Obama ranked as the most liberal Senator

Thorgrim · 01-31-2008, 04:36 PM

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings. The insurgent presidential candidate shifted further to the left last year in the run-up to the primaries, after ranking as the 16th- and 10th-most-liberal during his first two years in the Senate.

NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)

No wonder he got Teds endorsement, if you are THAT liberal...

This is where everyone reminds me of how Obama is going to cruise to the presidency, he has "electability" out the wazoo

WickedLou9 · 01-31-2008, 04:54 PM

these rankings aren't worth the cost of the electricity that it uses to display them on my monitor.

Thorgrim · 01-31-2008, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

these rankings aren't worth the cost of the electricity that it uses to display them on my monitor.

I didn't make them

hereticzero · 01-31-2008, 05:33 PM

Go Obama!

WickedLou9 · 01-31-2008, 05:43 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I didn't make them

I know. I just don't put any stock in rankings like this. Wasn't Kerry ranked as most liberal senator when he was running for president too? Someone arbitrarily chooses a list of senate votes and then subjectively decides that a yes is a liberal vote and a no is conservative or vice versa, on any given vote. Then they tally the results and choose a winner! If you know the result you want all you have to do it pick and choose the votes and make it black and white. Yes is liberal, no is conservative. Even if there is no grounds for it.
it's just nonsense.

garbagemanlb · 01-31-2008, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by hereticzero

Go Obama!

.

Once he is seen in the debates versus the republican nominee, it won't matter how much they try to paint him as a 'liberal'. America wants change, and it is too easy pinning the GOP candidates to Bush.

hsmith · 01-31-2008, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

.

Once he is seen in the debates versus the republican nominee, it won't matter how much they try to paint him as a 'liberal'. America wants change, and it is too easy pinning the GOP candidates to Bush.

America wants change, but they don't want an ultra-liberal.

Donkey® · 01-31-2008, 08:50 PM

I think this hurts Obama. I don't particularly care about how liberal he is...but it hurts him politically.

garbagemanlb · 01-31-2008, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

America wants change, but they don't want an ultra-liberal.

America also doesn't want another Bush.

Thorgrim · 01-31-2008, 11:18 PM

garbage did you watch the debate tonight...did you really think "omg, listening to this OBAMA IS SO DIFFERENT, I CAN NOT POSSIBLY VOTE FOR HILLARY SHE'S OBVIOUSLY TAKING A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION THAN OBAMA"

garbagemanlb · 01-31-2008, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

garbage did you watch the debate tonight...did you really think "omg, listening to this OBAMA IS SO DIFFERENT, I CAN NOT POSSIBLY VOTE FOR HILLARY SHE'S OBVIOUSLY TAKING A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION THAN OBAMA"

I've never said nor believed that their policies were dramatically different. My issue with Clinton is one of character.

Thorgrim · 01-31-2008, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

I've never said nor believed that their policies were dramatically different. My issue with Clinton is one of character.

reading the transcripts it's like the same people were talking

they plan to push the exact same agenda as president, yet you'd be giddy voting for Obama...and couldn't vote for Hillary

You don't care about issues, you care about what the media highlights about someone's "character"

Stylerod · 02-01-2008, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

reading the transcripts it's like the same people were talking

they plan to push the exact same agenda as president, yet you'd be giddy voting for Obama...and couldn't vote for Hillary

You don't care about issues, you care about what the media highlights about someone's "character"

You just said they were almost identical if you view their transcripts and they push the same agenda. Then you tell gman he doesn't care about issues?

If they have the same platform wouldn't it make sense to vote for who you like better or maybe trust more at telling the truth?

garbagemanlb · 02-01-2008, 02:10 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

reading the transcripts it's like the same people were talking

they plan to push the exact same agenda as president, yet you'd be giddy voting for Obama...and couldn't vote for Hillary

You don't care about issues, you care about what the media highlights about someone's "character"

Yes, I am a shallow person for taking issue with her Iraq war vote and her turnaround in regards to getting in bed with HMOs and other corporate interest groups. I am shallow for wanting a candidate who isn't so divisive and doesn't draw out so much vitriol from people. Thanks for straightening me out.

