rooted in conservatism, but some of these idiotic
> liberal posts tempt me. Seems my friends have the
> situation well in hand though. Carry on.

You may as well stick your fingers in your ears and shout "I'm not listening." Get out of the echo chamber once in a while and actually engage others.

Libtards are happy just like North Koreans are *HAPPY* to serve dear leader.

Most scientific research concludes that political conservatives are happier than political liberals. We show that this finding is fully supported (study 1; N = 1433) and then describe three studies drawing from “big data” sources to assess liberal-conservative differences in happiness-related behavior (studies 2 to 4; N = 4936). Relative to conservatives, liberals more frequently used positive emotional language in their speech and smiled more intensely in photographs. However, this observation is mediated by research indicating that liberal language and expressions were often coached and therefore almost identical from one person to another, while conservative language tended to express unique individual thoughts and conclusions, with more genuine and impulsive facial expressions. Our results were consistent across large samples of online survey takers, U.S. politicians, Twitter users, and LinkedIn users. Our findings illustrate the nuanced relationship between political ideology, self-enhancement, and happiness and illuminate the contradictory ways that happiness differences can manifest across behavior.

Any real conservative is unhappy with the current GOP. Nut job Teabaggers have made the party a disorganized mess with infighting not seen in my lifetime. It was bad enough when GOP used Lee Atwater-style pugilism against the Democrats but now they use it on themselves and against the country. I honestly cannot remember the last piece of legislation that was an original presentation passed or even presented by the GOP (other than anti Democrat/Obama).

Dems are probably happy and unhappy. They have the White House but government doesnt work with one party trying its best to tear the system down (GOP) so that sucks.

Conservatives see ironic humor in the news; Democrats/Liberals see only hate:

The White House this week celebrated Nowruz, the Persian New Year most often observed by Iranians.

The festivities come amid tense negotiations between the White House and Tehran. President Obama hopes Iran will slow or stop its nuclear weapons program in exchange for removing economic sanctions.

First Lady Michelle Obama praised the holiday in remarks at the executive mansion Wednesday. The event featured a Persian dinner and a dance troop’s performance.

“I think it’s so fitting we’re holding this celebration here today,” Michelle Obama said. “One of the things I love about the White House is how it truly is the people’s house. It is a house that reflects the diversity of culture and traditions that make us who we are as a country. Nowruz is one of those traditions.”

Meanwhile, Obama keeps the White House closed to the American people. No tours for you.

Not a Democrat Goober Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Conservatives see ironic humor in the news;
> Democrats/Liberals see only hate:
>
> The White House this week celebrated Nowruz, the
> Persian New Year most often observed by Iranians.
>
> The festivities come amid tense negotiations
> between the White House and Tehran. President
> Obama hopes Iran will slow or stop its nuclear
> weapons program in exchange for removing economic
> sanctions.
>
> First Lady Michelle Obama praised the holiday in
> remarks at the executive mansion Wednesday. The
> event featured a Persian dinner and a dance
> troop’s performance.
>
> “I think it’s so fitting we’re holding this
> celebration here today,” Michelle Obama said.
> “One of the things I love about the White House
> is how it truly is the people’s house. It is a
> house that reflects the diversity of culture and
> traditions that make us who we are as a country.
> Nowruz is one of those traditions.”
>
> Meanwhile, Obama keeps the White House closed to
> the American people. No tours for you.

Please tell me what "ironic humor" you see in that. It appears that you "see only hate." Do you people ever read what you write?

How can liberals be happy? They have NO sense of humor.

They'll bore you to death.

Liberal Goober Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Please tell me what "ironic humor" you see in
> that. It appears that you "see only hate." Do
> you people ever read what you write?

Closing the White House Tours to Americans while celebrating the Iranian march to the bomb and world domination is funny in a sick sort of way.

As long as you don't consider how much money and lives the Americans will expend later because of the Obama idiots.

Michelle Obama and three ayatollahs walk into the White House together. The first ayatollah says...

Or maybe you are correct. Just hate, not funny.

Liberal Goober Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Liberal Goober Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > Please tell me what "ironic humor" you see in
> > that. It appears that you "see only hate." Do
> > you people ever read what you write?
>
> Closing the White House Tours to Americans while
> celebrating the Iranian march to the bomb and
> world domination is funny in a sick sort of way.
>
>
> As long as you don't consider how much money and
> lives the Americans will expend later because of
> the Obama idiots.
>
> Michelle Obama and three ayatollahs walk into the
> White House together. The first ayatollah
> says...
>
> Or maybe you are correct. Just hate, not funny.

just bitter.