In Survey, College Students Identify Progressive Policies as "Middle"

[bballrox4717]

It's not that surprising; my friends in university consider me to be a conservative Democrat

[bballrox4717]

What's the difference between being 62 and being 22? If you are now 62, then you are unlikely to be around in 2060, and how unlivable the world will be then or how nasty the political order or economics will be in 2060 will not  matter. You will almost certainly be dead because you are unlikely to reach age 98. If global warming has taken over, then people may have been waging some horrible wars over a smaller land area that might not be as productive of food because it is more desert-like in much of it and there might be some tropical diseases reaching such places as Paris, Beijing, and Chicago.  If you were born in 1991 you will be middle-aged.  You have good cause to want the world to be livable when you are in your late 50s. If those who truly rule us bungle things or manage the economy for quick gain they might neglectfully so mess up the world that you will endure the Malthusian 'checks' of war, plague, and famine -- all nasty ways to go. Wars, plagues, and famines also bring out the worst in people

If you are 22 you can see the world from a long view  in your own interest. Someone forty years older might do so, but only out of charity.  If you are 62 and all you see is how your investments perform, then you might find quick-buck profiteering as a way to make your last years more economically comfortable.

So what's your solution to the inherent immorality of old people? Take away their right to vote?

My main problem with this survey is that I fit pretty comfortably into their category 'progressive', even though I think everyone on this forum could agree that, by world standards definitely but even also by American standards, I'm a pretty right-wing fellow.

Well, I am very left wing myself and I am in my late 50s. 

Youth too can be very immoral too. Violent crime is largely a pathology of troubled youth and young adults.

College students typically have no loyalty to commercial entities. Once a college grad gets a job as a manager trainee even for an awful employer (as in retailing), that adult quickly learns the company line and can no longer have the intellectual independence of a college student. Working 50-60 hours a week in a corporate setting obviously limits one's connections to people who might have other views. Expressing political values contrary to those of the top management is inconsistent with going up the corporate ladder. If the Company Way is to regurgitate what is said on FoX News Channel, then one had better not cite Rachel Maddow.

College graduates who enter the public sector or non-management positions can have more independence of thought. So it is with public employees, journalists, creative people, waiters, bartenders, clergy, medical professionals, and maybe people in the family business (especially if the owners are liberals). It might not be that professionalism keeps one independent.  If one is a geologist or accountant for an oil company it is wise to parrot the company line on global warming. 

Many people must sell out to the most rapacious and despotic figures in our economy to survive, let alone thrive, in Corporate America.  When they do they can no longer be overt liberals. If the company says that someone like George W. Bush is wonderful, it is best to say likewise even if objective reality indicates something much to the contrary.   

You might not be able to say it publicly, but that still doesn't stop someone from voting for Obama since it is private. There were companies that threatened to cut jobs if Obama won and  nothing happened once he won. It's just fearmongering and I haven't met or heard of anyone voting to save their jobs.