No Hillary you are NOT more progressive than Bernie. Stop it.

[pinebox]

A corporate Dem trying to run to the left against a Democratic Socialist is hilarious. Hillary's record is quite clear and so are her stances. However Bernie's is too. There is NO comparison. Hillary, quit lying already. We're sick of it.

Hillary Clinton Was the 11th Most Liberal Member of the Senate-That's not my opinion. That's what the data says.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/3/31/1374629/-Hillary-Clinton-Was-the-11th-Most-Liberal-Member-of-the-Senate

DW-NOMINATE is a method for analyzing data on preferences, such as voting data, developed by political scientists Keith T. Poole and Howard Rosenthal. Unlike the scoring done by interest groups, DW-NOMINATE doesn't rely on subjective determinations of what constitutes a liberal vote or a conservative vote--it sorts members of a population according to how similar each member's choices are to those of other members of the population. Two senators who vote the same way 90 percent of the time will be much closer to each other than two senators who only vote the same way 10 percent of the time. Poole and Rosenthal have used this method to discover some interesting statistics and trends going back to the First Congress in 1787-89.

Using House and Senate roll call votes as inputs, DW-NOMINATE has been used to chart every member of every Congress in a two-dimensional space. The primary dimension corresponds strongly to conventional notions of the liberal-conservative axis in modern politics, while the significance of the secondary axis tends to change over time (traditionally it tended to highlight the distance between Dixiecrats and the rest of the Democratic party; today it's kind of a more nebulous indicator of social and cultural differences and is, in my opinion, not particularly interesting). The point is that we can sort the members of a particular Congress by their scores on the primary dimension to easily rank them from most liberal to most conservative based entirely on their own voting data.

And when we do this for the period in which Hillary Clinton was in the Senate, here's what we get:

?1427824577

As it turns out, with a first-dimension score of -0.391 based upon her entire service in Congress, Hillary Clinton was the 11th most liberal member of the Senate in each of the 107th, 108th, 109th, and 110th Congresses. That places her slightly to the left of Pat Leahy (-0.386), Barbara Mikulski (-0.385) and Dick Durbin (-0.385); clearly to the left of Joe Biden (-0.331) and Harry Reid (-0.289); and well to the left of moderate Democrats like Jon Tester (-0.230), Blanche Lincoln (-0.173), and Claire McCaskill (-0.154).
Some more numbers from the 110th Congress, to further help put things in perspective:

[JaneyVee]

1. On guns she is. On prochoice she is.

Some other issues, so.

[beam me up scottie]

4. Wrong. She's not more progressive than Bernie on pro-choice issues.

Hillary supported a ban on late term abortions and abstinence-only education.

Late term abortion only if life or health are at risk

Q: Are there circumstances when the government should limit choice?

LAZIO: I had a pro-choice record in the House, and I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I support a ban on partial-birth abortions. Senator Moynihan called it “infanticide.” Even former mayor Ed Koch agreed that this was too extreme a procedure. This is an area where I disagree with my opponent. My opponent opposes a ban on partial-birth abortions.

CLINTON: My opponent is wrong. I have said many times that I can support a ban on late-term abortions, including partial-birth abortions, so long as the health and life of the mother is protected. I’ve met women who faced this heart-wrenching decision toward the end of a pregnancy. Of course it’s a horrible procedure. No one would argue with that. But if your life is at stake, if your health is at stake, if the potential for having any more children is at stake, this must be a woman’s choice.

Source: Senate debate in Manhattan , Oct 8, 2000

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Abortion.htm

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/09/29/hillary_clinton_i_could_compromise_on_abortion_if_it_included_exceptions_for_mothers_health.html#ooid=N1ODF1dzpHyB52_cmPb77qDHRLMY2We_

Teen abstinence is the right thing to do

Reaffirming her support for what used to be called teen celibacy Hillary reminded us that the point is to find out if it works. This is how Senator Clinton put it, in a paragraph I never saw quoted in the press.

"Research shows that the primary reason that teenage girls abstain is because of their religious and moral values. We should embrace this--and support programs that reinforce the idea that abstinence at a young age is not just the smart thing to do, it is the right thing to do. But we should also recognize what works and what doesn't work, and to be fair, the jury is still out on the effectiveness of abstinence-only programs. I don't think this debate should be about ideology, it should be about facts and evidence--we have to deal with the choices young people make, not just the choice we wish they would make."

Source: The Case for Hillary Clinton, by Susan Estrich, p. 55 , Oct 17, 2005

http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Hillary_Clinton_Families_+_Children.htm

Bernie on the other hand has always been completely pro-choice and has a 100% NARAL rating to prove it.

[senz]

33. Bernie votes from conviction. Hillary from electability.

This explains all her votes, including the IWR and the Patriot Act.

[beam me up scottie]

38. Her vote in support of cluster bombs, her support of the death penalty...

I'm not saying she's a DINO but no way in hell is she more or even close to being as progressive as Bernie.

[senz]

40. Expedient votes, all of them. None from principle.

A good OP would analyze her votes from this perspective. (Hint, hint.)

It is the only explanation for her odd, checkerboard record.

