https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_and_paleoconservatism#Conflict_of_values
Most of DUers' views of the difference is strongly colored and changed by their views, attitudes, opinions of conservativism in general, and what they think must be important to others that they don't really understand. We believe we know what's going on in their heads far, far better than they do. And this has been shown in surveys and attitude research: Self-claimed liberals "know" what conservatives think and their reasons far better than conservatives claim to know what other conservatives think, and are often at odds with the reasons conservatives give for their views.
(There's a lot of that kind of confirmation bias in the service of maintaining tribal boundaries.)
There are isolated voices like Radosh who like to claim that neoconservatism is what happened when progressives like the youthful him were mugged. They brought some left-of-center views and attitudes to a muscular foreign policy and domestic policy, but ultimately a lot of the "is this done according to approved policy and politics" rhetoric that they'd known from prior years carried over. ("This is done according to approved policy and politics" is just a paraphrase of "politically correct", if you didn't notice.)
This gets reflected in some of the Wiki article because a lot of the old East-Coast progressives that converted to their new political faith were ethnically Jewish.
= new reply since forum marked as read
