Frankly, I think I would hard pressed to meet a non-nominalist today.
Just cause you say so, doesn't make it so. Should I use my Applebee's analogy again.
This is not to say because of certain circumstances you have inculcated yourself with enough reading to think you are not a nominalist, but I would have to get you in the every day so to speak to demonstrate to you how often you like act in a nominalist manner.
Papist is going to say the same thing. Again, I am not going to argue people aren't going to tell me they believe in universals, especially those who take philosophy as some hobby and take a reactionary stance, like both you and Papist tend to.
But in my day to day life, and this is recent revelation to me, people are functional nominalists. And how people act and in virtue of what they do is much more interesting to me than someone who can parrot a summary of a philosophical trend.
EDIT: Observe your friends, unless they philosophy students, and see how they act and in virtue of what they discuss "bigger questions". You can do the experiment yourself. I really don't care if you agree with me. Agreement or being right or wrong are the most boring of ways to deal with thought.
When people shout, incoherence or inconsistent when dealing with interesting questions, I hear: I am boring and unproductive. An awe filled and passionate adversary I'll take any day over a milktoast agreer with me.