[NurseJackie]

53. These two are very important to me! But you know what else ...

... she's right where she needs to be in these "more-liberal-than-thou" rankings. Not too hard, not too soft ... hot to hot, not too cold ... she's ju-u-ust right! For me, and for the country!

I love her!

She's my choice!

GO HILLARY!

[corkhead]

2. this should settlethe question:

[pinebox]

3. Yup I posted that this morning. Great video!

[uponit7771]

5. and she doesn't have to be either, she doesn't have to be as "left" as he is to progress this countr

... in a practical matter.

Strawman via setting personal goal poast

[cali]

6. Those ranking lists are bullshit for a simple reason

All votes carry the same weight. Does anyone think that Hillary was a more liberal Senator than Pat Leahy. He could never even get her on board his anti-cluster bomb legislation.

[pinebox]

12. Actually

you'd have to compare their senate voting records and perhaps there are some things Hillary supported that Leahy didn't if they all carry the same weight. Data backs up the findings though and on economics, Hillary is a tick to the left of Obama.

[cali]

19. I know Leahy's record well. He's my other Senator

Pat Leahy is far more liberal than Hillary.

[pinebox]

24. Dig out their voting records

It would be an interesting comparison. https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/53353/patrick-leahy
This one is interesting, I am trying to find out more about it though https://votesmart.org/bill/3695/8665/53353/arctic-national-wildlife-refuge-drilling-amendment

[DanTex]

7. I'll go along with that. 11th most liberal for Hillary, 1st for Bernie.

What it shows is that, contrary to Bernie fans' dogma, Hillary is in fact quite progressive, and all the talk about her being a centrist RINO corporatist whatever is just hot air.

[cali]

10. Yeah, Hillary was more liberal than Pat Leahy.

That is absurd. A vote to go to war has the same weight as a vote against cutting funds for the dept of education. Not.

[DanTex]

11. Of course the rankings aren't perfect, maybe off by a couple spots one way or the other.

But the whole DINO thing is silly.

[cui bono]

49. You realize people can see that I didn't say DINO, right?

Clearly you don't want to actually discuss this or look at more than a glossy surface that tells you what you want to hear.

I still don't understand why you can't just be proud of the candidate you support as she is, why you keep wanting her to be something she's not.

If you want a liberal that badly, vote for Bernie.

.

[cui bono]

15. No, what that shows is how center most Dems are these days.

It's a sliding scale. She's 11th out of 100, half of those are loony tunes so that's no accomplishment, and the other half are mostly pretty close to center.

We have a lot of work to do to get real liberals elected so we can fix this country. There is no way in hell Hillary is a liberal even if she is the 11th "most liberal" in the Senate rankings of her time there.

In other words, it's all relative.

.

[DanTex]

18. She's in the top quarter of Dem Senators in terms of progressiveness. Sounds progressive to me.

Claiming that 75% of elected Dems are DINOs is a bit silly.

[cui bono]

43. I didn't say DINO, you did. It's a sliding scale.

When you look at who she's being compared to she's not liberal.

Liberals don't get financed by banksters and health insurance companies. Period.

Once the DLC started and brought in Bill Clinton, they changed the face of the Dem Party and made it okay for them to be another corporate party. The entire party leadership shifted to the center. That doesn't mean the center is now liberal, it's center, it's moderate. Liberal is still on the left, which is not where Hillary is. It's just a fact.

Why is it that everyone wants her to be a liberal so badly? If you like and support her you should be happy and proud of where she is on the political spectrum.

.

[gcomeau]

46. Please get a grip on the difference...

...between "not a Democrat" and "not Progressive.

People aren't arguing over whether Clinton is a "DINO". It is over whether she is a progressive. Those two things are not synonyms however we might wish they were.

And if she is a progressive she's not much of one and pretty selectively on the issues. Certainly nowhere near in the same league as Sanders.

[cui bono]

48. You realize people can see that I didn't say DINO, right?

Clearly you don't want to actually discuss this or look at more than a glossy surface that tells you what you want to hear.

I still don't understand why you can't just be proud of the candidate you support as she is, why you keep wanting her to be something she's not.

If you want a liberal that badly, vote for Bernie.

.

[kristopher]

47. Perfectly expressed. nt

[bkkyosemite]

31. We are not saying this (Bernie supporters) Hillary is! (that she is Moderate) eom

[Betty Karlson]

8. Oh come on: give her a break. She nearly lost Iowa.

[pinebox]

13. lol

[PeaceNikki]

9. The most fundamental part of progressive is “progress”. She makes progress.

I think it's stupid and silly to get into a pissing match about it. But, she makes concerted efforts to make progress. That's a fact.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/21/1473138/-Progressive-Praise-for-Hillary-Clinton-From-a-Bernie-Supporter

[cali]

16. What progress? Saying it's a fact without specifying doesn't

support your claim that it's fact. Her record is mixed. Her tenure at State wasn't progressive. Her support for continued use of cluster bombs in areas with high civilian populations isn't progressive.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/21/425303/-


This isn't progressive:

The Flag Protection Act of 2005 was a proposed United States federal law introduced by Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Robert Bennett. The law would have outlawed flag burning, and called for a punishment of one year in jail and a fine of $100,000

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_Protection_Act_of_2005

Support for the death penalty isn't progressive.

