Conservatives report better mental health than liberals. I think I know why.
Every time I open social media or turn on the news, I consistently see one thing: Liberals are outraged.
Whether it's fear and loathing over the Supreme Court's decision on transgender care or rioting and protesting because President Donald Trump is enforcing our nation's immigration laws, liberals are angry.
It seems like many of them enjoy being angry, too.
You know who isn't angry? Conservatives like me. And we have the data to show why.
On June 18, statistician and political analyst Nate Silver presented a detailed analysis of the 2022 Cooperative Election Study, which surveyed 60,000 Americans. Silver concluded that the survey shows that conservatives outnumber liberals 51% to 20% among people who report excellent mental health. And liberals outnumber conservatives 45% to 19% among voters who say they have poor mental health.
Silver found that the liberal-conservative mental health gap is fairly consistent across multiple demographics, including gender, race, age, education and income.
Why are conservative women happier? What conservative women know − and liberals don't − about happiness | Opinion
Here are some key findings from Silver's analysis:
Conservative women report considerably higher levels of happiness than liberal men.
Black liberals are significantly happier than white liberals.
Bisexual liberals report the lowest happiness level of any demographic.
Gay and lesbian conservatives report being happier more often than heterosexual liberals.
Low-income conservatives, with annual household incomes of $30,000 or less, are happier than liberals at the same income level. Those low-income conservatives even report the same mental health levels as liberals making six figures.
Conservatives with post-graduate education report the highest happiness of any demographic.
The research raises an important question about correlation and causation: Am I happier because I'm a conservative, or am I a conservative because I'm happier?
Social psychologist Jaime Napier has looked into that question. Her answer: "One of the biggest correlates with happiness in our surveys was the belief of a meritocracy, which is the belief that anybody who works hard can make it. That was the biggest predictor of happiness. That was also one of the biggest predictors of political ideology. So, the conservatives were much higher on these meritocratic beliefs than liberals were."
'White Lotus' is wrong: Women need deeper things than friendship to be happy | Opinion
That makes sense to me. Conservatism emphasizes personal responsibility, liberty, limited government and human dignity. Meritocracy, the idea that if you work hard you can achieve success no matter your background, is embedded in those values.
I'm not sure liberals these days can agree on their core beliefs, but their mindset that government, universities and other institutions must balance the scales through affirmative action, diversity and other top-down actions is the opposite of meritocracy.
Sign up for our Opinion newsletter on conservative values, family and religion from columnist Nicole Russell. Get it delivered to your inbox.
The common theme behind progressives' rants on social media and the protests against Trump is that life is unfair and that it's the government's job to make them happy. But government can't really deliver on that expectation, no matter how many handouts progressive politicians promise.
So guess what happens when progressives don't get what they think they are owed by our government? They get angry. And they feel sad, betrayed and unhappy.
Conservatives like me, in contrast, don't expect government to satisfy all of our needs and desires. We're busy working hard, raising our families, going to church and doing all the other things that make us − you know ‒ happy.
Nicole Russell is an opinion columnist with USA TODAY. She lives in Texas with her four kids. Sign up for her newsletter, The Right Track, and get it delivered to your inbox.
You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: I always knew the left was more angry. Data proves it | Opinion
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
5 Top Ways Your Paycheck Will Change If the Supreme Court Allows Mass Layoffs
In recent news, it was announced that the Trump Administration's mass layoff plan — also called a 'reduction in force' plan — has once again moved to the Supreme Court for final approval. If it passes, 22 government departments could be affected as thousands of federal employees would be let go from their jobs. Read Next: Find Out: If the Supreme Court allows this mass layoff, it could have a ripple effect across both federal and non-federal employees. Here's how experts think it might impact workers in the U.S. — and potentially your paycheck. Recent changes have already impacted employees across the board. For federal workers, there's a significant increase of those being forced to leave the workforce without severance pay. 'While, initially, many of the federal workers cut from the workforce accepted a voluntary incentive to leave the ranks earlier than they might otherwise have left, there are thousands more who were simply severed without compensation,' said Eric Steffy, Founder and CEO at Federal Solutions Support. Steffy added that many of those who were severed without pay were employees who were still on probation and contract workers. That said, many of those severed are still eligible for state unemployment benefits as they seek new opportunities in the private sector. Mass layoffs in the federal government could have implications regarding job stability and workplace confidence. 'Even for non-federal workers, substantial cuts in the federal workforce can create impacts on job stability, local economic systems, and public confidence,' said Eric Kingsley, Partner at Kingsley Szamet Employment Lawyers. 