Not inherently and you've yet to provide a context that would make it counterculture. But yes, calling yourself counterculture reeks of victimization because of how immensely involved people of that ideology are with mainstream culture.

Being conservative is about as counter culture as being a football fan.

Anti-abortion, anti-welfare state, anti-Obamacare, BUILD A WALL, Nationalism, lowering taxes etc. there's more, but the point is that there's a difference of opinion between certain elements of the right and certain elements of the left. One is considered to be the norm (the left) and one is relatively against what we see reported in the media (the right).

We have to speak in generalities of course.

So my point made sense. People arguing that Soros is evil shouldn't automatically be ignored because there's some evil guy on "their side". Can we not fight back against both at the same time?

You had no credibility from the start amigo..but nice try. All I said is he was ugly and he funds protests, both of which are facts. He also gave hundreds of millions to the Democratic Party and lost a shitload more when Hillary didn't win. How 'bout dem apples?

It's so weird to me that something can be counter culture while around 50% of the population currently is subscribed to that ideology. Kinda paradoxical.

No, no, neither is considered out of the norm. One is just slightly more popular.

It's like arguing that Justin Bieber is counter culture because he's not as popular as Taylor Swift.

Not exactly. People's privately held beliefs don't always find themselves into wider culture. Hence why so many people assumed Hillary had it in the bag.

Well y'all are pretty mainstream for a counterculture is all I'm saying and I think that's pretty obvious.

People thought she had it in the bag because she was going against Trump, not because she was going against a conservative.