What do you think differentiates a moderate Democrat from a liberal Democrat?

[NNguyenMD]

Er...what issue do you think distinguishes the two?

Moderate Dem: Socially liberal, but perhaps more probusiness?

What do you guy's think?

[mitchtv]

1. ambivalent to Iraq war (lots of hokus pokus talk)

for civil unions only. Willing to sell out Labor= moderate? Willing to allow uncontrolled handguns and assault weapons in the big cities, also

[benEzra]

60. Actually, the gun-control thing was more a hallmark of Third Way types...

it was the DLC, not the left, that made the "assault weapon" bait-and-switch Priority One in the early '90s, as a way to appear "tough on crime" to right-leaning authoritarians.

[liberaldemocrat7]

61. By your definition that looks like a libertarian in my view.

Supposedly the current conservative Democrats that got elected in Nov 2006 still act liberal on economic issues but conservative on social issues.

[benEzra]

80. Being pro-choice on guns isn't really a conservative position, is my point...

I agree it could be considered libertarian (small "l") in the same sense that opposition to the Patriot Act or support for the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments are libertarian, i.e. anti-authoritarian. Not anti-progressive in any sense, though.

FWIW, Russ Feingold opposes the concept of "assault weapon" bans, but he's not really considered conservative on social issues. Arch-right-winger Bill Bennett is a gun-control proponent, and Sarah Brady herself is a conservative on social issues (Reagan repub and proud of it). So IMHO it is not a left/right issue, but more (as you point out) an authoritarian/libertarian issue, or perhaps something of a urban/suburban-and-rural issue. The Communitarians (generally considered "moderates" on social issues) really pushed the ban-more-guns thing through the '90s, until their influence waned within the DLC.

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, sorry...


------------
The conservative roots of U.S. gun control (DU post)

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What?

[Gman]

2. Moderates are pragmatic

Moderates and many liberals can live with getting 90% of what they want. It's the progressives that throw a fit over the other 10% and threaten to vote Green.

[treestar]

32. ITA a moderate does not get all tied up in their one issue

or can let it go to get the 90% and worry about the more extreme things later.

[Clark2008]

67. Oh - no... some of us just don't trust some of the people running.

It has nothing to do with "getting what we want."

I'm pretty moderate and I don't like one of the more moderate candidates running for the Dem nomination because I think he's a double-talker.

:shrug:

[Robbien]

3. I do not believe a moderate/centrist Dem is socially liberal

They are pro-business all the way which of course means they do not favor social programs.

[mahina]

16. Can't agree with you on that, sorry-

I am a liberal Democrat businessperson.
There are lots of us; the Republicans just assume all businesspeople are R's. Not remotely so.
We are aware of costs, we just don't want to externalize costs onto the whole society.

[Rockholm]

17. I totally agree with you.

On social issues, I am very liberal. On fiscal issues, I am somewhat conservative.

[mahina]

22. I think most Democrats would be characterized as fiscally very conservative

if we really thought about it. I don't want to spend all our tax money servicing a debt incurred to enrich a few companies at the cost of our troops' lives. That is not conservative, it's criminal.
Check out Laurie Anderson's youtube vid on the national debt...chilling. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FNbqCTQVKQ

[liberaldemocrat7]

65. In my view that makes you a libertarian and not a Democrat.

Plenty of libertarians want to pare down government to police work and defense and let the people who need government fend for themselves.

As for public private partnerships of the government just look at the prescription drug benefit the Republicans forced through. It benefits business but not the people who didn't have drug coverage under Medicare in the first place.

[Rockholm]

84. Well, thanks for your view.

[Robbien]

21. Excuse me but aren't you agreeing with me?

You are a moderate/centrist but feel every man is for himself where the society as a whole shouldn't foot the bill for the less fortunate. That is what I assume when you say "externalize costs onto the whole society".

I said moderate/centrists do not believe in social programs. You said you do not believe in social programs.

Why are you saying we disagree?

[mahina]

24. No, but I don't have time to argue about it for more than a couple of seconds.

You said: "I do not believe a moderate/centrist Dem is socially liberal

They are pro-business all the way which of course means they do not favor social programs."
I disagree.

You said:"I said moderate/centrists do not believe in social programs. You said you do not believe in social programs."
I do believe in effective social programs.

Ta ta.

[mahina]

27. And I'm not moderate.

PDA, Code Pink, protesting since the bogus innauguration in 01. But enjoy your assumptions.

[Marrah_G]

37. I work for a very liberal democrat business owner

Not all businessmen are republicans. I work in the insurance field and 90% of our brokers are liberal democrats. Of course I live in Mass, which might sway the numbers a bit.

