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

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
19. HRC's farther left than EW per Ballotpedia. Warren is more Populist. I researched it:
Thu Apr 16, 2015, 10:36 AM
Apr 2015

Last edited Thu Apr 16, 2015, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)

The only real lefty is Sanders, and Sanders and Clinton voted almost exactly the same. No daylight between them in the Senate.

Warren has not been there as long to get the record HRC and Sanders had but EW, HRC and Sanders are all on the same page. Here's a link on my reply to a question on Sanders' National Security positions which I contrasted with HRC & EW:

He has voted on the CR's that contained things he didn't like, typically Democratic. See here:

F-35 fighter planes OK at Burlington Airport.

Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's roving wiretaps.

Voted NO on cutting $221M in benefits to Filipinos who served in WWII US Army.

Voted YES on requiring FISA court warrant to monitor US-to-foreign calls.

Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad.

Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months.

Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report.

Voted NO on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant.

Voted YES on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight.

Voted NO on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists.

Voted NO on continuing military recruitment on college campuses.

Voted YES on supporting new position of Director of National Intelligence.

Voted NO on adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Voted NO on emergency $78B for war in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Voted YES on permitting commercial airline pilots to carry guns.

Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Voted NO on deploying SDI.

End the use of anti-personnel mines.

Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record.***

Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11.

Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell, and reinstate discharged gays.

Non-proliferation includes disposing of nuclear materials.

Address abuses of electronic monitoring in the workplace.

Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror.


These votes span a number of years. Obama agrees on most of them. But Barack is also the CinC, although if the world's demands on us in their wars calms down, he can just be what he wanted to be: POTUS.

Kucinich told us in a meeting, that BO's duties are far different than a member of Congress. DK also said Obama is a progressive and a liberal Democrat. But that his position as POTUS entailed doing a wider range of things in his job.

***Hillary has a 100% rating at SANE as well, which is one of the oldest and most well-known peace groups there is.

For details of the years of those votes and the pros and cons:

http://www.ontheissues.org/international/Bernie_Sanders_Homeland_Security.htm

A little more on his votes, and where he falls on the spectrum politically in that chart***:



Sanders is a Hard-Core Liberal per their chart, which is not strictly anti-war. Sanders is like FDR, who even like Orwell, weren't strictly anti-war. But not for war for profit or religion as the GOP is.

The link says Sanders votes as an average Democrat. That is why he should run as candidate for the Democratic Party.

***HRC's part on the chart is the same as Sanders, but Clinton is a Liberal Populist.

Many say that about Warren, whose chart shows she is less liberal than HRC, FWIW:



http://ballotpedia.org/Elizabeth_Warren

Note that on National Security, HRC's and Sanders' were virtually the same on may issues:

Voted NO on cutting $221M in benefits to Filipinos who served in WWII US Army. (Apr 2008)

Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad. (Aug 2007)

Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months. (Jul 2007)

Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report. (Mar 2007)

Voted YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees. (Sep 2006)

Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods. (Sep 2006)

Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)

Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)

Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)

Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders. (Mar 2005)

Federalize aviation security. (Nov 2001)

Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record. (Dec 2003)


She said she supported what has been hailed this year by PBO. I am uncertain when she said this, but it perhaps it was Secretary of State. We must remember though, that Obama's job is quite different from anyone else's in government. HRC said on Iran:

I’m relieved that the intelligence community has reached this conclusion, but I vehemently disagree with the president that nothing’s changed and therefore nothing in American policy has to change. I have for two years advocated diplomatic engagement with Iran, and I think that’s what the president should do.

Not too hawkish there. Here's more:

VoteMatch Responses

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's right
(+5 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 2:
Require hiring more women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 3:
Same-sex domestic partnership benefits
(+5 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 4:
Teacher-led prayer in public schools
(+2 points on Social scale)

Opposes topic 9:
Mandatory Three Strikes sentencing laws
(+2 points on Social scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale)**

Favors topic 5:
More federal funding for health coverage
(-3 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Parents choose schools via vouchers
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 18:
Replace coal & oil with alternatives
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Opposes topic 19:
Drug use is immoral: enforce laws against it
(+2 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 11:
Make taxes more progressive
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Favors topic 12:
Illegal immigrants earn citizenship
(+2 points on Social scale)

Strongly Favors topic 16:
Stricter limits on political campaign funds
(-5 points on Economic scale)

Strongly Favors topic 14:
The Patriot Act harms civil liberties
(+5 points on Social scale)




Sources:

http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/hillary_clinton.htm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026396578#post44

**Is it the cause of some of the heat directed at her at DU?

That's just a few things from the compilation by NYC Liberal. Perhaps you can see how HRC and Bernie match up by googling more.

I don't see that much difference, both have negatives with some and both have positives in terms of electability. I won't give into what the GOP wants us to FEEL, since most I read is about feelings by a filter installed by a generation of GOP propaganda.