Simius · 02-01-2008, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

...Wasn't Kerry ranked as most liberal senator when he was running for president too?.....

That was my first thought. I know we dems love our liberals... but I highly doubt we nominate THE most liberal democrat every election.

...but what do I know.

hsmith · 02-01-2008, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

America also doesn't want another Bush.

edit: i don't even know what i was replying to

WickedLou9 · 02-01-2008, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by hsmith

Did Kerry win the election?

I ate breakfast this morning. That means that america does want another Bush.

My statement and your statement are the same. They have nothing to do with anything.

hsmith · 02-01-2008, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I ate breakfast this morning. That means that america does want another Bush.

My statement and your statement are the same. They have nothing to do with anything.

see edit

my mind is out of wack, long week

Thorgrim · 02-01-2008, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

Yes, I am a shallow person for taking issue with her Iraq war vote and her turnaround in regards to getting in bed with HMOs and other corporate interest groups. I am shallow for wanting a candidate who isn't so divisive and doesn't draw out so much vitriol from people. Thanks for straightening me out.

Those sound like good reasons you'd vote against her in a primary. and I'd applaud you for following your convictions in getting the best Democrat out there

Those do no sound like reasons I'd hear from someone who says "Well, if that's the case, I'm going to help the OTHER side win which believes in none of my issues while she believes in all of mine"

I'm just pointing out: You can vote against her...in the primary, make your voice heard, with a bare-minimum primary win, Democrats 4 years later will look at that and realize they need to improve on the qualities that turned people like you off...

However, if you "boycott" the democrat party for your vote, there's a significant chance they'll simply look for different voters

I wouldn't be surprised if they nominated a conservative Democrat like Ben Nelson, after all, winning over "Reagan Democrats" solidly like a blue dog-type would...that's like 5-10%of the vote, while fringe purity extremeists make up about 1-2% of the vote...either way, the math works out for them

Then you'll have Ben Nelson versus Jim DeMint, and the whole race will be tilting so right wing your voice won't even be heard

Just in case you are thinking in your head that the Democrats will change who they nominate based on you...Al Gore lost in 2000 because he came across as "too centrist" and so purist voted Gore, in 2004 the Democrats came right back and elected the most centrist candidate on the ballot...they don't respond well to people who abandon the party that is trying to put forth progressive issues to let a conservative asshole like Bush win

But you can sit there waiting for the "perfect candidate" that will never come, and vote against a candidate who holds all your views and your plan for the future...because she, like most democrats in Congress, voted for an inspection with force, and believed a post-911 Bush that he had the interest of the country at heart, she voted for the Byrd amendment to make it more specific that this wasn't a rush to war

In bed with HMOs? This is the second time she's trying to hurt the less scrupulousones ones, don't even get me started on Obama, he's in bed with big banks on the bankruptcy bill that screwed over the working class, they wanted to cap interest rates at 30% and he voted against it, so they can charge higher rates to poor people

And divisive? If you really think Obama has his hands clean...you've been missing all the swipes he took at her for being dislikeable as a first lady...real character there...and let's not forget past primaries:

In 1992, Jerry Brown accused Bill Clinton of funneling business to Hillary's law firm. In 2000, supporters of President Bush accused rivals of spreading rumors that he had used cocaine. That same year, Al Gore insinuated that Bill Bradley's health-care plan was racist, and Bradley bashed Gore for holding a fundraiser at a Buddhist temple.

You're just buying into the media narrative that gets the most people to watch, and what a select view liberal websites are highlighting...a case can be made that Obama is a sell-out who has made extremely poor decisions and very under handed attacks that show a lack of character

thewise1 · 02-01-2008, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

reading the transcripts it's like the same people were talking

they plan to push the exact same agenda as president, yet you'd be giddy voting for Obama...and couldn't vote for Hillary

You don't care about issues, you care about what the media highlights about someone's "character"

If they are exactly the same, then maybe you should vote for Obama