[liberaldemocrat7]

63. Republicans do not tend to practice capitalism very well.

Very good Mahina.

I say that capitalism appears a very good system and that just like driving to an extent you need regulation for safety of products and work conditions. You also need government to take care of those unemployed, disabled, elderly and retired and other people who need help.

Republicans tend to want unregulated capitalism and to support those who practice capitalism irresponsibly. Republicans strongly tend to want to get rid of social programs and a mimumum wage and unions.

[mahina]

29. Oh I understand now,

all I said was that I am a businessperson. You assumed I was against social programs. You are mistaken about that. I have lobbied our legislature and successive governors for better social programs.
Anyway back to life.

[NNguyenMD]

4. might I just ask, let's not lose our cool on this thread please constructive dialogue is preferred

[HappyWeasel]

5. Hmmmm....

I guess liberal democrat is a party line democrat.

A moiderate democrat I guess is a more libertarian or hawkish democrat or it could just be a cautionary democrat. Like one who is is not willing to withdraw from Iraq or support gay marriage yet.

and a conservative democrat a democrat that panders to the religous right, like Ben Nelson or Schuler.



I guess where I would draw the line between "liberal" and "moderate" is on whether you want some federal intervention on the health care crisis, whether you want total equality for homosexuals and whether you want a total withdrawal from Iraq.

I guess I would put the diff between a "moderate" and a "dixiecrat" is whether you want to attack Roe v. Wade,open to some "right to work" legislation and whether you want to continue the war.

[razors edge]

19. How so?

Libertarians hate this war, and all wars of conquest. They serve the elites as they waste and abuse the resources of the state.

As a liberal libertarian I support the Democratic party for lack of other viable choice, and to suggest I would support state control over a persons decisions or advocate state violence is short sighted, perhaps ignorant of libertarian values.

[HappyWeasel]

43. well, economically libertarian, anyway.

There are GOP "Neo-libertarians" who support the war.

[razors edge]

44. Link me to one

please as I've never heard of such an animal.

[razors edge]

52. "GOP "Neo-libertarians"?

After a single Google of that phrase, and looking at one site, I guess my appreciation of Thoreau is not a libertarian leaning if these people represent the libertarian politic.

Call me a Democrat please!

[Moderate Dem]

89. Sorry, I disagree

I am a genuine centrist that is for full rights for gays, national health insurance and affirmative action, and a Christian who opposes the religious right.

I differ from liberals mainly on the Iraq issue, where I'm closer to Joe Biden and the other (mildly) hawkish Democrats.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice."

Tom Paine

also,

“In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.” Gandhi

[XemaSab]

7. Knowing when to use an apostrophe?

:shrug:

[Nikki Stone1]

9. LOL!! That was my first thought too

:0

[NNguyenMD]

15. thanks for the correction

[DemKR]

8. Moderate vs. conservative

I believe a moderate Democrat is socially liberal "enough" but is DLC-esque when it comes to economic issues. Pro-free trade etc.
Conservative Democrats I divide into two. Some are economically in-line with us but almost all of them are not inclined to vote with us socially.

[NNguyenMD]

12. I like your breakdown, do you think that moderates are at a tough crossroads with both parties?

What I think is interesting is that while the base of both parties will push a lot of pressure and criticism on their moderate members, it is the moderate faces who make up the frontrunners of 2008 such as Clinton, Giuliani, Edwards, Obama.

And I think for Statehouse offices, moderates are generally more successful like Eliot Spitzer, Arnold, Christie Todd Whitman, Bill Richardson, Bill Weld, etc.

[Selatius]

23. In our system, you need people with the broadest appeal to hold a seat of power.

Why? Because this is a two-party system. It's built on single-seat constituent representation.

It is not built on multi-seat districts where seats are alloted according to proportional representation. You can find that in Switzerland or France or Germany, not here. That is why you only have two parties in America.

[Selatius]

10. Moderate Democrats bend more. Liberal Democrats tend to be more inflexible on positions.

If the House and Senate were in Democratic hands in 2002, I guarantee the IWR would exist in a lesser form or none at all. It was only the "far left" that voted against the IWR.

[Zhade]

54. Yep. Moderates bend on things like: not engaging in illegal wars...

...on supporting equal rights for all, on defending workers' rights here and abroad, on the separation of church and state.

Oh, they bend alright.

[PhilipShore]

11. Liberal Democrats seek a true democracy...

Modern moderate Democrats have no clue what a true democracy is, so they generally just give lip service to a democratic system, so as to keep the sheep under control.

The Moderate Democrats do not believe that man has a free will (thus man is an animal) in need of control from unseen more wise masters (politicians).

Liberal democrats, seek the principles that unite all people in peace; while moderate Democrats, seek wars and divisions, so that they can keep their corporate/government welfare jobs -- as a cog in the war machine, etc.

