I ran across this example the other day. I don't where, so apologize for not linking the source.
Problem: A little Honduran girl is found in the US Southwest, dying of thirst. What do you do?
The Left wants to give the girl water, scoop her up, take her to a safe place, give her something to eat, get her clean clothes, etc. The response is powered by emotion. Then, the Left may look further.
The Right tends to focus on reasons: What can we do for her? Why is she in the desert? Who brought her there? How can we stop this from happening again?
The first question overlaps with the Left's response. However, the Right is going to look "uncompassionate" in its overall response, because the Right is looking at the "coyote," the economic and political conditions in the home countries, what the US may be doing to encourage or discourage attempts to cross its borders illegally, etc.
If you see ten troubles coming down the road, you can be sure that nine will run into the ditch before they reach you.This is frequently, and approvingly, quoted by the Right.
The Left's view is that these are 10 crises and they all must be dealt with now.
If the facts are against them, the Left tends to rely on anecdotes rather than fixing their failures. For example, an article in support of Obamacare will quote three people who benefited from Obamacare. It may note at the end that 6 million Americans have had their previous health plans cancelled because of Obamacare's requirements.
Example #1. The stated reason for Obamacare was to take care of the crisis of Americans without healthcare. Obamacare failed if its actual implementation increased the number of Americans without health care.
The Right would discuss the 6 million cancelled plans, while noting that some people have, of course, benefited.
Example #2. A recent report, released by President Obama's own Secretary of Education, states that almost every study done on Head Start, done over its entire history, has shown that Head Start has no effect on its beneficiaries past the second grade. In other words, the program is a failure by its own standards. But articles about Head Start always feature anecdotes about how well individual students are doing.
If you look through the articles on gender issues posted below, you will note another feature of how the Left deals with problems: a crisis is announced and then they cherry-pick statistics in order to over-simplify to their benefit. [Women earn 76% of what men earn.]
Of course, cherry-picking is a problem with both sides. However, it is the Left that generally tries to change things (by declaring the crisis) in the first place. It could chose to argue honestly. It does not.