At his heart, every worthwhile politician is an evangelist of his policies. At the heart of every worthwhile evangelist is the good faith belief that his beliefs are good for others. It is with this light that I try to look at the current political climate; at least that which we see online, through the news, and partly in the men on the street.

First things first. I don’t think that we are in a state of political civil war. At least not yet. Neighbors of differing political affiliations don’t spit at each other on the street; so far, and I don’t even think the balance is tenuous at all, Middle America Americans don’t consider themselves in a state of political warfare with each other.

I suppose the kind of rabidness that we see from the left these days — the kind that wishes death upon those who think differently, that which considers George W. Bush a greater threat than Jihadic terrorists, that which “justified” tackling Richard Streeter — is being pushed into the mainstream by the media itself. Jeff Jarvis laments and calls them extermists.

However, I think that centrists on both sides of the fence have too many differences between each other to form a strong political movement. While we can wax romantic all we want about forming “the perfect party,” has it ever occured to us that perhaps organized centrism leads to paralysis? Our positions are already the result of reasonable compromises — at least those reasonable to us — but I think that the differences between us will prevent us from “all getting along.”

Take for example, myself. A generally laissez-faire, libertine fellow who is for same-sex marriage, who all the while finds abortion (of almost any sort) abhorrent. Along the way I’ll have to draw the line somewhere, and so will someone else. How, then, do we find a way to cut through all the white noise and find a platform that will be appealing to at least 35% of voters?

While we disavow the ideologues on our extremes, they themselves are the principle-thumpers. We don’t like it, but it’s the harsh reality. Rush Limbaugh was right when he said that centrists never formed movements. What we do have, or at least, what we have had all the while, is a system where ideologues form the ideals (or extremes) of policy. The art of compromise brings everything back to the center where it will be palatable enough to be feasible. That’s how it works in Congress; that’s how it works in Middle America.

Centrists may never have the power to form a movement; they do have the power to keep a movement going by attracting numbers. The problem with the Left as perceived by us bloggers is that they have been pushed into the Democrat center by the media. Given all the attention that they have given, they indeed have gravitas in the party. Why else would Terry Mac and other Mainstream Democratsâ„¢ give their blessing to Michael Moore?

I have the good faith belief that Moderate Democrats still know what they are doing, and that their desire to have a president from their party stems from a good faith belief that they are doing the right thing. I will never, and I mean never, treat with any sort of seriousness a candidate whose platform is to “take back the country,” much less “take back the White House” The White House — the Presidency — is not just a position of power: it is a position of responsibility.

While Andy Sullivan, Dan Drezner, and Chris Lawrence speculate on the effects of this year’s of electoral results on the GOP, I worry more about what is happening to the Left and how a Kerry victory may affect us. John Kerry’s positions on issues that concern me are not too different from those of President Bush’s. I think Kerry would sooner nuke Mecca than he would allow our citizenry to fall into dhimmitude. But, my problem with a Kerry victory, one that sets off political upsets in other electoral positions, is that Democrats whose only goal is to undo what George W. Bush has done could take the floor. Instead of four to eight years of moving the country forward while riding on what good (no matter how little good they might think there was) GWB has left behind, I think that petty partisanship will turn the character of a Kerry presidency into one of “bringing things back the way they were.” Economically, it’s a bad move. In terms of the war on terror, it will be a fatal mistake.

I want George Bush to win: he’s less unpalatable than John Kerry is. But more than that, I want GWB to win so that the same kind of phenomenon that hit the Right during the second Clinton term would happen to the Left in this country: true-thinking, centrist Liberals would sit down, talk policy in terms that appeal to Middle America, and find a way to win the presidency in the name of making this country better. Most likely I won’t agree with any of their policies; however, it will be a more interesting competition in 2008 than it is now. Bring it on.