[NNguyenMD]

13. you forgot to mention tolerance too, liberal Dems you would think are more tolerant

to have moderate members in their party.

[NNguyenMD]

18. well...that begs the question, is there a place for moderates in the Democratic party?

I don't mean to put words in your mouth, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you apparently express quite a bit of disdain for people declare themselves moderates. Would you prefer that the current Democratic moderates not be in your party. And I don't just mean the elected officials, I mean moderate Democratic voters. Do you think that there is a place for them in this party?

[PhilipShore]

30. Sure why not, as long as they are "friendly" with the liberals, but more

and more, I see politicians using - liberals - as a political football, and being unfairly critical of them. I give the moderate Democrats the benefit of the doubt - in that they are "brainwashed" by the media propaganda, and live in a constant state of psychic fear, so their normal reasoning abilities are not there.

I think Al Gore is taking steps to address this problem; I think he even wrote a book -- recently -- about how fear clouds reason in the mind.

[Dhalgren]

14. Moderate Democrats are either (1) situational Republicans or (2) they

believe in relatively progressive ideas but do not trust the common people with any power. Any progress for the commoners must come from above and with strict control - the people can not really be trusted to do what is best.

Liberal Democrats tend to be situational Democrats. The Democratic Party is the most progressive party between the two that are viable. If a truly viable Progressive Party arose, the majority of truly liberal Democrats would move to it. An example would be that most Democrats who support women's rights have real problems with the very idea that a Democrat could be anti-choice. The same is true with GLBT rights - if you are not for equal rights, how can you call yourself a Democrat? The same is true in regards the Iraq Occupation; delaying the withdrawal equals murder, however you try to justify it.

Yet there are Democrats who oppose women's rights, are against equality for GLBT and who are in favor of prolonging the Iraq Occupation. The Democratic Party finds itself badly divided. It is not in very good health and the next year and half could see it fall completely apart - or it may be that being the only alternative to the disgustingly rotten Republican party will see its life extended for a few more years...

[mahina]

20. Anyway to probe your question a bit,

what do you think is the difference, and how would you characterize it, between Republicans and Democrats?

[NNguyenMD]

34. Glad you ask, I think I consider myself a moderate Democrat not for reasons of a particular issue

but b/c I think that negotiating with others, and yielding to some concessions is the ideal way to govern. There are times when there is no place to yield, and in those moments I greatly appreciate the presence of energetic, driven, liberal Democrats.

I don't agree with 100% of the Democratic party line, but I agree with a lot it. But I think that there should be room for some flexibility on some issues. For example, while I think that though a woman does have the right to choose, if the majority of state voters do not want to pay for it via the state medicaid budget, that is their perogative. While I support amnesty, and a faster track to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are currently residing in the US, I also think that stringent enforcement along the border is crucial if we truly do want to be serious about illegal immigration. And I think that harsh punishment against business owners who employ illegals is the only way to effectively stop illegal immigration.

I've conveyed my thoughts on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq before, I think pulling out immediately will result in very devastating consequences for the Iraqi people who helped us, while leaving is the best thing for the troops and the country, it is something that I don't think many people who support withdrawal understand the consequences for the people we leave behind. If you're going to pull out, you should employ at least some measures to ensure their protection. After all, we did destroy their entire society in the last 4 years. What would those be? I'm sure we can think of something.

I'm just a regular voter. I don't claim to know much about anything, if you want to tell me why you think my positions on some issues is selling out or wrong, I'm all ears but it doesn't mean I'm going to agree with you or vote for your candidate. I think government is about meeting a consensus, and I'm willing to bend a little around an issue so long as the primary objective is more or less met. Some might call it laziness, but I think its the most practical way to go about.

[NNguyenMD]

38. one more thing I wanted to add...moderates in both parties are willing to listen to the other side

And don't blindly yield to the screams and pouts of their base. While these are of course "safe" issues, they're actually a lot more tougher to support, such as the environment and stem cell research.

Being a moderate I feel, means that you will yield to reason more often than rhetoric. Thats why there are guys like Bill Weld and Arlen Specter who support Gay Marriage, and an Arnold Schwarzenegger who supports reducing CO2 emissions, stem cell research. Go off all you want for their failings, but these people will listen to some of your issues, because yes, even Republicans can be reasonable.

I think that in any government, it can't be "us against them" 24/7. You got to search for some common ground, even if you don't support their overall agenda.

[Warren Stupidity]

47. I doubt that is the difference.

First of all there really aren't any moderate Republicans left. Secondly I can certainly come up with liberal Democrats who have worked on bipartisan issues.

