What kind of FOUR LETTER conservative are you?

You need more bags than ABC
People have more diversive views.
Rather than ABC you would need most of the alphabet.
You get a "rundown" on each candidate with election information.
Why not a central location to collect & post all that data?

I expect to see some real surprises in 08.
Every candidate listed on both sides to date has large groups of people who hate them intensely.
Politics are volitile due to the WOT.

You're correct about the particular volatility of the GWOT issue in the 2008 campaign. However, this makes it even more important to know what candidates say and think about all issues - across the spectrum.

Also, the larger idea (shown at the beginning of the post) is to use all the letters in the alphabet for each of the four axes:

A-M: liberal spectrum, with A being Ultra-liberal
N-Z: conservative spectrum, with Z being Ultra-conservative

This provides THIRTEEN 'buckets' for each type (conservative or liberal). Since it divides evenly, 'centrists' too, would lean one way or the other!

I'm sure that there will be suggestions to add more than 4 axes, or more choices - but I think that with 4 axes and 26 choices in each, we already have nearly half-a-million different combinations!

It's the religion thing. I think that the state should be secular, but that it should be influenced by morality or ethical considerations of the majority.

I do not go for an "atheist" state. I feel much more comfortable with a deist state, but I don't think that morality should necessarily be legislated (except when it comes to the education of minors).

I'm not religious, but I don't like calling myself "religious left wing." The left is generally anti-religious; athiests are often anti-religious.

I'm non-religious, but I'd defend the right of anyone else to be religious, unlike the secular left.

Perhaps you could modify it to "non-religious" instead of "religious left wing."

-The Secular Conservative

That does make sense .. I can see why the label casts a 'spin' in the classification that wasn't intended.

Actually, the 24 letter spectrum (A-M, N-Z) wouldn't have any labels - it would just be a rating that is either self-administered or as a result of a questionnaire.

A while back, someone posted an essay just like this on their blog. Was that you?

but I do think your options on religion are missing the boat. I respect people who are guided by religion in all things that they do but don't thump the bible in my face. I am suspect of atheists. The problem facing us today is that the seculars are trying to outlaw religion and make it culturally repugnant. The religious right, on the other hand, are responding by trying to impose it onto government as it was in Europe. They are both wrong. We have a right to live our lives wearing our religion in public but not subject government to a religious test. Our constitutionally defined rights are predicated on their being a divine being in the first place and the values are distinctly Judeo-Christian. It shouldn't be illegal to acknowledge that or discuss it public. It's the virtue we are looking for, not how you kneel or pray.

This is based on the choices you give.

ABA[because of the way you have it]the last has to be {AB} again because of the way you have it.

Thanks for your comments!

BrianR: I certainly hope that it was on THIS blog, because this was one of my first few posts on TH (way back in Jan '07, when I was just 'vor', not 'VOR' :)

Pasadena Phil: I am not an atheist in the militant sense that one associates with secular leftists. I actually believe in values and virtue. This may sound self-promotional (and it is), but I have an article titled 'Can Atheists & Religious people share common values?' at:
http://voice.townhall.com/g/3e9d4f52-889c-453f-b4f3-e8a80ee 1f5ac
In the article, I have 'borrowed' the definitions of values, virtues and joy in a way that seems consistent (to me). I would be interested to read your comments.

Jevica: thanks for participating. I agree that the ABC definitions are a bit narrow. In fact, my grand scheme (which has not materialized due to 'real world' pressures) was to have:
A-M: liberal spectrum, with A being Ultra-liberal
N-Z: conservative spectrum, with Z being Ultra-conservative
This would allow nearly 500,000 combinations, which should satisfy even the highly-nuanced leftists!

Depending on the specific definition, I'm either a Swedish pop group or a triple-A/single-B conservative (with a hint or two of "A" in the nationalist category as well).

But I don't believe one needs to be "anti-gay" to be a social right-winger.

Granted, I'm just picking nits: any possible objections to your phrasing you've already addressed.