What I see are more similarities than media hyped differences. They are both, when all is said and done, typical of a liberal Democrat and great people personally, and they don't attack each other. I won't fall into the GOP media game.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Blah blah! mylye2222 Apr 2015 #1
Or she really admires Elizabeth Warren. MineralMan Apr 2015 #6
Warren didnt seemed 100% ready for Hillary lately. mylye2222 Apr 2015 #7
You're incorrect. You're projecting MineralMan Apr 2015 #9
I just wish we had seen more action from HRC before the campaign started erronis Apr 2015 #36
EW has already endorsed HRC. They play different roles within the Democratic Party. EW is great at freshwest Apr 2015 #14
Link to her endorsement of Hillary? morningfog Apr 2015 #15
Elizabeth has not endorsed Hillary. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #56
you are right. Helen Borg Apr 2015 #66
A later date Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #72
Again, not an endorsement. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #74
Yes, she has, which is why I know that she'll support MineralMan Apr 2015 #18
Link to Warren's endorsement of Hillary? morningfog Apr 2015 #68
Here is one, there are more Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #71
I think you are overstating it. morningfog Apr 2015 #75
hey, you wanted a link. Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #76
And it is not an endorsement. morningfog Apr 2015 #77
Just threading the needle, huh. Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #79
Why people think these two have a conflict? abakan Apr 2015 #35
I see your point, but I think it's because Warren is fighting Wall Street while Hillary has appeared DesertDiamond Apr 2015 #37
That is EXACTLY the reason. Anyone who doesn't see that hasn't been paying attention. whathehell Apr 2015 #80
Agreed. These Democrats have the same goals and work together. Good analyis on the origin. n/t freshwest Apr 2015 #38
Respectfully, I have to disagree with you. pennylane100 Apr 2015 #52
everyone is entitled to their opinion abakan Apr 2015 #54
I see this, too. Two Powerful Women...Oh noes. Even Caroline Kennedy was tagged with libdem4life Apr 2015 #64
I think you'll find that the Left's populism is sweepting the country and that their support of sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #78
What??? VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #11
Know Them By Their Actions...Not Their Words billhicks76 Apr 2015 #51
She's right. E.W. is doing great things in the Senate. MineralMan Apr 2015 #2
Hillary is correct! leftofcool Apr 2015 #3
Elizabeth Warren deserves praise. democrank Apr 2015 #4
Of Course. Liz deserves praise. mylye2222 Apr 2015 #5
I assume that a former Republican like Warren sees Hillary as one of the women who pulled her Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #16
Hilary the Goldwater girl pulled Warren left , thats Rich. bahrbearian Apr 2015 #22
Yea, when she was 16 and not old enough to vote. leftofcool Apr 2015 #26
Sure bahrbearian Apr 2015 #40
What were the Republicans like in 1965? VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #45
I hear/read this one a lot. tazkcmo Apr 2015 #33
Well someone or something did, Liz was a Reagan/Bush Republican until she was pushing 50. Bluenorthwest Apr 2015 #46
I think this is how EW went left she followed Hillary, Hillary was Democrat in Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #73
Still claiming you know how Elizabeth voted I see. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #58
She was already as Far Left as Liz Warren... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #12
Baseless conjecture. Fearless Apr 2015 #13
HRC's farther left than EW per Ballotpedia. Warren is more Populist. I researched it: freshwest Apr 2015 #19
Exactly.... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #44
Nonsense. Hillary is a neoliberal. AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #59
K & R !!! WillyT Apr 2015 #8
praised the woman in the Senate promoting/furthering the cause of corporate financial regulation? bigtree Apr 2015 #10
Right on! Orsino Apr 2015 #17
Good on her! riqster Apr 2015 #20
Love it! Thanks Hillary.. My Senator is a good one! boston bean Apr 2015 #21
Talk is cheap. Will Hillary walk the (latest) talk? L0oniX Apr 2015 #23
Talk Isn't Always Cheap saintsebastian Apr 2015 #29
+1 "Goldman Sachs once paid $200,000 to hear former Secretary Clinton do a little talking" L0oniX Apr 2015 #30
Either that or her feet will be in the fire dreamnightwind Apr 2015 #48
but will she vote for Warren for POTUS in '16? PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #24
Hillary don't forget Glass-Steagell. jwirr Apr 2015 #25
I think Elizabeth is the best-now send money! jalan48 Apr 2015 #27
What will be the reaction, I wonder, when Warren campaigns for HRC? MADem Apr 2015 #28
She will be thrown under the bus. leftofcool Apr 2015 #31
Warren was hypnotized from HRC minions Iliyah Apr 2015 #43
... or when Hillary campaigns for Elizabeth AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #60
Warren has said she's not running. What part of NO doesn't mean NO to a liberal or MADem Apr 2015 #69
Right, and pols change (or make up) their minds all the time AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #70
Not after they've said NO over fifty times. But how quick you went to the personal!! MADem Apr 2015 #81
very good move samsingh Apr 2015 #32
while "centrist" hatemongering bullies HERE attack progressives as party traitors... carolinayellowdog Apr 2015 #34
"Sen. Warren, are you or will you be running for vice-president?" nt ChisolmTrailDem Apr 2015 #39
A WTF???? paragraph in the Guardian article mak3cats Apr 2015 #41
Check it out, it's puke worthy. herding cats Apr 2015 #42
It totally sucks that our party enables a creep like Paul dreamnightwind Apr 2015 #49
The great thing about Rand Paul. joshcryer Apr 2015 #50
Talk is cheap customerserviceguy Apr 2015 #47
Still Say... Clinton/Warren.... nm Rosco T. Apr 2015 #53
not a chance AtomicKitten Apr 2015 #61
If only Hillary Clinton were Elizabeth Warren. If only. delrem Apr 2015 #55
Heads explode!! treestar Apr 2015 #57
So which statement would be more reflective of actual policies Clinton would pursue as POUS JonLP24 Apr 2015 #62
When HRC takes action to follow Sen. Warren's lead, I'll be impressed. 99Forever Apr 2015 #63
Records show Warren may be following Hillary's lead, are you impressed now Thinkingabout Apr 2015 #65
It's a page from LBJ's playbook. cloudbase Apr 2015 #67
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hillary Clinton Praises '...»Reply #19