There are a whole bunch of Democrats in the Senate who are labelled moderate but who will vote Republican on a broad set of issues - tax cuts for the rich for example, or endless funding for bad wars, where are the equivalent Republicans? Tkae the case of the recent nonbinding resolution debacle - where were all of those moderate Republicans? Even the resolution's purported supporters on the Republican side didn't vote for it.

[razors edge]

25. Education level?

More education tends to support a more liberal world view as the mind is exposed to more cultures.

IMHO moderate Dems are union members with a Playstation 3 set on Kill.

Yes, it's a broad generalization and feel free to blow the hell out of it folks, but its just an opinion.

[NNguyenMD]

36. wow haha, just wow

[razors edge]

40. Glad you liked it.

Like I said, it was broad generalization.

Just a short description of the Democratic voters I know. Your results may vary.

There a million variables in everyones lives that form their stance on any issue, and neither of us have time to go down that road.

[Zhade]

55. Actually, it's more than an opinion - studies exist that prove this.

NT!

[razors edge]

57. Guess I'm lucky

and not a statistical norm, I dropped out after 10th grade.

Although I do live in a Holiday Inn Express.

[UTUSN]

26. I'm a BROADstream, rather than a MAINstream, Dem. Difficult topic.

I have voted for EVERY Dem nominee, from prez down to city/county, over MANY years. If the list were to scroll by right now, you would see a WIDE spectrum of Dem ideology. I mean, it goes from some Zell types on one end over to Green types (but all with the Dem label). Just between TWO Dem candidates, LBJ and McGOVERN, there was a chasm that I somehow bridged. Where does it stop for me on the Left end?---at TOTAL pacifism, or TOTAL pie-in-the-sky of the AMLO/Hugo-CHAVEZ type. I have a soft spot in my heart for Idealists and we wouldn't be Dems if we didn't have a large component of idealism, but a few steps short of the end of the pier.

Broadstream Dem. If I didn't already have a handle, I would choose this.

[UTUSN]

49. Heck, there was a hugh!!1 CHASM just in LBJ himself, like schizoid n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

28. The term "moderate" gets misused to include RINOs like LIEberman and Zell Miller

When I think of a moderate Dem, I think of Dianne Feinstein: socially more liberal but fiscally somewhat conservative, except more tolerant of social programs. Boxer is more mainstream Dem. When I think of Progressive, I think of Sheila Jackson Lee.

Re: Iraq:

Progressives have ALWAYS been against this war. Mainstream Dems got snookered by 9/11 and changed their position before the 2006 election. Moderates are currently changing their position on the war, as it is becoming clear that it is putting the US on an economic path to hell. Mainstream and Moderate Dems are concerned about the next election more than the war, while true Progressives want to end the war ASAP and impeach the people who got us there. All this is very different from the Republic party: The moderate Republics are seeing the economic and military disaster but are having a hard time with the neocons. The Walter Reed scandal embarasses them The Neocons have no shame and see no loss, no economic issues and no problems.

[yurbud]

31. I'd divide "moderates" in two: ideologically business-friendly and flat out business-owned

You can tell which is which by their willingness to ignore and deny plain facts right in front of their face.

Unfortunately, by that test, not many Democrats pass the test on issues like healthcare, where the primary causes are insurance companies and pharma, so talk about streamlining paperwork and figuring out how to take care of the people insurance companies refuse to serve, spit out, or price out of the market.

[NNguyenMD]

39. couldn't agree with you more

especially with regard to Big Pharma

[Warren Stupidity]

42. yes healthcare is a defining issue. nt.

[merh]

33. I think your assessment is correct.

I also know a good many moderate dems that see the party winning is more important than national needs. It is so strange to me, it's almost as bad as republicans. They will overlook the flaws of the candidate and promote them just because they are dem. They don't care that their dem platforms are so close to republican that it is scarey.

Many moderates dems are too pro-corporations for my taste.

Corporations, like governments, are there for the people. If they don't serve the needs and if they take their eyes off the needs of the individuals (workers, consumers, public good) what good are they?

[woo me with science]

35. oftentimes, pragmatism.

willingness to give on some issues in order to ensure an overall liberal trend in government.

[Warren Stupidity]

41. Moderate Democrats are confused in general.

They can't seem to figure out that we live in a kleptocracy and that we are getting swindled and robbed on a daily basis by the folks running this country.

But I'm jumping ahead of this question a bit. What exactly are the 'moderate' Democratic positions that are different from the 'liberal' Democratic positions?

Here is an example: healthcare.

Moderate position: mandate universal coverage. (Romneycare)

Liberal position: single payer universal healthcare.

Another example: the Iraq war.