[PeaceNikki]

17. I included a link. Read it if you want to know what I meant.

[DirtyHippyBastard]

44. This part

[Trajan]

55. Cute little musings ...

Frankly, I find it disingenuous to dig so deeply into such an arcane subject area to evaluate the differences between 'Progressive vs. Centrist' approaches to world events like these ... Some progressives are pro war, some conservatives are anti war .. All depending in the situation ...

But, that stuff is neither here nor there when it comes to mommy and daddy getting a roof over their kid's heads, and sending those same kids to college in working-class wages ...

The corporate world HAS rigged the game, and, many of us believe the Clintons Specifically helped them do it ...

I find your line of argument specious and a bit on the fringe ... Let's get some bread and butter on the kitchen table for our kids and their kids after ...

[cui bono]

20. That's not the meaning of the term "progressive" in the political arena.

Republicans believe they are making progress, and they have been on there conservative agenda with the help of centrist Dems, but that is in no way "progressive".

Progressivism means a certain set of values, a mindset. It's a political movement/label/category.

Progressivism in the United States is a broadly based reform movement that reached its height early in the 20th century and is generally considered to be middle class and reformist in nature. It arose as a response to the vast changes brought by modernization, such as the growth of large corporations and railroads, and fears of corruption in American politics. In the 21st century, progressives continue to embrace concepts such as environmentalism and social justice.[1] Social progressivism, the view that governmental practices ought to be adjusted as society evolves, forms the ideological basis for many American progressives.

Historian Alonzo Hamby defined progressivism as the "political movement that addresses ideas, impulses, and issues stemming from modernization of American society. Emerging at the end of the nineteenth century, it established much of the tone of American politics throughout the first half of the century."[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism_in_the_United_States

.

[PeaceNikki]

21. You didn't read the link, either.

Whatever.

It's silly to reply to someone without having the full context to which you reply.

[cui bono]

22. I reponded directly to what you stated.

Links generally back up someone's statement. Since your statement was false to begin with it didn't really matter what is at the link because you didn't appear to understand what "progressive" means in politics.

.

[PeaceNikki]

23. The link. In my post to which you replied. You know, this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1138591

Lots of people just read titles and kneejerk.

[cui bono]

26. You're fast! I edited my post while you replied.

It's not knee jerk to see that a statement you made is completely wrong. As I said in my edited post that you didn't get to reply to because I was editing it as you posted, the link is generally to back up the statement made, but your statement was incorrect.

So I was correcting your statement.

You are free to defend what you stated or learn from people correcting you. I'm not going to follow a link that is supposed to back up an assertion that I know to be completely false based on a misunderstanding of what the word "progressive" means in politics.

Your response of just go read the link to me is indicating that you know you are wrong but are trying to make your repliers look wrong.

.

[PeaceNikki]

28. The link was in my original post. The only change I made was updating "effects" to "makes"

It's right there in the edit history:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1138591

[cui bono]

35. I didn't say you edited. I said I edited to be fair to you so it was clear that what iooked like you

replied to was not what I originally wrote.

You are being so defensive. I'm just trying to help you and not have this thread misrepresent what you were saying due to my having edited my post while you were replying.

.

[PeaceNikki]

29. kthxbai!!

Also.

[Goblinmonger]

14. Why can't she just be fine with that?

That's what I don't get. Sanders is more liberal than her. Not on everything, for sure (I know, I know...guns), but as a whole he is. She has said herself she is a moderate. But because Sanders is getting traction with being a progressive, she has to fight it when he says she's the label she gave herself? That's how this comes across.

And, for fuck's sake, people on DU have been saying for a very long time that Sanders is unelectable BECAUSE he is too liberal. Too progressive. That the "socialist" label will kill him. But now you want to fight him put Clinton just as far left? It makes no sense , people.

[LexVegas]

25. Yes, she is. nt

[pinebox]

27. Yes she is the 11th most progressive.

You're RIGHT!

[Kelvin Mace]

30. If McConnell is the median

how liberal do you have to be to be the 11th most liberal?

[senz]

32. Dont forget Hillary's goal was to run for president. Her votes should be seen in that light.

We know by now that she doesn't have firmly felt convictions on the issues. She voted to enhance her chances. It shows in everything she says and does.

So she was trying to appear "liberal" but was afraid the Repubs could attack her record on national security and defense.

[leftofcool]

34. No one is progressive unless they support bernie. We get it.

[PeaceNikki]

36. Correct. And conversely, everyone who supports Bernie is a pure angel of perfection.

[stonecutter357]

41. +1

[amborin]

39. knr

[zappaman]

42. Ok. n/t

[TIME TO PANIC]

50. K & R!

[kjones]

51. I don't know, are we measuring by rhetoric or by results...

I mean, I can point to the top of Everest and say, "Yeah, I'm
gonna climb that," but it doesn't make me a climber.

[pinebox]

54. The measuring stick

Let's start here and go from here, mmmk?

[AtomicKitten]

52. No progressive votes for preemptive war and takes money from Wall Street.