You're wrong about the other side of the aisle, though. People who are otherwise pro immigration, pro social change, pro downwards wealth redistribution, etc. (in other words, not at all conservative), are typically against AI.
This is not a question of definition. Conservatism is what I wrote, period. See e.g.: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/conservatism/
The issue here is that most Americans no longer have any clue what it actually means, because they only associate party politics with it that are by now completely disconnected. But the definition itself has never changed.
>People who are otherwise pro immigration, pro social change, pro downwards wealth redistribution, etc. are typically against AI.
Are they? This is a pretty rigorous statement mixing in a lot of smaller ones and thus would need some actual data to back it up. I know many people I would classify as traditional "liberals" by the virtues you describe, but who are very much pro new tech and by extension, pro-AI. They are only against if they fall for the usual social media doomsayers, but from my experience they are more likely to do so the less they know or care about new technology (which in some sense directly translates to higher conservatism too I suppose).
I suppose "neoliberal" means whatever anyone wants it too, but perhaps you were looking for "postliberal". From the AI summary:
> Postliberalism is a political and social philosophy that rejects the core tenets of traditional liberalism. It argues that liberalism’s hyper-focus on individual autonomy, free-market capitalism, and secularism has eroded social cohesion and community.
"Conservative" is used to describe the current US administration, and I suppose they imagine they're conserving _something_, but they seem very eager to attack the liberal foundation of the Republic.
Maybe you mean "conservative" voters? Though, these are more likely the "moderates" everyone is on about. Those are the neoliberals on both sides.