Moderate position: we can't cut off funding because that wouldn't be supporting the troops so we have to have two more years of war, and give the Bush Cabal anything they ask for. Meanwhile we will work on meaningless resolutions with a paralyzed senate.

Liberal position: this war is wrong, cut the funding.

I could go on.

[kiahzero]

64. How much does straw cost these days?

I figure you must know, because it must have taken a lot to build those gigantic men.

[Warren Stupidity]

66. Fair enough.

What is the moderate Democratic position on healthcare?


What is the moderate Democratic position on the Iraq War?

[kiahzero]

68. There are dozens.

Ask five "moderate Democrats" what the "moderate Democratic" position on any issue is, and you'll probably get ten answers. You're assuming that there is a group of "moderate Democrats" that speak with one voice. "Moderate" Democrats are "moderate" because they are less radical OVERALL than other Democrats, in the same sense that "moderate" Republicans are "moderate" because they are less reactionary OVERALL than other Republicans.

[Lurking Dem]

70. Well said!

[Warren Stupidity]

71. Well then since you will not provide any positions

I am left with my stated positions for moderates and they appear to not be strawmen.

If you are going to attack my attempts at describing the difference between moderate and liberal positions on these two issues, as 'strawmen' don't you think you are then obligated to provide at least your moderate positions on these two issues to illustrate how my characterizations are false?

"You're assuming that there is a group of "moderate Democrats" that speak with one voice."

I didn't assume any such thing by the way - the OP did with his message that started this thread.

I assert that there is a general moderate democratic position on issues. Every moderate democrat may not agree on the details, but they must share enough in common so that we can generalize about the moderate position and what it is, or the term itself is meaningless. Pointing out that moderates disagree on the details is a distinction that is not absent in the liberal, conservative, or any other broad political grouping you want to make. Of course there is disagreement within these categories. So what? The categories are reasonable enough, which is why we use them. There are in fact moderate positions, liberal positions and conservative positions.

The only question here is what are the moderate positions on healthcare and the Iraq war and are the ones I stated for the moderate position not valid?

[kiahzero]

73. If they were valid, you would find people espousing them.

You're the one that's claiming that people hold those positions, yet you curiously are unable to provide support for that.

I'm not going to do your homework for you. Put up or shut up.

[Warren Stupidity]

76. put up or shut up?

I'll note that you refuse to state what the general moderate position is for either issue while claiming that I have misstated it. Not exactly honest of you. However since you seem to think I cannot back up my claims, here you are:

Lets start with the Iraq war.

The current Democratic strategy being acted out over on Capital Hill by our moderate Democratic leadership is to pass the next Iraq war funding bill (although perhaps attaching restrictions on it) for the war, and fail to pass meaningless nonbinding resolutions and other DOA legislation in a symbolic demonstration of opposition to the war. It is precisely the position I outlined.

"WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi moved to broaden the scope of an Iraq war funding bill and buy herself extra room to unite Democrats on the divisive issue and better challenge President Bush's policy.

More than $20 billion in new spending will be added to the administration's request even as the bill will call for withdrawing U.S. troops by the end of August next year. After weeks of pummeling by Republicans on the subject of the war, Democrats hope to regain the offensive less by challenging what is in Mr. Bush's funding request than what's not."

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117340533551731809-HBG7mUu5U2Jn0p6WBJ353mecgNo_20070407.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

"And in the House, Democrats are wrestling with even deeper divisions as they try to agree on a way to use a supplemental war funding bill to slow the deployment of more troops in Iraq amid accusations by Republicans that the move would deprive troops of the help they need.

At a closed-door caucus meeting Tuesday, three senior House Democrats — including the chairmen of the Appropriations and Armed Services committees — urged their colleagues to support the funding strategy, the details of which are being worked out.

But the apparent deceleration of the legislative drive to end the war is dismaying antiwar activists."
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-warvote28feb28,0,2275681.story?coll=la-home-headlines

I could productively fish google all day for support of my position here.

Now lets move on to healthcare. The three 'leading' and moderate Democratic candidates for president, Obama, Clinton, Edwards have all proposed some form of a mandated universal insurance program that keeps the current private insurance system in tact and is not single payer medicare for all. Clinton's earlier work back in '92-93 was the prototype for all of the moderate romneycare programs. Currently you cannot find specifics on what Obama or Clinton are proposing, as they are very carefully being completely ambiguous. What none of them are saying is the liberal position: single payer universal healthcare.

