In the same manner, liberalism might more naturally appeal to those who have different sorts of flaws, let's say as a random unsupported example pedophiles, because there is support for the idea of rehabilitation rather than harsher punishments. That would not actually say anything about liberalism, nor about the many people who adhere to it who are not pedophiles.
In other words, a prediliction of one particular group to gravitate to one particular idea does not in and of itself associate that idea with that group. I mean, Hitler hated drinking and smoking, and I think he was right about that, but that doesn't make me a Nazi and it doesn't mean dislike of drinking and smoking means you support racial purity and martial power. The entire idea is ludicrous.
And if people with lower IQs are more attracted to conservatism, it could be as simple as conservatives being better at promotion and people with lower IQs being more susceptible to advertising. Once again I don't think there's anything that can actually be inferred about the positives or negatives of either conservatism or liberalism. Until someone can prove why a particular statistic or study result occurs, it doesn't have much bearing on real life and in this particular case is much more likely to simply be a political stick to wave about.
If I understood you correctly you are basically saying correlation is not causality. Fine as far as it goes, but if a disproportionate number of conservatives only adopted THAT philosophy because of either low intellect and/or its service of another far uglier one, that speaks very poorly of conservatism. If the vast majority of intelligent unbigoted people reject a position that is not an indictment of its morality, but certainly of its rationality.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.