Doesn't anyone check voting records anymore????

Whenever someone accuses a dem of being more rethug than dem, make sure they know what the hell they are talking about.

Hillary Clinton



John McCain



Barack Obama



http://www.issues2000.org/default.htm

People have it in their heads what the think of Hillary's record...and no amount of fact will dissuade them!

pesky little facts.

... not when there's a big bowl'a Hilary-hatin to be had!

disproves. At best, she's a left-leaning centrist.
I personally think the country is ready for a solid left candidate. The last midterm elections should have hammered that into anyone's head.

I don't think being merely more left than republican will suffice anymore.

time to try and take this country back to the correct side of the political divide.

I cannot stomach another moderate or centrist. It really is time for a liberal - loud and proud and not aftraid to say what they think.

May we be so lucky....

Right now at the top of the list is Obama, Hillary and Edwards. Those are the ones which have declared so far. Looking at their stances and past voting records reflect much of what I believe although not all. I do like the other candidates as well so it'll depend on how well the rest of the campaign season plays out.

I'm not sure how far left the country is ready for at this point. Right now there isn't a majority supportive of gay marriage. Perhaps when most do the country will be ready for a very liberal president, but I don't believe it's time yet.

Because rightist policies have left this country in tatters.
Political movements are rarely compromises, usually they are reactions AGAINST the status quo, if its not working.

Giving people more of the same is a disastrously misguided strategy, IMHO. The country as a majority is fed up with the war, and other issues that have been ramrodded down their throats by rightists while centrists stood by and let it happen.

People are fed up with BOTH right wing corruption AND centrist appeasement.

Sometimes, a compromise is the worst solution. Sometimes, taking a stand for what is right is the best solution.

Yes, we need to go left, but I'm not sure if the country is ready to go as far left as many of at DU are.

I totally agree that people are fed up, but going to the far left too fast could backfire. That's my concern.

does not adequately know what "left" is. Therein lies the problem. The American populace does not react to the actual left, but rather, the perceived left, which is a charicature wrapped in the hammer and sickle with a joint in its mouth or giving aid and comfort to terrorists.

We will have no idea whether or not America is "ready" for the left until the "left" is allowed a fair position in the marketplace of ideas. As it stands, centrists and conservatives join forces to make sure that does not happen...both are benefitted by the false perception of the left and have no interest in America meeting the actual left.

EXACTLY a 50% Republican, 50% Democrat.

Isn't it interesting how when someone does this exercise themselves, their scores do not look a thing like ADA or progressive punch.

If people did check then all the trashing of Obama being a centrist DLC type would not be happening. You should check just what they did while in office and what it was about as well as voting record.

tee-hee

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2809

I couldn't figure it out from the link. I'm curious where my Senators fall when compared to someone like Lieberman. I always complain that Feinstein is too conservative but I wonder if that's true in your grids.

They're not my grids.

I'll have to dig for their methodology, then.

The first thing I'm looking for in a candidate is one who was willing to speak up about the Iraq War when Bush had 80% approval ratings and was landing on an aircraft carrier declaring "Mission Accomplished". Some votes outweigh others and when someone who has served as long as Ted Kennedy says that voting against the IWR was the best vote of his career, that really means something.

It's the same way that liberals rightfully defected from Johnson and Humphrey and supported McCarthy or Kennedy in 1968. Johnson and Humphrey were just plain wrong about the war and it's hard to ignore an issue that big despite the fact that both of them were great on domestic issues.

That said, I think 2004 was more like 1968 and 2008 is more like 1972. If Ed Muskie or Hubert Humphrey had been elected in '72 they would've pulled us out of Vietnam pretty quickly. Hillary like Muskie and Humphrey jumped on the bandwagon late but she clearly has no interest in escalating the war and McCain does.

