Tips for Political Moderates

Bob McDob · Post by **Bob McDob** » 2003-12-24 11:56pm

I consider myself a moderate. Although the word has many meanings, the one I use is one of prudence, of preferring to look at a problem from all angles before making a decision, a conservative, but not dogmatically so.

The problem, of course, with moderation is that it simply isn't sexy. It's more interesting, amusing and overall entertaining to see an Ann Coutler or a Michael Moore rant about how guns suck and gays are Satan's hellspawn and how America raped their dog. When brought up among the politics of showmanship, moderates are simply not as appealing because they don't garner as much attention. Not to mention, a charismatic leader is far more appealing. So although we generally make up the largest portion of the population, we get far less attention.

To that end, I would like to suggest a set of changes that will, hopefully, revitalize the moderate movement, and at the same time propel our message to a large audience.

1. From now on, the name of the movement will no longer be called moderate. It will be called the Sexy Beasts.
2. All Sexy Beasts will be required to dress provocatively, regardless of relative sexual attrativeness or weather conditions. While this would in any other case surely result in censure by the mainstream populace, I must remind you that we are the mainstream populace. I mean, we like Reality TV, so why not?
3. When giving speeches, Sexy Beasts shall scream at the top of their lungs while waving their arms around expressively. While the content shall be unaltered, the overall tone of the message shall be dramatically amplified.
4. While Sexy Beasts will not submit to gross displays of ostentatious wealth, they will distinguish themselves by wearing colors that clash horribly.

This is merely the start of the Sexy Beast revitalization. There are many more ways planned, but my Sexy Beast prudence requires me to end prematurely to avoid seeming "weird". The only way Sexy Beasts will be accepted is if they proceed ahead slowly. Do it one day at a time. Wear scanty clothes in winter, change your inflections mid-sentence for no apparent reason, paint your house purple and orange.

The path of a thousand miles begins with a single step!

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-25 12:40am

Sorry, it won't work. The real problem with political moderates is that they don't have cool slogans and sound bites.

In the modern age, we have replaced principles with slogans, debates with mudslinging, and values with catchy one-liners. One could argue that this is a direct consequence of our Rapid-Serve convenience culture. Why slog through an entire page of complicated arguments on a subject when there's a catchy one-liner you can throw at people?

Whether it's "no child left behind" or "it takes a village" or "I feel your pain" or "if it doesn't fit, you must acquit", the last man standing is usually the guy who figured out the best one-liner, not the guy who knows the subject or the guy whose platform is most reasonable.

Therefore, the moderates need good one-liners. The problem is that one-liners, by their very nature, are far easier to generate for extreme and oversimplified arguments than for reasonable ones.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-12-25 12:49am

What exactly is a moderate?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-12-25 02:15am

kojikun wrote:What exactly is a moderate?

Someone who might have an extreme opinion or two, but on most issues is in the middle of the political spectrum between the dominant conservative and liberal values of their system. Here it would be someone who doesn't give a shit either way about gay marriage, race isn't an issue, Christianity is just a set of motions, and drugs are the neighbor's problem.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-12-25 10:08am

kojikun wrote:What exactly is a moderate?

Part of the problem is that "moderate" is a rather vague and nebulous term. Ideally, a moderate is someone who seeks the most reasonable solution to a problem, which usually is somewhere between the extremes.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-12-25 11:00am

RedImperator wrote:

Part of the problem is that "moderate" is a rather vague and nebulous term. Ideally, a moderate is someone who seeks the most reasonable solution to a problem, which usually is somewhere between the extremes

The problem with that is "moderates" usually do not believe in anything with any conviction.. and in politics "belief" is what drives change.... IMHO

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-12-25 11:27am

theski wrote: The problem with that is "moderates" usually do not believe in anything with any conviction.. and in politics "belief" is what drives change.... IMHO

Which is particularly stupid..."belief" is almost always based on "faith" that this is right, whereas the moderate approach is to weigh up all the options based on thier merits rather than picking one based on thier "belief".

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-12-25 02:24pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:

Which is particularly stupid..."belief" is almost always based on "faith" that this is right, whereas the moderate approach is to weigh up all the options based on thier merits rather than picking one based on thier "belief

I will have to disagree on this one.... Any great leader is driven by his beliefs and transfers that passion to that goal.. People will not follow a "moderate" or someone that governs by committe or polls.... IMHO

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-12-25 02:27pm

theski wrote: I will have to disagree on this one.... Any great leader is driven by his beliefs and transfers that passion to that goal.. People will not follow a "moderate" or someone that governs by committe or polls.... IMHO

That's just it, people will follow nutters rather than think for themselves, that is the problem, that is the stupid part of it.
Stupid people follow people based purely on faith/belief, those who can think things through properly make thier choice on who to follow based on what is the best course of action.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2003-12-25 10:06pm

I'm convinced that a great deal of the problems throughout the history of the world have been the fault of extremists. Even though I, personally, am a liberal, I think it's better to be a moderate conservative than an extreme liberal.

Symmetry · Post by **Symmetry** » 2003-12-26 12:50pm

Where do gradualists with extreme goals fall into this?

Soontir C'boath · Post by **Soontir C'boath** » 2003-12-26 01:32pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:That's just it, people will follow nutters rather than think for themselves, that is the problem, that is the stupid part of it.
Stupid people follow people based purely on faith/belief, those who can think things through properly make thier choice on who to follow based on what is the best course of action.

~Jason