Not sure about examples in particular, you just seem to try to broaden the terms of the argument in general to allow yourself to bring in other examples to prove a point valid in the broader argument, but not in the narrower one.

What i want is dialogue. I look at the ignorant things Americans say about politics and realize that this stupidity trickles up, that the establishment on the right is producing low-watt bulbs because that's more or less what the base is demanding. "Hope" and "Change" were certainly platitudes, but they are, at least, flexible platitudes, whereas the right's assertion that knowledge != truth is essentially a dialogue-killer. When the answer to all questions is "the bible" or "government is bad," and the answer to all foreign policy questions is "bring our troops home but carpet-bomb them" (which is what the grass-roots right-wing consensus on Afghanistan seems to be at the moment), then we can't really have a discussion on anything, and this will prompt the other side to entrench if they know one side isn't going to do any work. Polarization then reinforces itself in a downward spiral.

It could just be me having one of my naive youthful freakouts about the fact that there are stupid people in the world and trying to blame it on something more substantive than human nature.

It probably is. Most people are not anti-intellectual but simply unintellectual, and this is true regardless of political leanings. That you see the right as being this way moreso than the left is likely a result of your own political allegiance since it is a common thing to see the worst elements of a group as typifying said group, particularly when you are already inclined to dislike them.

I still wouldn't give up the idea that it's a bigger problem on the right than it is on the left. I have seen nobody on the left that is complaining about the tendencies of left-wing voters (or if they are, they're complaining about conservative tendencies of left-wing voters, like the accusations that the diehard Hillary supporters or the PUMA folks of 2008 were some degree of racist), whereas you see conservative intellectuals (again, George Will, or even that article you cited) complaining about the tendencies within the party, unless that is merely a reflection of the fact that the GOP is currently a party in flux, moving towards some transformation.

I wouldn't call Shikha Dalmia a conservative. At all. And as I mentioned before, Glenn Greenwald has been all over the left as of late over their silence about Obama's decision that he can order the death of an American citizen without due process when they'd previously hyperventilated over Bush's wiretapping and waterboarding. Greenwald and other intellectually honest lefties have been pretty distressed about the sudden evaporation of the anti-war movement circa November 2008. You may not see that as the same thing exactly, but I think the left's "YAY BLUE TEAM!" mentality is about as unintellectual as you can get.

Republicans usually come from more affluent family backgrounds than Democrats. Education in the US costs a lot of money and people raised in a wealthy affluent family can afford to send their kids to college. Democrats have to rely upon college scholarships or work hard at High school to get into college. Thank god for the access to student loans but they must be paid back at a later date. Without an adequate education, employment prospects are limited.

The jury is still out on whether or not the Bush tax cuts created jobs or simply increased the Budget deficit and added to the national debt. Both sides of politics: Republicans and Democrats engage in class struggle arguments to justify their political positions: basic assumptions or political rhetoric aimed at the common voting American.

Minority groups generally support Democrats. 52% White conservative Americans support Republicans. 53% of  white males support Republicans. 48% white females support Republicans.

Republicans oppose gay marriage, support the death penalty, support increase in military spending and oppose increased public spending on education and social services. Increased military spending comes at a cost to adequately funding education and social services. Democrats support gay marriage, oppose the death penalty, oppose increase in military spending and support increased public spending on education and social services.

While we're on the subject of anti-intellectualism... please note how a prominent left-wing celebrity in America typically responds when he/she is confronted about a sweeping statement they made against the right in this country...

letting people keep their own money in no-way increased the debt. the only possible way to add to the deficit is to spend.

spending is what adds to the debt, not letting people keep their own money.

sorry i just hate when people say that, as if the government is entitled to our money, or that its already theirs.

Unfunded tax cuts? They definitely increase the deficit. Just like any entity, the Federal Government has a series of constant expenses, spending that is ongoing, and the best way to get further into debt is to have ongoing expenses and yet your revenue stream dries up, which is what happens to troubled businesses all the time, except this time the Federal Government did so willingly.

A real debate would be the efficacy of supply-side economics, or rather, is it better for money to trickle down than to trickle up? Welfare money is just as good as that extra $20,000 you get to keep because of a lower capital gains tax, but who spends it more effectively?

That may well be the debate you want to have, but I find it morally repugnant to take someone's $20,000 and transfer it to someone else because Top Men have decided that it's better for the economy. For all the flak free marketeers take about supposedly worshipping the market, at least we don't believe that theft is justified if it's economically beneficial.

I think therein lies the real problem, not whether or not people (or just conservatives) are too stupid nowadays. There seems to be a genuinely irreconcilable difference in philosophy, and thanks to centralization of power, we can't have the states acting as laboratories of democracy to find out what works best and, more importantly, to let people live as they please. The leftist Borg won't allow it.

A tax that makes the American Right pay more is simply defined by them as theft.
Unless a tax redistributes the proceeds into their pockets, the rich American Right will keep on crying their crocodile tears.
Huge corporate welfare and bailouts went straight towards helping the American Right keep their huge fortunes.