The question for the post is flawed in many ways.
First, the terms liberal/conservative have a lot of baggage that has evolved from the original uses of the terms. They also have cultural and generational baggage.
I think there might be as much of a F/T correlation as a N/S one.
I might be considered more liberal if I had any faith in government properly assessing whether a program was getting a reasonable result for the money spent--and then killing a program when it didn't. As it is, the conservatives have become liberal spenders. The liberals have a scape goat to throw off all restraint on spending.
A read up on the term "neoconservative" will be very enlightening. To some degree, the neocons are the WWII democrats who were also hawks so they defected. The remaining liberals drew heavily from the philosophy of socialism/communism to steer the new party (post neo-con defectors) further left.
Now we have the Hawk Democratic Party (republicans) and the Socialist Democratic Party.
Of course all this is a very simplistic summary of a complicated reality.