What is a Political Moderate?

Ok , my working definition of "moderate" is someone who is oriented toward free markets, pro-business, advocates reasonable but not onerous regulation, a strong defense, tries to come to reasonable accomodations on social issues...And when at a ballgame, and the National Anthem is playing, and there is perhaps a flyby, feels proud to be an American, and does not feel chagrined or engage in silly navel gazing about exaggeratred fears of militarism and fascism...Democrats who fall into my "moderate" category ? Evan Bayh, Joe Lieberman, Blanch Lincoln.Republicans ? Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Arnold Schwarzenegger.

I agree, although with such criticism, especially by a Presidential candidate, comes the responsibility to offer credible alternatives, articulated in a fair amount of detail. Quite correct. Notwithstanding, My primary issue was the war on terror, which we have discussed at length and need not repeat in this thread, and I judged Bush superior on this issue.Indeed, there will be conflicts between the hardcore social conservatives and the Arnold wing of the party. Indeed if the Democrats are to win national elections, a party that looks like a mix of people of the types I mentioned, where Michael Moore is as unwelcome as David Duke, is their best bet. As always, IMO.

too early to tell, let's see hoiw he does in office. Ken Salazar of CO also falls in that category of possibly moderate but let's wait and see.

Well, Bush outpolled Kerry 52% to 47% among Catholics overall, and by a wider margin among those who attend Mass weekly. I can't speak for all Catholics, but I have issues with much of the agenda of ultra-right Protestant Fundamentalism (YEC in public schools, Protestant prayer in public schools, Fred Phelps gay hatred). Yet I oppose most abortion except to save the mother's life or avoid grievious medical harm, and I oppose gay marriage - I could agree to civil unions on a state basis , if enacted by legislatures, not forced by courts.Kerry's view on abortion (I say I oppose it, but kowtow to NARAL anyway) is simply not acceptable to me or millions of Catholics. But, that was not my main issue.Bush got 44% of the Hispanic vote, and many of those voters fall into the above category. I think the Democrats naively expected to get more Hispanic votes becuase many are poor. The thing is, many are becoming non-poor through entrepeneurial efforts, just like Italians and Irish did before them, and they hold fairly socially conservative views. Cesar Chavez is no more typical of Hispanics than Michael Moore is of whites. Talk to a Hispanic owner of a restaurant or small construction company to find out what the majority really thinks. The pro small business agenda of the Republicans appeals strongly here.I also think you are conflating Protetsant Fudamentalists and Evangelicals. The distinction may be subtle, but it is there. The latter group is larger by far and this is the group that is most responsible for the Bush win. These people have broadly social conservative views, but more diverse than you might imagine. Many oppose YEC. Many could accept civil unions. They are not uneducated morons - many have college degrees and some even advanced degrees.I think Hangdawg13 is probably a typical Evangelical although I don't want to speak for him.If the Democrats want to win national elections, they need to take these groups (Hispanics, Catholics, and Evanegelicals) seriously. The sneering disdain that the party leadership had for these people's views was palpable and they saw right through the pandering.

I disagree. Abortion on demand with public funding is an extreme position. Instead of distancing himself from NARAL, which advocates this, Kerry publicly threw his lot in with them, appearing onstage with their director.Contrary to your assertion, I watched Kerry in all three debates very attentively. His remarks to the effect that poverty should not be a bar to abortion in the second, townhall debate were transparent code for public funding of abortion - an extreme NARAL position. We don't know each other personally. I don't think you are Michael Moore. Obviously you are to my left somewhat. If I am center-right, perhaps you're center-left. I do think you are an intelligent, good debater, although given to occasional flights of invective, although I confess to this vice as well. I heard Bush speak at a campaign event. One question was from a clearly fundamentalist woman to the effect of "what are we going to do about these unchurched people". His response was quite negative. It was to the effect of "Maam, you must understand that in America, everyone is free to practice whatver religion they choose, or no religion at all. We are fighting groups like the Taliban because they impose their distorted view of religion with whips in the public square. This is not what America is about".This answer was a key factor in my decision to vote for Bush. Again, I disagree. I see many of these positions as center-right positions.YECs tried to pack local school boards during the Clinton years, and they'll try again. And I'll be there opposing it, as before. If the right pushes too hard, the Schwarzenegger Republicans and the moderate Democrats will become the majority party. The system will work.