Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Hillary Clinton: Where does she stand on the issues that are important [View all]Raine1967
(11,676 posts)40. This might be interesting to some:
From March 31 of this year: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/31/1374629/-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).
(Snip)
Oh, and a certain junior Senator from Illinois, Obama I think his name was? At -0.367, he ranked 23rd in the 110th Congress.
(snip and boldface- mine)
Like everyone else on Earth who does not wear my clothes and kiss my wife in the morning, Hillary Clinton disagrees with me on some things. The same is true for everyone here, and some of those differences may be profound. That is a conversation we can have. But suggestions that she is "a liberal republican or a conservative dem," to take one example of a quotation I read today, should stop here. By her voting record in Congress, Hillary Clinton is squarely in the mainstream of the national Democratic party in America, and would be a good ideological fit for it as its nominee. If anyone tries to tell you differently, ask them to show their work.
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:
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).
(Snip)
Oh, and a certain junior Senator from Illinois, Obama I think his name was? At -0.367, he ranked 23rd in the 110th Congress.
(snip and boldface- mine)
Like everyone else on Earth who does not wear my clothes and kiss my wife in the morning, Hillary Clinton disagrees with me on some things. The same is true for everyone here, and some of those differences may be profound. That is a conversation we can have. But suggestions that she is "a liberal republican or a conservative dem," to take one example of a quotation I read today, should stop here. By her voting record in Congress, Hillary Clinton is squarely in the mainstream of the national Democratic party in America, and would be a good ideological fit for it as its nominee. If anyone tries to tell you differently, ask them to show their work.
Take it for what it is worth.
Peace,
Raine
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
126 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Hillary Clinton: Where does she stand on the issues that are important [View all]
ghostsinthemachine
Apr 2015
OP
Exactly. And she sure has not moved even a half step away from the "forever war"
truedelphi
Apr 2015
#34
I know where she stands on forever war. I know where she stood on Bush/Cheney's illegal and
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#7
Couldn't find any US Democrats to compare her to? That isn't very hopeful, is it?
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#17
You don't do fantasy? Lol! Your entire post to me, I know it was intended to be a personal attack,
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#48
Where does Hillary stand on the TPP? Where does she stand on ending the neocon wars?
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#77
Really? You liked those lame old Freeper attempts at personal attacks on Democrats?
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#52
Ii think your reading it wrong. the point was she is That Hillary is to the left of Putin
hrmjustin
Apr 2015
#54
Oh I know an attempt at a personal attack when I see one. The implication was exactly what it was
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#75
I don't think you were attacked. i think BB gave a good response and you just don't seem to know how
hrmjustin
Apr 2015
#76
Right wing personal attacks do not belong on a Democratic forum. You can support such behavior all
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#78
Exactly! And such Right Wing tactics against Democrats in order to avoid answering questions
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#80
Are you seriously saying you don't know? Were you around during the Bush years?
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#82
I lost loved ones also, far too many. I do not discuss my personal losses on DU. I asked you a
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#84
There is no Democrat on this forum who went through the Bush years opposing his policies.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#86
My question to you which you still refuse to answer is what was rw about Bainsbane response.
hrmjustin
Apr 2015
#88
YOU are condescending. Did you oppose the Iraq War, did you support the Whistle Blowers who
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#89
Using right wing tactics to personally attack other Democrats here is against the TOS of this forum.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#94
ok with all due respect I have tried very hard here to listen to your complaint.
hrmjustin
Apr 2015
#95
I did not take offense nor was I complaining. I was doing what needs to be done when people resort
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#96
I am stating a fact. And I have no doubt about it. Nor that most Dems here know it. I'm not the
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#99
Why do you think people use old Right Wing talking points, rather than their own words?
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#102
You're not very good at this game. So back to what apparently caused the use of old Right Wing
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#104
You personally attack me with right wing gqrbage insults, and then YOU have the gall to
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#108
You cheered for a right wing personal attack. That is the ONLY reason I addressed you at all, then
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#111
If you don't want to discuss where our candidates for the WH stand on issues, just say so.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#118
Using Right Wing personal attacks on this forum against other DUers, violates the TOS.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#101
What does somebody evading an arrest warrant for rape have to do with anything?
Comrade Grumpy
Apr 2015
#35
You didn't answer the question. What do old Right Wing personal attacks against Democrats have to do
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#51
I take it then you support the neocon 'forever war everywhere and anywhere' policies AND you
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#73
Nice post, about ME. But my interest is in issues and what political candidates stand for.
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#119
What it was, was a desperate attempt at a personal attack because there appears to be a problem
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#49
On many issues she has directly contradicted or changed her position btw 2008-2012.
Warren DeMontague
Apr 2015
#42
Do you 'get' a Democrat proposing cuts to SS? Or pushing a disastrous and secret deal with
sabrina 1
Apr 2015
#74
I agree, but my fear is not so much that she'll do what it takes to be elected, my fear is
Warren DeMontague
Apr 2015
#68
She's bright and has surrounded herself with a lot of bright people, including Obama people
DemocratSinceBirth
Apr 2015
#71
I think a lot of boomers don't totally get the Millenials, who are driving much of this change
Warren DeMontague
Apr 2015
#69
She has made definitive issue statements on the issues the American voter REALLY cares about, silly!
Warren DeMontague
Apr 2015
#43
Democratic voters love marijuana legalization. Hillary Clinton doesn't.
ghostsinthemachine
Apr 2015
#122
The answers to your questions has been established on many areas. Here is the link
Thinkingabout
Apr 2015
#126