If Hillary gets the nomination I will vote for her not because I think she deserves it, but because you would have to be blind, deaf, and dumb to think that she's not 1000x better than any Republican. People can complain all they want about Hillary and other Democratic leaders, in fact that's what I just did. It doesn't change the fact that today's Republican party is so extreme that the worst Democratic leaders don't even come close to them. Some will say Joe Lieberman but I would remind you that after that slime showed his true colors, he couldn't get elected on a Democratic ticket.

same goes with every dem that voted for the thing.

What I have a problem with is people calling her a rethug and maligning her to the point it sounds like I stumbled onto a RW talk show like Hannity or Rush. They take no consideration that she is a socially conscious woman with a lot of smarts. She is calculating and she does test the political waters. What politician doesn't?

I do have my preferences, but I'm also realistic, too and I'm not willing to cut off my nose to spite my face.

Perhaps that is what some people mean when they say she is more rethug than Dem?

I must have missed something on that.

I don't give a pass to anyone that voted for the IWR, and HRC isn't any more or less guilty or complicit than the rest of the knuckleheads that voted yes.

I just cringe when I hear RW talking points. Some people use it to describe other candidates but get their knickers in a twist when their candidate is dissed. I think that it would be a good idea to eliminate that particular line of verbiage from DU entirely. It really is low brow and I think we are better than that; I could be wrong about that but I hope not.

Everyone knows that Hillary Clinton votes however John McCain votes. They're practically twins. And she somehow brilliantly brainwashed Nancy Pelosi into not wanting to impeach Bush because Hillary and W. are BFF. And Hillary just sits around all day doing nothing but rubbing her greedy little hands together and laughing at all the little sheeple she's suckered into propelling her onward in her ultimate goal to change America into a monarchy so that she can be the Queen of the U.S.A.

Prove me wrong. Go ahead, debunk it.

Again, what do voting records have to do with anything? All the info I need I get from www.cluelessopinionatedblogger.com.

Every three months.

I score every Senator on bill passage and nominations, and keep track of voting trends.

I suppose that, at least on the issues I score (not amendments and non-binding stuff), I know what I am talking about. My interpretation of the data is up for debate, though.

Here are my scores as they were after the 109th Congress:

Harkin (Iowa) 82.75862069
Boxer (California) 82.75862069
Feingold (Wisconsin) 82.75862069
Kennedy (Massacheusetts) 77.5862069
Corzine (New Jersey) now Gov. 76.66666667
Lautenberg (New Jersey) 75.86206897
Durbin (Illinois) 75.86206897
Akaka (Hawaii) 75.86206897
Sarbanes (Maryland) 72.4137931
Kerry (Massacheusetts) DLC 70.68965517
Leahy (Vermont) 70.68965517
Levin (Michigan) 68.96551724
Mikulski (Maryland) 68.96551724
Reed (Rhode Island) 68.96551724
Biden (Deleware) 67.24137931
Dodd (Connecticut) 65.51724138
Wyden (Oregon) 65.51724138
Dayton (Minnesota) 65.51724138
Obama (Illinois) 63.79310345
Bayh (Indiana) DLC 60.34482759
Murray (Washington) 60.34482759
Schumer (New York) DLC 58.62068966
Inouye (Hawaii) DLC 56.89655172
Bingaman (New Mexico) 56.89655172
Dorgan (North Dakota) DLC 55.17241379
Reid (Nevada) 55.17241379
Byrd (West Virginia) 55.17241379
Clinton (New York) DLC 53.44827586
Menendez (New Jersey) DLC 50
Cantwell (Washington) DLC 48.27586207
Stabenow (Michigan) DLC 46.55172414
Kohl (Wisconsin) DLC 44.82758621
Feinstein (California) DLC 44.82758621
Leiberman (Connecticut) DLC 44.82758621
Rockefeller (West Virginia) 41.37931034
Conrad (North Dakota) DLC 41.37931034
Baucus (Montana) DLC 39.65517241
Carper (Deleware) DLC 34.48275862
Johnson (South Dakota) DLC 31.03448276
Lincoln (Arkansas) DLC 31.03448276
Salazar (Colorado) DLC 24.13793103
Pryor (Arkansas) DLC 22.4137931
Nelson (Florida) DLC 20.68965517
Landrieu (Louisianna) DLC 17.24137931
Nelson (Nebraska) DLC 3.448275862


Here is a graphical representation of all of the 109th Congress (frequency distributions; done in Sept.)



