you may be a moderate as a whole, the sum of all your stances. some of which are relatively extreme one way, some the other, relative to the general population. red is a moderate on every single issue. you take a principled stance on abortion. red kinda sorta prefers this or that and he staddles the middle. you are actually in favor of free trade in principle. red is a little bit, just as much as needed to be in the middle. so you have a principle besides moderation driving your opinions, red does not.
Ok, we're close, now. What I'm saying is that a moderates opinions naturally scatter around the center, while a conservatives scatter between the extreme right and center, while a liberals would scatter between extreme left and center. Moderates have an opinion scatter just as broad as the conservative and liberal ones, but it rarely reaches to the extremes, because of its mean near the center. This is a natural scatter pattern and is not related to the opinions of others.
you often use opinion polls when we discuss things, and i always dismiss them as irrelevant in terms of what is correct and what isnt. you use the opinion polls because you think that what is right is defined by what pleases the most people. for example, you say bush is a failure because the polls say he is. if he is a failure the polls are not the reason why. you say we are incorrectly defining you as a centrist, when you actually are favoring positions from all over, not just he midpoint. so that reminds me of the question i axed earlier. on what issue do you really vary from the middle? on what issue are you most opposed what an opinion poll might say?
Again you make up something I'm supposed to have said so that you can argue with it. I have not said that Bush is a failure because the polls say he is. I recently made a long list of Bush failures and I have previously ranted long and loud about his failures in detail. If I cite a poll is it to suggest to you that others agree with me. I don't know, why don't you try me. I think that we have different opinions about what the middle is. You see it as a thin fence that moderates must stand upon. To me the middle is a broad band of thought overlapping onto right and left. Moderates fall on both sides on center and are still in the "middle". I'm farthest to the right on gun control, the death penalty, and military spending. I'm farthest to the left on Roe v Wade and social issues like marijuana possession. But in no case do I take an extreme viewpoint, nor do I walk in lockstep with the special interest groups or any party platform. For instance, I'm a gun owner and I favor personal ownership of guns without restrictive regulations and I have a carry permit. On the other hand, I don't follow the entire agenda of the NRA, because I think they go too far in the direction of no gun controls at all, which is madness. I can't agree with private ownership of machine guns and I don't see any problem with a thorough background check of gun buyers. Gun registration doesn't bother me either. Law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from it. Conversely, just because I think gay people should have the same rights as any other taxpayer doesn't mean I support the entire agenda of Queer Nation. I think "hate crimes" are simply crimes and a civil union is legally equal to but not a marriage. Moderates are free to have mixed feelings and to stake a position wherever they please. Extremists are slaves to their party or ideology.
it would be conservative to think that others haven't taken a liberal dose of aspirin after digesting this thread.
Alright Martin and Lewis- All y'all need are some maroon velvet suits, bad hair cuts, and a stage. We'll take this act to Atlantic City and make a killing.
