Anti-Climacus

WELL: I think this comment of J.P.'s (scroll down a bit) deserves an extended reply:

"***...but candidates tend to move towards the center because that's where the voters are.***

True. But why don't we just choose candidates who are squarely in the middle from the beginning? If the center is what voters want then candidates should do away with all the nonsense about being conservative or liberal.

In fact, we would probably be better off choosing candidates that we *know* are middle-of-the-road."

I think (excluding House races, which are a different kettle of fish) we by and large do choose candidates who are middle of the road, and I think the system has such a level of inertia that it keeps anyone from going too far off the ends. I think everyone can agree that when we talk about candidates, what they say is, most times and in most instances, self-serving cant, so it's the actions the particular politician engages in that we have to watch.

If you look at Presidential nominees back (excepting 1964, which was sort of a fluke year in this regard) through the end of World War II, all of them have run, more or less, as moderates compared to the political climate at the time (Reagan increases federal spending, Nixon passes environmental legislation, Clinton reforms Welfare, etc), and all of the Presidents who have been elected have pretty much been moderates in terms of their accomplishments. And I think people know this and instinctively support candidates in this mold. A lot of the counterexamples to this argument apply towards what politicians say and do to influence the politically savvy, who only make up 10% or so of the population at large.