Here are the votes I scored (and how a "typical" DUer would vote in parentheses):

Condi confirm (nay)
Gonzales Confirm (nay)
class action law (nay)
bankruptcy bill (nay)
confirm negroponte (nay)
energy bill (nay)
CAFTA (nay)
CAFTA (2nd vote) (nay)
ohiovote (no to certification, 5 points for at least giving a speech)
firearm manufacturer immunity (nay)
confirmation of radical judges (gang of 14 = 5 pts, voting for one or more of these judges 0)
tax relief act of 2005 (tax cuts for rich) (nay)
deficit reconciliation act (spending cuts for poor) (nay)
Alito cloture (nay)
Alito nomination (nay)
Tax cut protection (favor the rich) (nay)
Extend Patriot Act (nay)
Raise limit on public debt (nay)
Flag burning Amendment (nay)
US-Oman FTA (nay)
Roberts Confirmation (nay)
Gates' confirmation (nay)
Atomic cooperation w/ India (nay)
Border Fence (nay)
Military Commissions act (nay)
Pension protection act (nay...not sure about this one, actually..Feingold and Boxer voted nay)
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act (nay)
Child Insterstate Abortion Notification Act (nay)
Stem Cell Enhancement Act (yeah)

Here is where you can read up on all of my scores for the last 4 quarters.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Zodiak%20Ironfist

Bookmarked! Thanks.

From what I see. I'm bookmarking this one, too. All of us that do this shoud compare notes and methodologies and get a good cross-section of metrics. There is no one metric that is perfect, but the combined efforts of DUers using different, but valid methodologies, might be more convincing than the "official" ones that give Feinstein a higher score than Boxer (like ADA)....or Hillary a more progressive score than Feingold (like Progressive Punch).

I have always said that DUers should do this for themselves. They find out that Hillary is NOT a Republican. Kerry is actually a very good Senator, and there are about 15-2o arguably more Republican-like Democrats that we never talk about (like Carper).

Good on you....you should get a few recommends for this. I'm recommending it, now.

And Harkin rocks.

He is more liberal than Obama, I would wager. This does not seem to reflect that, for whatever reason.

I do not know Kucinich's score because I only do the Senate.

http://www.issues2000.org/House/Bernie_Sanders.htm

For the record, I also thought Kucinich was more liberal than the graph indicates.

This method uses all sorts of metrics....endorsements, quotes, votes on specific bills, etc. Did you score everything, or just select things like votes only?

My measurement is far more dichotomous...in other words, I read in one dimension, and you read in two dimensions. That is a LOT of work to score all of that for both the House and the Senate!!!

Or are you doing just a few?

I'm excited....I thought I was the only guy around these parts that did this sort of thing.

If you click on the links in my posts and scroll all the way to the very bottom, you find the graph you see in my post. ontheissues.org compiled these graphs, not me.

I frankly wouldn't have the time to measure candidates on both social issues as well as economic issues using the number of metrics they employ, and it is likely that such a task is a full-time job, as there is always a new bill to be voted upon and hundreds of congressmen to track simultaneously. You'd need a dedicated staff given the number of congressmen, the multiple metrics, a scale for social issues, a scale for economic issues, and the number of bills that pass through congress each year.

Another good site for information is votesmart.org. It is a website where politicians take their National Political Awareness Test in order to guage their position on the issues. Unfortunately, a good number of politicians refuse to take the test for some reason or another; it's voluntary after all, and a lot of politicians are afraid of revealing their full positions.

Here is, again, Dennis Kucinich's information on votesmart:

http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=BC032003

Unfortunately, this website does not condense Kucinich's position into an easy to read graphic, but the lay-out of the information is like reading somebody's answers on an exam.