Big-time bundlers for Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential campaign are still shell-shocked and searching for answers more than a month after Election Day.
“Everybody’s still frankly stunned, and in the back of their minds they think they’re going to wake up tomorrow morning and all of this never happened, including me,” added donor Alan Patricof.
One of the problems the left has, would seem to be that the liberal amygdala has more difficulty than most in differentiating between concepts which are unpleasant and concepts which are incorrect. Both will trigger aversive stimulus, but for different reasons.
I suspect it takes a very well developed (and stress/harshness-tolerant) amygdala to tell the difference between the two. You have to be programmed to feel more aversive stimulus at incorrect information than you feel at unpleasant information. That can only be programmed through experiences involving wrong information producing outcomes that are so harsh that the aversive stimulus programs an aversion for the incorrect that is larger than the aversion for the unpleasant.
Notice how such experiences will program you to tolerate harshness – and how one facet of the modern SJW is a total inability to tolerate such harshness. That SJW intolerance is programmed through a lack of experiences with consequences, produced by an environment where consequences were always avoidable.
Of course you cannot ignore the evolutionary angle. Leftists, in reflexively pursuing a lighter amygdala load, and believing whatever makes them feel good, will exhibit a psychology more likely to simply flee in the face of harshness. And the more they flee in the face of harsh consequences, the more their amygdala will be trained that no later consequence will produce sufficient aversive stimulus to make avoiding incorrect information worthwhile, amygdala-wise.