Pete Abel asks: “Why do benevolent conservatives (and yes, they do exist) tolerate the prominent, malicious voices that have become the spokespeople and hence caricature of the movement?”

His answer: “So back to the question of why hateful voices are tolerated in the conservative movement. In part, they’re tolerated because they speak for a significant, election-making swath of hateful conservative voters.

Then again, that’s only half the answer. The other half is rarely acknowledged or confronted, even in private.”

He published ‘part 2′, in which he gives the other half of the answer at his own blog: ”
The Other Made’s are the inheritors of the Self Made’s fortunes, large, medium, and modest. They grew up listening to the Self Made’s muttering around the dinner table about bums and moochers, and even if they eventually became bums and moochers themselves, they did it off their parents’ money, damn it, not the “guhvment’s.”

And thus collectively, many Self Made and Other Made conservatives tolerate hateful voices because they suspect there might just be a grain of truth in the haters’ words.”

Good reasoning but I think that he forgets to mention one thing, one reason why some, less aggressive, conservatives tolerate cruel conservatives: because being hateful works.

Attacking one’s ideological opponents works. Negative ads work and in the end… less aggressive conservatives want to win.

O, and, this is also applicable on progressives.