On the issues has Barak Obama here:
"Ensure access to basic care
Principles that Obama supports on health care:
Provide tax incentives to small businesses who provide health care to their employees.
Ensure that citizens have access to basic health care, through managed care, insurance reforms, or state funded care where necessary.
Provide health care to uninsured children by expanding Medicaid.
Use state funds to continue some Medicaid coverage for legal immigrants."
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Barack_Obama_Health_Care.htm

Clinton on universal healthcare:
Q: Would you support a universal health care bill?
CLINTON: We need to take step-by-step progress toward providing insurance for every American. I’d expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program. I’d allow people between 55 and 65 to buy into Medicare. I want to see mental health considered on parity. He’s opposed the “patients’ bill of rights” that is supported in a bipartisan coalition, as well as by 300 medical and health groups. And he’s gone for the GOP version of the prescription drug benefit, which wouldn’t cover 650,000 New Yorkers.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Social/Hillary_Clinton_Health_Care.htm


You can read about Edwards' mandated insurance purchase program on his website here:
http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/health-care/

Now having put up and having backed up my claim that these are typical moderate democratic positions, where have I misstated the moderate position?

[kiahzero]

79. OK, so your summation of health care is fair.

Perhaps it was your wildly inaccurate summation of the Iraq policy that made me read your summation of health care in a different light. The problem with Iraq is not Democratic will, the problem is that the Democrats may not have the power to bind Bush to pull back. You can rail all you want about the Dems not getting anything accomplished, but if they don't have the power to do more, how can they be faulted for not doing more?

[WinkyDink]

45. Let's just say my ModLib husband won't hear of deliberate 9/11evil from Bush, whereas THIS

Ultra-Leftie is the Queen of Cynicism.

[Warren Stupidity]

46. That would be about right.

Keep working on him.

[yurbud]

48. liberalism is moderate by definition

It is essentially capitalism with umpires and helmets, and the government picking up the slack on social functions that private enterprise does poorly or not at all.

It is in between capitalism and socialism, but quite a bit closer to capitalism.

So a "moderate" liberal wants the government to do even less.

If we let the demonization of the left to continue, we will have fewer and fewer options left to address problems, and in fact, things the average joe might consider problems aren't to "moderate" and pro-business business types as long as someone is making a profit, and making the right political donations.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

50. Do you pride yourself on your willingness or your unwillingness to compromise?

My impression is that while there is correlation between positions on issues and whether people describe themselves as "moderates" or not, it's mostly a matter of approach - some people think that the best way to achieve some of their goals is to compromise and give up on others; others think that one should always make a stand on principle regardless of the costs.

Moderates pride themselves on being willing to compromise to achieve a greater good. "Liberals" (although that's a misnomer; most people in the former category are also liberals; but both "immoderates" and "extremists" are obviously perjorative) pride themselves on not being.

[Zhade]

56. On some things, there is no compromise. Like equal rights, for example.

All in or all out. That's the only choice that really works.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

59. I disagree - I think achieving some rights now and some later is better than nothing.

On gay marriage, for example, there are two options - either try and make it a federal issue, in which case it will be made illegal everywhere, or try and make it a state-level issue, it which case it will be made legal in some states but not all. I think the latter is the wiser course of action, even though in an ideal world I'd pick the former.

Remember that compromise is a matter of tactics, not of objectives.

[Zhade]

85. Of course someone who is not a second-class citizen would say that.

As one, I heartily disagree. All in or all out, period.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

95. Even if that inevitably means all out?

I think that saying "we do not want to achieve anything until we can achieve everything" is a very counterproductive position.

The more progress on gay rights (in particular - the same is true of any issue, but I think more so on gay righs where much of the opposition stems from small-c "it's never been this way before" conservatism) has already been made, the less daunting the remaining steps will look to their opponents.

[Toucano]

51. The so-called "Moderate" Democrats are corporate whores. n/t

[Zhade]

53. An informed worldview. Studies show the smarter you are, the more liberal you trend.

If that sounds arrogant, fuck it - it happens to be true.

[leftofthedial]

58. which side they are on in the class war

the "moderates" hate American working people and vote consistently in ways that harm them further (NAFTA/CAFTA, bankruptcy bill, cuts in social programs, support for repuke tax policies, etc.).

[petronius]

62. I think it's a lot like what separates crazy drivers from good drivers from bad drivers:

If you drive faster than me you're a crazy maniac, if you drive slower than me you're a bad driver, if you drive at my speed then you know what you're doing.

Similarly, if you differ from me to the left you're an extremist, and if you differ from me on the right you're a freeper...

Everyone else is a good solid liberal...

(This doesn't really address the OP ?, I know...)

[Cleita]

69. What is known as a moderate Democrat today used to be

a Republican back in my dad's day.

[Madspirit]

72. Not Gun Control

I notice that some people are saying gun control is one of the separators of the moderates and more left-leaning.

I am far, far, far, far, far, far left...I lean so left I occasionally tip over. Sometimes I make Michael Moore look conservative.

