>(Don't ask me to define the distinction between classical- and neo- liberalism, though, it never had a fully accepted distinction)

Neoliberalism is an economic policy favored by both parties, it's not a socialistic policy. It leans towards unfettered capitalism. This philosophy is why we have things like outsourcing, globalization and NAFTA, things that significantly disadvantage the American worker. I didn't understand it for a while myself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

>"Liberal" isn't a synonym for "Democrat", nor is it a strict antonym of "conservative".

Yes, as I understand it, liberalism is change, conservatism is status quo. Personally I'm liberal on some policies and conservative on others. To me conservative could simply mean, "I haven't heard a good plan yet, I'll wait until I hear one." On the topics I'm conservative on, I could be persuaded to change if a plan was actually presented, rather than a vague concept (like universal healthcare, UBI, student loan debt forgiveness, etc). The only candidate in recent memory who ever discussed and laid out a plan was Bernie, and I thought it was good, well thought one one that I could support. The only issue is it would have to be a gradual implementation as to not upturn the economy. Unfortunately our current implementation of quasi-universal healthcare seems to be benefit the medical and insurance industry far more than the citizenry, though there are good things about it for the citizenry as well.

>"Transexual" hasn't been the preferred term for over a decade. That and the fact that you listed it in opposition to "women's rights" makes me think that you aren't actually coming to these discussions to "understand the other side's opinion in good faith"

I don't keep up on the latest trends of vernacular, they change like the tides. I'm also older, so people tend to stick with the terms they learn. (i.e. Blacks, vs African Americans, vs Colored People (bad) vs People of Color (good?!), and other labels that go back even further). Out of curiosity, what is the current preferred nomenclature for what used to be "transexual?" Also, who decides? Isn't that what the T in LGBTQ stands for? You should let them know they need change their acronym.

FWIW, just because your circle of people want to call potato chips "crisps," doesn't mean you should expect everyone to immediately switch, or even know you've decided to describe something differently. You certainly shouldn't assume they aren't coming in good faith because they don't keep up with your group's trends, that seems fairly egocentric. An example of this would be, "You called Pluto a planet, therefore you aren't arguing in good faith about science." Seems a strange conclusion when put in a different perspective. Instead of discussing the topic, you shut down the conversation because I used a term that was common only 10 years ago. That somewhat proved my original point, though I don't believe that was your intention.

Anyway, I seemed to have gotten side tracked in the long and rambling post. I think my original point was liberals have extremists too, and liberals aren't as open to discussion as they used to be and are quick to find reason to shut down discussion (like not using the current, possibly obscure nomenclature). Extremism isn't a political condition, it's a human condition and should be shunned regardless of political goal.