• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is a "Moderate"?

friday said:
Well, really my point is that so-called moderates don't really exist. Even if you are a moderate, in most cases you have a pov that disagrees with others. People call themselves moderates to try to fool everyone into thinking they are well balanced, compromising and agreeable people who everyone can love. But usually it just means they either haven't thought the issue through enough to take a stand or have taken a hard stand that does not agree with liberals or conservatives. Doesn't make them automatically right.
Click to expand...

<--left----------------middle----------------right-->

Moderate means they fall about int the middle of the above line on average, not that they do not have strongly held beliefs.

:2brickwal
 
Moderates don't always inherently have a combination of left and right views as centrists do, but rather they tend to move away from extremism. If a policy is extremely leftist, then they will move more to the right in their opinion on it; if the policy is too rightist, they will want to add some left-leaning elements to balance it out. A moderate is the opposite of an extremist, and there are pros and cons to being a moderate. One of the main cons is that people from both sides accuse you of being too wishy washy in not committing to either side; however, it has historically been moderates who have prevented extremism from corrupting government and policy making. You can also be a left leaning or right leaning moderate. Both parties in the U.S. have moderates in them and they don't always vote along party lines.

The claim that moderates are liberals in disguise was popularized by Fox News, but it is patently false. Fox doesn't represent right-leaning politics, it represents extremist politics, and thus everything to the left it will be called liberal, and that includes moderates who side against them. It's because moderates tend to move opposite to the extremists that they might appear to actually belong to the opposite camp, but actually they are just siding with the least extreme side. If both left wing and right wing parties were to become extremists, then the moderates would end up being in the dead middle and would be against everyone. This is why moderates, historically speaking, are next in line to be executed after a radical party comes to power. Once the polar-opposite enemies of the ruling party are purged, the moderates are usually encouraged to join the ruling party or die. Moderates who want to survive end up falling in line, but those who stick to their principles of not favouring extremism usually get purged.

Moderates are essential to healthy politics in any country. They can be the voice of reason during heated or troubling times.
 
Redress said:
<--left----------------middle----------------right-->

Moderate means they fall about int the middle of the above line on average, not that they do not have strongly held beliefs.

:2brickwal
Click to expand...

I think I said that one kind of moderate was the kind who had not studied an issue enough to have an informed opinion. Basically what you said here. But there are others who call themselves moderates, but that is only because they don't want to admit the hardline views they actually take.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Personal experience is insufficient evidence when you're making broad statements about a whole group of complete strangers.

Do you have anything else to back up your claims?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are asking for. A source? Is there anyone who is credentialed enough that if they were to say what I am saying you would believe them? I doubt it. Let's not waste our time.
 
friday said:
I think I said that one kind of moderate was the kind who had not studied an issue enough to have an informed opinion. Basically what you said here. But there are others who call themselves moderates, but that is only because they don't want to admit the hardline views they actually take.
Click to expand...

No, that is actually nothing like what I said. Completely different in fact. A person can study the facts and form opinions that place them near the center of the political spectrum.
 
friday said:
Not sure what you are asking for. A source? Is there anyone who is credentialed enough that if they were to say what I am saying you would believe them? I doubt it. Let's not waste our time.
Click to expand...

Do you or do you not have sources -- not opinionators or pundits or ranters, but actual sources citing actual numbers -- outside of your personal experience to support your broad statements about a whole group of complete strangers?
 
Orion said:
Moderates don't always inherently have a combination of left and right views as centrists do, but rather they tend to move away from extremism. If a policy is extremely leftist, then they will move more to the right in their opinion on it; if the policy is too rightist, they will want to add some left-leaning elements to balance it out. A moderate is the opposite of an extremist, and there are pros and cons to being a moderate. One of the main cons is that people from both sides accuse you of being too wishy washy in not committing to either side; however, it has historically been moderates who have prevented extremism from corrupting government and policy making. You can also be a left leaning or right leaning moderate. Both parties in the U.S. have moderates in them and they don't always vote along party lines.

The claim that moderates are liberals in disguise was popularized by Fox News, but it is patently false. Fox doesn't represent right-leaning politics, it represents extremist politics, and thus everything to the left it will be called liberal, and that includes moderates who side against them. It's because moderates tend to move opposite to the extremists that they might appear to actually belong to the opposite camp, but actually they are just siding with the least extreme side. If both left wing and right wing parties were to become extremists, then the moderates would end up being in the dead middle and would be against everyone. This is why moderates, historically speaking, are next in line to be executed after a radical party comes to power. Once the polar-opposite enemies of the ruling party are purged, the moderates are usually encouraged to join the ruling party or die. Moderates who want to survive end up falling in line, but those who stick to their principles of not favouring extremism usually get purged.

Moderates are essential to healthy politics in any country. They can be the voice of reason during heated or troubling times.
Click to expand...

I think "moderate" positions tend to be very extremist. For example, do you think President Millard Filmore was a moderate when it came to the issue of slavery? He thought so. In fact he attacked extremists who desired abolition by saying this: "All mutual concession in the nature of compromise must necessarily be unwelcome to men of extreme opinions."

So whether you think Filmore was a moderate or not, it doesn't really matter. I think my point has been made.
 
Redress said:
No, that is actually nothing like what I said. Completely different in fact. A person can study the facts and form opinions that place them near the center of the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

Yes, but those opinions become as hardline as any leftwinger or rightwinger. Are we discussing centrists or moderates?
 
friday said:
I think "moderate" positions tend to be very extremist. For example, do you think President Millard Filmore was a moderate when it came to the issue of slavery? He thought so. In fact he attacked extremists who desired abolition by saying this: "All mutual concession in the nature of compromise must necessarily be unwelcome to men of extreme opinions."

So whether you think Filmore was a moderate or not, it doesn't really matter. I think my point has been made.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about it to say either way, but during the era of slavery, there were probably moderates who owned slaves. In today's terms maybe those moderates would be extremists, but not in the context of the times.

Yes, your point has been made. You don't know what a moderate is.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Do you or do you not have sources -- not opinionators or pundits or ranters, but actual sources citing actual numbers -- outside of your personal experience to support your broad statements about a whole group of complete strangers?
Click to expand...

Well, let's try some simple expirimentation. Do you consider yourself to be a moderate?
 
Orion said:
I don't know enough about it to say either way, but during the era of slavery, there were probably moderates who owned slaves. In today's terms maybe those moderates would be extremists, but not in the context of the times.

Yes, your point has been made. You don't know what a moderate is.
Click to expand...

So you think owning another man as property is a moderate position?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I asked you my question first. Why are you refusing to answer it?
Click to expand...

You are asking me for some sort of source who gave me my opinion. I said personal experience and you said that isn't good enough. I am defending my personal experience as good enough. Wanna play ball? Or want to stop wasting our time?
 
friday said:
You are asking me for some sort of source who gave me my opinion. I said personal experience and you said that isn't good enough. I am defending my personal experience as good enough. Wanna play ball? Or want to stop wasting our time?
Click to expand...

When the subject at hand is a large group of people, personal experience is never accepted as a source because (if nothing else) it's physically impossible for the individual to interact with enough members of the group in question for personal experience to be representative.

Do you or do you not have sources -- not opinionators or pundits or ranters, but actual sources citing actual numbers -- outside of your personal experience to support your broad statements about a whole group of complete strangers?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
When the subject at hand is a large group of people, personal experience is never accepted as a source because (if nothing else) it's physically impossible for the individual to interact with enough members of the group in question for personal experience to be representative.

Do you or do you not have sources -- not opinionators or pundits or ranters, but actual sources citing actual numbers -- outside of your personal experience to support your broad statements about a whole group of complete strangers?
Click to expand...

What sort of source would you find acceptable? A cbs poll saying "Moderates are either hardliners who disagree with Republicans and Democrats or wishy washy populists who don't want to risk getting their feelings hurt"? No, I don't have that. I doubt CBS would do a poll asking that. However, the more you refuse to answer my question, the more you prove me right.
 
I'm not proving anything you said right or wrong. I'm asking if you have a source to support the broad generalizations you're making.

You don't. Ergo, your broad generalizations aren't worth the recycled electrons they're printed on.

That's all I needed to know.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I'm not proving anything you said right or wrong. I'm asking if you have a source to support the broad generalizations you're making.

You don't. Ergo, your broad generalizations aren't worth the recycled electrons they're printed on.

That's all I needed to know.
Click to expand...

Good. Now answer my question. Are you a moderate?
 
friday said:
Than what is your definition of a moderate? Please provide sources.
Click to expand...

Despite my earlier levity, I don't think there is a single definition for "moderate," just as terms like "liberal" and "conservative" tend to shift based on the events of the day and the convenience of the speaker.

I've seen plenty of examples of so-called "small-government conservative" politicians, pundits, and citizens who weren't really for small government at all (on national security, for example). I've seen so-called "liberals" profess the virtues of a powerful central government one second (the fairness doctrine, for example), but then protest that the government doesn't have the authority to tell women if and when they can have an abortion. I've spoken to Americans who simultaneously think it's bad when someone accused of a crime goes free because of a legal technicality, and good when someone accused of a crime has their life destroyed because of a legal technicality. Conservatives on this forum quite often use the term "liberal" to refer not only to self-labeling liberals, but anyone whose label isn't clear but whose opinions clearly contradict those of the conservative in question. No doubt there are liberals who have done the same.

The fact of the matter is that these terms have been redefined for convenience so often by this point that I think they're entirely meaningless.

That's partly why I label myself "Other."
 
Sidgaf said:
individual right to own a gun?
I have no problem with you having a M16 full auto as long as you understand how to handle it via some kind of training and you're not some kind of nut.
Click to expand...
sort of begs circularity, dunnit? who but a nut wants a full auto military weapon?
Do moderates deny that Americans are overtaxed?
overtaxed? sure but what can we do about it?

Do moderates favor keeping "Obamacare"?
I have no problem with federal health care. I've seen it at it's best with the military health care systems both at Portsmouth Naval Hospital and Camp Lejeune Hospital

marriage should or should not be defined as between a man and a woman
The term "marriage" at one time was a religious term. The government should stay out of it, Civil (as in government) Union are fine.
Click to expand...

as for the rest, if this is "moderate", i surrender my "radical liberal" membership and step into the middle of the road. but... if i get run over by someone who actually knows where he wants to go... well, i am just gonna have to kick a lil ass.

geo.
 
friday said:
Just because you fall on a side that is not traditionally republican or democrat doesn't mean you aren't falling on a side. Believing that everyone but you is wrong doesn't necessarily make you right.
Click to expand...

I never said everyone else is wrong. On some issues I agree with conservatives and others I agree with liberals and some issues I have my very own opinion.
 
I consider myself 'moderate' on the 'left-right' scale because my beliefs or values are equally sided on the left and right.
Meaning - I identify with the left in just as many ways as I identify with the right (on different subjects, of course). I can't peg myself 'to the right side of everything' because I am *not* on the right side of everything. Vise versa.

It doesn't mean I don't know *what* I feel - it means I *do* know what I feel (by VERY VERY heavy examination and self-questioning) and discovered that in some ways I side with the right and some ways I side with the left.

That coming from someone who was EXTREME right for a long time - is a pretty big step towards honesty via self evaluation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom