Our Take: With Election Day approaching, media are analyzing how moderate and undecided voters might vote. But what does it mean to be a moderate? In his most recent post for The New York Times, David Brooks defines what moderation means, and what it doesn't.
"First, let me describe what moderation is not," Brooks wrote. "It is not just finding the midpoint between two opposing poles and opportunistically planting yourself there. Only people who know nothing about moderation think it means that."
Moderates start with a political vision, but they get it from history books, not philosophy books. That is, a moderate isn't ultimately committed to an abstract idea. Instead, she has a deep reverence for the way people live in her country and the animating principle behind that way of life. In America, moderates revere the fact that we are a nation of immigrants dedicated to the American dream — committed to the idea that each person should be able to work hard and rise."
Read more about political moderation on The New York Times.
- Doug Robinson: Utah man's new running shoe...
- In our opinion: A darkening cloud is hanging...
- Richard Davis: Airlines should do more for...
- Letters: Federal encroachment
- My view: People deserve rights at our borders
- Michael Gerson: Reinvigorating the GOP will...
- Letters: Ending debt
- Snapshot of 2013 in political cartoons




Mr. Brooks' definition of moderate closely resembles most definitions of classical conservatism, or Burkean conservatism. In the modern era I think President Eisenhower best exemplifies the style. It's a conservatism I could easily live More..
Sounds like someone wants to control the definition.
Didn't Rush tell us to hate all moderates?