The base of this country is moderate conservative.  Politicians have a very bad habit of believing their own press releases.  Clinton over-reached in 92, misreading the vote against Bush and against Perot as a vote for his policies.  We saw the result in 94.  Then, Gingrich and the Republicans in 94 mis-understood the vote against the overreaching of the Democrats as an endorsement of the Conservative Republican’s policies.  However, they maintained power and then let the power corrupt them.  In 2008, we run the danger of Obama, Pelosi, and Reid misreading the anger at Bush as an endorsement of their policies and ideas.  This would be just as wrong and may lead to another republican take over of the house and senate.

I believe most people want government to leave them alone, but help those who can’t help themselves.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

Phil - I think you’re basically right, but studies on Gen Y (1980-2000) show a shift in upbringing that may soon change the “moderate conservative” label. Some interesting observations from here:

Generational distinctives have always been of interest to me.  Her focus was on the generation born between approximately 1980 and 2000 [Gen Y], and some of the things she shared were very interesting.

1. The first was that that this generation is very bonded to their parents, so much so that they come into the workforce not having made any major decisions in their life.  Parents are even involved in their job search and placement; she related that, when she turned down one prospect, same prospect’s mother called demanding to know why their child was rejected.
2. The second was that this generation has an enormous amount of self-confidence, instilled both by their parents and their school system.  Both of these and more have pumped this group up.  (A good place to watch this in action was the Beijing Olympics, complete with the complementary abyss of defeat.  Personally I found it hard to take; it came across frequently as arrogance.)
3. The third is that this generation is totally technologically connected, both to their devices and to each other.  That’s no surprise, but it’s important to underscore both for the benefit of the old timers and in an industry that in some ways pioneered such things as computer simulation and then lagged in using the technology for other things such as talking with each other.  That connection changes very rapidly.  Ms. Coursey related that she taught a Sunday School class of college and career people.  She dutifully collected their emails, only to find out that few read them!  They were all on MySpace and Facebook!
4. The fourth is that this generation has a low tolerance for jobs and work environments they deem unsatisfactory.  Don’t like a job or employer?  Start hunting online for a new one, and let everyone else know that the one you’ve got sucks.
5. The fifth is that this generation requires a higher degree of mentoring/coaching/interaction with management/handholding (take your pick) than their predecessors.  You just don’t let this group “sink or swim” alone in a corporate environment.
6. The sixth is that formal, higher education is a given.  (That, too, is buttressed by the public school system.  Just try to push for more vocational education and feel the brick wall you run into.)

The rest of the post is worth reading as the blogger relates these characteristics to politics and the idea of “tolerance.”

“America isn’t about to become liberal heaven”

That’s certainly correct. If Barack Obama becomes president with hefty Democratic majorities in the Senate and House, their victory will still be preeminently a rejection of George W. Bush. Self-identified liberals will still comprise only a fifth of the electorate.

The Democrats will win future elections only if they pursue policies fairly close to the political center, as Bill Clinton did after 1994. Obama knows that. So do Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Even more so do Rahm Emanuel and Charles Schumer, who’ve played a key role in Democratic congressional gains over the past two years. The challenge will be to impress the point on older, more liberal members of Congress, most of whom have safe seats.

Schumer and Emanuel will find strong allies among the Democrats who in 2006 and 2008 won in previously Republican districts. They are the blue canaries in the political coal mine. They will be the first to lose if their party falters. How effectively will they organize themselves (e.g., into a muscular Blue Dog Caucus)? How effectively will congressional leaders restrain the pursuit of a liberal nirvana? That remains to be seen. But more senior Democrats, including liberals, well remember life in the House under a Republican majority. They’ve been there and they don’t want to go back.

a vote for Barack Obama and for a Democrat in Congress on Tuesday is a vote to transform the country into a kind of social democratic paradise.

I only hope the Democrats think so and overreach enormously.  Every generation needs to have an experiment in socialism - we’re not bright enough to learn from history.  It’s been a while (since the 70s), and now is as good a time as any.

but studies on Gen Y (1980-2000) show a shift in upbringing that may soon change the “moderate conservative” label.

There’s that, and there’s also the fact that the government (and the Republicans no less enthusiastically than any others) is importing a new electorate.

Byzantine [#5]: Immigrants tend to hold traditional values. The Gen Y trend spells more telling demographics. It carries particular force because it resonates with the deep libertarian streak in American history and culture.

Irenaeus,

Gen Y is libertine, not libertarian.  And the rates of social pathology are tragically high for Hispanic immigrants.

“The rates of social pathology are tragically high for Hispanic immigrants”

Byzantine [#7]: Do you mean the immigrants themselves or their children?