...and I am not big on gun control. When guns are outlawed...ONLY THE FRAKKING POLICE, MILITARY AND CRIMINALS will have guns. That's not good. ...and it's not the criminals I am most afraid of.

I don't own a gun right now and I am a Texan so it's not difficult to get one. This is mostly a theoretical answer but if things started leaning much more to the right, I would certainly go get a gun. I'm a lesbian...I'm not dying at the hands of a state sponsored homophobe.
Lee

[TheMadHatter]

74. I think it comes down to socially liberal and fiscally conservative

As in: Leave me alone with my vices, and if I get in too deep I have to dig myself out. After all, nobody put a gun to my head and forced me to put the bong to my lips.

[EndElectoral]

75. Moderate Democrat=Clinton ; Liberal Democrat=FDR

[GoneOffShore]

77. WANTED - Brave Democrats

If I was laying out an agenda for the Democratic Party, here is my wish list:

(Please note that this is not in any particular order, but being put down as the thoughts occur - hence no numbers)

:rant:

Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

A NATIONAL SINGLE PAYER HEALTH SYSTEM!!!! Why is this so difficult people? We spend way too much on health insurance that doesn't cover squat, because the health insurance companies are trying to make money for their stockholders. That's not the way it's supposed to be. How did we let this get out of control?

An end to corporate person hood.

Sever the ties between the military and industrialists.

An end to corporate welfare.

A Congressional ethics standard with real teeth - That is, no travel, gifts, events or perks paid for by lobbyists. And if you get caught, you lose your seat - no appeals, no chance of standing for electoral office again - not even dog catcher.

Term limits - 4 terms in the House, 2 terms in the Senate. And no cushy K Street lobby job after your term is finished. In fact, you will not be allowed within the Beltway or have contact with anyone in government for 10 years after your term is finished. Get a real job,

An amendment to the Constitution disallowing discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, age or skin color ( I'm not using "race" because it is a social construct.) Repeal DOMA.

Make reproductive choice a right. See above.

A breakup of media conglomerates. No one person or corporation would be allowed to own more than one media outlet. Hence, if you own a cable operation, you can't own a newspaper or a radio station. Nor would you be allowed to dominate any one aspect of the airways. Let us return to the concept of the "public good" when it comes to media. See paragraph 1.

Strengthen the wall of separation between church and state. Do I have to elaborate on this? I didn't think so.

A real energy policy, that addresses the needs of the future and the problems of climate change.

A transportation policy that does more than encourage public transport, it supports it. Why should we have to rely on cars all the time?

Urban renewal and suburban removal. Let's stop the sprawl and bring the cities back to life. We really don't need yet another damn mall with yet another Home Depot, Bed Bath & Beyond, Marshall's, and Wegmans surrounding our cities.

An agricultural policy that moves us into sustainable food. No more feed lots, no more mono-culture, no more corn subsidies. You do realize that with the amount of corn in our diets that most Americans, if you broke us down would resemble gigantic walking corn chips? We need to stop letting agribusiness feed us and buy fresh and buy local.

Get the politicians out of everyones bedrooms. Again do I have to elaborate on this? I didn't think so.

There's more, but that's a start.

[Tom Joad]

78. What distinguishes the two? Usually several million dollars in campaign contibutions.

[kohodog]

81. DLC=corporate dem, DNC=mainstream dem

The rest of us are here because dem's present the only avenue for change at this point.

[Paprika Jones]

82. A real democrat supports reparations first and foremost..

and realizes we cannot move forward as a nation until we have
healed this open wound. There are no moderate democrats, just
pawns of the white power structure.

[Rusty MacHenry]

87. So what your trying to tell me

That your only a real Democrat if your for giving millions of dollars away to people although had ancestors that werenot slaves but not slaves themselves. Is that what your trying to tell me cause if it is I guess i'm no Democrat.

[The Straight Story]

83. One works within reality, while the other is working to make a newer reality

One wants small steps to bring about change, the other wants to leap into change.

That is - insofar as methods go (which is where a lot of friction exists).

I think both want a change to something better, but disagree on how to achieve it.

One cares about the swing votes so that they can stay in power, one wants the swing votes but does not want to compromise with them.

On some issues they just plain could disagree, one wanting less gun control perhaps, the other a thousand or two more laws on the books or a ban altogether.

More liberal and to the left, the more likely to ban or try to control people and their lives and choices based on the ideal 'it is better for all if you don't do X as it costs us money'.

Moderates tend more towards letting people be more free and trusting them more not to be sinners who need a new moral code backed by jail and fines, or re-education.

closer to the center democrats want to be more like republicans with a few bones tossed out to the workers and other groups, feed em all a little bit to keep em from yelling and don't really make a lot of change.

