

Oh, that’s a very cool study. However, here’s an important bit that should help with interpreting it.
Our goal is not to provide a comprehensive account of ideology in the U.S. public, but rather it is to make a convincing case that unidimensional treatments of ideology obscure important (and interesting) complexities in the antecedents of political orientations. We believe this goal to be best served by keeping the analyses tractable. We thus exclude a number of issues from consideration, focusing on the two core domains of social and economic conservatism. In particular, we do not address issues associated with race, immigration, or foreign policy. These are obviously core issues in American politics, and future work needs to expand on the present article to explore additional complexities arising from these issues.
I really hope someone has dumped a gazillion questions into a similar process. Would be really curious to find out how many dimensions you would really need to explain the data.
Anyway, the economic and social dimensions definitely are needed as a foundation of any political model. If you did a more comprehensive study, you would obviously add some more dimensions on this foundation.



Nah. What’s done is done. Hard lessons, but those are the ones I remember.
But let’s imagine I could send a message to an alternate timeline version of past me. I have some ideas.
Don’t hang out with the people on this list. Learn about mental illnesses such as narcissism, bipolar disorder, paranoia, depression, and psychosis. Read a bit about conspiratorial thinking too.
Equipped with this info, you no longer need that list of names. You can notice when it is the time to leave a particular crowd. Now that you didn’t learn things the hard way, you avoided some hardship and trouble.