I don’t think it’s useful to try to define political moderation by looking at how so-called moderates view individual issues. The defining thing about a political moderate is not that they hold no radical positions on any particular political issue but that their views may straddle both sides of the political aisle and that they are willing to accept compromise solutions that don’t line up exactly with their political preferences. For example, a moderate may prefer a single-payer health plan for the country but settle for ObamaCare because it is the best that our political system can produce. Or, they may be in favor of deporting every undocumented worker in the country, but realize that this isn’t practical or politically feasible. What should define a moderate is a willingness to tolerate half-measures and imperfect compromises, not that they are necessarily swing-voters or that all their political preferences split the difference between the two parties. Moderates may have far right beliefs on some issues and far left beliefs on others, which is why both parties have an opportunity to win their support in any given election. But they should not be understood to hold middle of the road positions.
Sometimes you hear people say that they are socially liberal and fiscally conservative, which usually means that they don’t like to pay taxes but they also don’t like god-botherers who try to dictate sexual morality. These people can easily hold positions that are nowhere near any kind of consensus on both abortion and marginal tax rates. But, as long as they are not so doctrinaire about any particular position as to preclude them from supporting a compromise, they should be considered politically moderate.