[Rusty MacHenry]

86. I think it has to do with the issues

I would be classfied as a moderate cause I side with conservatives on a bunch of issues. I am pro-gun, although I am pro-choice i am for many restrictions, I am pro-ANWAR and I wouldn't hesitate voting for certain Republicans that are fairly moderate.

You think i'm right about that

[The Straight Story]

90. I think issues are part of it

but is HOW one approaches the issues and how they want to solve them which help in defining the line (or scales perhaps).

I don't want guns banned, and I think there are plenty of restrictions on em already.
On abortion - I look at it like other choices we make, it is our body our choice and people should not be punished for their choices when it comes to their bodies, which goes to everything from smoking to drinking to eating, etc. I would include in that places like bars where people can choose to be or not to be if they want to allow smoking.

I think there IS a place for regulation on many things, we can't live without intelligent regulations. Their scope though is another place where folks differ on all sides. I think there is room for a things like 'non-enforced' regulations where they are only enforced when there is a complaint - like garage sales. We had a FEW people who ran em all summer and neighbors were not happy about it - now you are supposed to have permits to have them, when and how often is regulated, etc. If no one complains but the city sees a violation I don't see why it should be enforced. This happens now in bars here in Columbus - have not been to one, nor have my friends, where people aren't smoking. No one complains, it is not enforced (and the cops were in the one bar one night and didn't do a thing about it, they were there over another issue).

I can see having restrictions on abortion if one is far left - it will eventually be a health care issue where it will affect how much others pay (or so I am told in regards to smoking/eating/drinking/etc) - have one, ok, have more than one well then you are taxed cause you are not taking precautions and driving health care costs up, etc and so on. It is a slippery slope when we start tying our individual lives together via money for health care and then regulating the lives of others over cash. Seems like something a corporation would do.

[Moderate Dem]

88. I guess that I call myself a moderate because

I'm more of a civil rights/safety net Democrat, for a strong defense, and I have little in common with most "leftists". I have voted Republican exactly 2 times in my life, both times to "reward" that Republican for standing up to the religious right.

I am also pro-gun and pro-death penalty, although I'd like to see a much higher burdon of proof.

I live in Virginia, and Virginia Democrats are a lot different than Massachussetts Democrats. If I lived in Massachussetts, I'd probably split the ticket more, but in Virginia, I fit right in with guys like Mark Warner.

[mmonk]

91. The term moderate has been raped just as the term liberal has.

Nothing means what it used to.

[Neshanic]

92. House square footage.

[Rusty MacHenry]

93. Also I have to say this

Even though i'm pretty conservative Democrat in alot of issues, I would take an ultra liberal like John Conyers any day of the week cause I have learned that liberal Democrats (like Conyers, Woolsey, Waxman etc) tend to be fighters and would stick up to anyone in need unlike the conservative Democrats(i.e DLC, Blue Dog) that tend to do nothing and just sit on the sidelines watching. I mean when have you see a conservative Democrat that's not John Murtha really fight, really say what needs to be said.

I hope that post makes sense with all of you.

[philosophie_en_rose]

94. A Song by Evan Greer (inspired by Phil Ochs). {mp3}

http://www.evangreer.com/x/evangreer%20-%20lovemeimalibera.mp3

I trade Internet jokes about Dubya,
They sure are funny to me.
But don’t even think about asking
For me to give up my new SUV.
I don’t know what you mean about oil,
I just wish that gas could be free...
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

Well I’ve signed about a thousand petitions,
And my golf score is six under par.
And I keep myself up on the issues
By listening to N.P.R.,
And you know that I’m changing the world
With these stickers all over my car!
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

And you know that I’m not a racist,
I've been on the side of the blacks all along.
And I always give a few extra dollars
To the young man who mows my lawn!
And I’ve never read Emma Goldman,
But I know that she must have been wrong!
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

Yes I went to that pro-choice rally,
I think women should get equal pay.
But it’s sure nice that my wife cooks me dinner,
And she puts my clean laundry away!
And maybe our country ain’t perfect,
But revolution is never the way.
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

You know I support Gay marriage,
And I want the environment clean.
But I’m too busy at work to take action,
So I’m just voting for Howard Dean.
I know we must work inside the system,
It’s the best one that I’ve ever seen!
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

Yes, I cheered when they caught Saddam,
I knew that the news wouldn’t lie,
And I'm glad that the war is now over,
Cause my 401k's on the rise!
And you know that I love my country:
Best democracy money can buy!
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal!

Oh, once I was young and impulsive,
I wore every conceivable pin.
Even went to the socialist meetings
And I learned all the old union hymns.
Ah, but I've grown older and wiser,
That's why I'm turning you in...
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal!