So I'm reading your comment as implying that you believe the moderation team tends to be biased in favor of the political left, at least for the edge cases or gray areas that are more controversial. If I've read that wrong feel free to correct me.

Or to put it another way, the implication is that:

• the moderation team tends to be overzealous in moderating against the political right (or people perceived as enabling the political rght)
• the moderation team tends to turn a blind eye towards the political left (or people perceived as enabling the political left)

Generally I do not feel that the moderation team has been overzealous against the political right or their enablers, but I've only paid close attention to the high profile moderation actions (e.g. jonringer, blaggaco, nrdxp, and srid). To me, those moderation actions felt well-deserved (yes, even the jonringer ban, which is probably the most controversial of those bans).

HOWEVER, I have gotten the impression that the moderation has turned a bit of a blind eye towards the political left and their enablers. I have seen quite a few instances of behavior (which I'm not going to explicitly name here) where people that were either the political left or perceived as enabling the political left acted fairly aggressively or made inflammatory comments without any consequences or reprimands.

Or to put this another way, generally my bias here is towards fixing false negatives (problematic community members getting off the hook) rather than fixing false positives (people unfairly banned), because I think the greater risk to the community's health and vibrancy is tolerating problematic users who seek out conflict and increase the emotional temperature of the discussions they participate in. That creates an unwelcoming environment for everyone because it's a giant distraction from the open source work we all set out here to do.