'It is possible that we can witness shrinking consumer spending, increased competition for available jobs, and a general sense of insecurity pervading the job market.' Increased competition could also lead to more skilled workers vying for jobs with a lower starting salary. This is especially plausible as more federal workers seek private sector opportunities. The average federal worker earns $106,382 annually. However, federal workers often get paid less than their private sector counterparts. As per The Federal News Network, there's a 24.72% wage gap between federal and private sector workers who have jobs where they perform similar duties. Given this, federal employees who get laid off and need to make the switch could see a pay increase. Just because many people would be laid off doesn't mean everybody would be. After all, someone still needs to perform the tasks at hand. But even here, there could be the downside of heavier workloads and more responsibilities for those who remain. Some experts believe this could also lead to longer hours, potentially without overtime pay — that's more work. 'Salaried employees, who are not eligible for overtime pay, may be expected to work longer hours without additional compensation,' said George Carrillo, former Director of Social Determinants of Health for Oregon and current Co-founder & Chief Executive Officer at Hispanic Construction Council. 'Hourly workers typically won't see a pay increase either, since government compensation is fixed within existing budget agreements and union contracts.' Another potential impact is that on small businesses — both the owners and the employees. As Steffy pointed out, many small businesses work in part based on federal grants and contracts. This has led to some businesses shutting down permanently, while others have laid off some of their employees as a result of canceled contracts. 'This has been painful not only for those business owners who must now weigh whether their work can go forward, but for severed employees now without a paycheck and those downstream who benefited from their services,' Steffy said. Mass layoffs on any level are stressful, but they're not the end of the world. 'One thing is certain, the marketplace will continue to evolve. Federal and non-federal jobs will come and go but the skillset, mindset, and lifetime experience that you bring to the table are needed in multiple venues,' said Steffy. If you're stressing about your livelihood, take a moment to calm down. It might help to talk to someone you trust and to make a plan — just in case. More From GOBankingRates 10 Unreliable SUVs To Stay Away From Buying This article originally appeared on 5 Top Ways Your Paycheck Will Change If the Supreme Court Allows Mass Layoffs
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Stock Market Today: Dow Jones Rallies On Trump Ceasefire Declaration, Powell Speech Due Next (Live Coverage)
The Dow Jones index rallied Tuesday after President Trump declared a ceasefire in the Israel-Iran conflict. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell is due to speak shortly.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: Trump allegedly claimed in 2011 tweet that Obama would start war with Iran to get elected. We checked his timeline
Claim: President Donald Trump tweeted on Nov. 29, 2011: 'In order to get elected, @BarackObama will start a war with Iran.' Rating: In mid-June 2025, a claim about a tweet from U.S. President Donald Trump's account gained widespread circulation on social media. The tweet, allegedly posted in 2011, stated: "In order to get elected, @BarackObama will start a war with Iran." Multiple users across various platforms shared screenshots of this tweet, with some questioning its authenticity. One example occurred on June 16, 2025, when an X account posted (archived) a screenshot of the tweet with the caption "OLD TRUMP TWEET RESURFACES..." This post received over 221,000 views and over 3,700 likes in four days. (DramaAlert/X) The claim also appeared on Facebook (archived) and Hindustan Times (archived), an Indian English-language daily newspaper based in Delhi. The circulation coincided with ongoing tensions (archived) between Israel and Iran, with Trump facing decisions (archived) about potential U.S. military involvement in the Middle East as president. Our examination confirmed that Trump posted this tweet on Nov. 29, 2011, at 12:48 p.m. EDT. The tweet remains (archived) on Trump's account and can be verified through direct examination of his Twitter history. In order to get elected, @BarackObama will start a war with Iran. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 29, 2011 This November 2011 tweet was the first in a series of predictions Trump made about former President Barack Obama and Iran between 2011 and 2013. As we documented when we first examined this topic in 2019, Trump posted at least seven tweets predicting that Obama would launch military strikes against Iran for various political motivations, including to "get elected," "boost his poll numbers," "save face," and "show how tough he is." According to our reporting in 2019, these predicted military incursions did not occur. Obama completed both presidential terms without ordering military attacks on Iran. Obama pursued diplomatic negotiations that resulted in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, an international agreement limiting Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. On June 21, 2025, Trump announced he had ordered U.S. bomber attacks on nuclear sites on nuclear sites in Iran: — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2025 Mikkelson, David. "Did Trump Tweet Multiple Predictions That Obama Would Attack Iran?" Snopes, July 2, 2019, Accessed June 20, 2025. Gambrell, Jon, Melanie Lidman, and Julia Frankel. "Israel strikes Iran's nuclear sites and kills top generals. Iran retaliates with missile barrages," AP News, June 18, 2025, Accessed June 20, 2025. Patta, Debora, and Tucker Reals. "Trump says no decision yet on U.S. joining Israel's attacks on Iran, after Iran warns it would risk 'all-out war,'" CBS News, June 18, 2025, Accessed June 20, 2025. Obama, Barack. "Statement by the President on Iran." Obama White House Archives, July 14, 2015, Accessed June 20, 2025.