Somehow, DU has decided that Elizabeth Warren is the most liberal senator. I'm not sure where that's come from, given her brief tenure ... but if we go by the traditional rankings handed out by the National Journal (and we don't have to go with them: but at least they have a method for going by actual votes in the Senate), she's far from that: at 73% liberal ranking, she's 31st most liberal senator this past year. Now I'm not saying that's exact, or fair, but here was their explanation.
This year, the vote ratings of another Massachusetts Democrat are eye-catching, but for the opposite reason. Elizabeth Warren, the newest liberal icon, is not the most liberal member of the Senate, according to this year's National Journal vote ratings. Warren's composite liberal score of 73.2 places her as the 31st-most-liberal senator. How could that be?
For starters, she broke with President Obama on a very significant piece of legislation,
voting to repeal Obamacare's medical-device tax—a core element to the funding of the Affordable Care Act. Many manufacturers are based in Massachusetts, so this is an instance of her voting her constituency over her party. She didn't stop there,
joining with many Republicans to "repeal or reduce the estate tax" if done in a fiscally responsible way. Warren even irked consumer advocates by
opposing a measure that would have allowed states to mandate labeling of foods that contain genetically modified ingredients. Those differences gave her a liberal percentile score of 75 on economic policy.
...
On foreign policy, Warren received a liberal percentile score of 54 . . .
voting with almost every Senate Republican against an amendment to limit the legal rights of Guantanamo detainees brought to the United States.
...
On social issues, Warren lived up to her reputation, tying with 26 other Democratic senators as the most liberal.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/2013-vote-ratings/why-elizabeth-warren-isn-t-the-most-liberal-senator-20140206I know I'll get pilloried for printing this ... and it's not that I don't like Elizabeth Warren. I do. But I want to point out that this game of "who is the most liberal" is a losing battle. It can't really be defined. And if we're going to have accusations of "Obamabots," for instance, on this board, then I guess we should also start using the term "Warrenbots" for people who will defend her despite any vote.
Let's just take issue by issue folks, admitting that none of our politicians are perfect--and neither are we. We all have inconsistencies, exceptions to our own rules, occasional poor judgment, etc.
= new reply since forum marked as read