Think there's no difference between "DINO's" and Repubs?

[pnwmom]

Think again.

http://www.progressivepunch.com/members.jsp?member=HI1&search=selectScore&chamber=Senate&zip=&x=75&y=8

According to Progressive punch, in both the Senate and the House there is a HUGE GAP between the votes of Democrats and Republicans on progressive issues.

Of the Democratic Senators, vote scores on progressive issues range from Paul Sarbanes’ 97% to Benjamin Nelson’s 49%. No Democrat other than Nelson scores less than a 73% on progressive issues.

On the other hand, with an exception of a handful of “liberal” Republicans (Chafee-43%, Spector-35%, Snow-32%, Collins-31%) all other Republican Senators have scores of less than 16%.


http://www.progressivepunch.com/members.jsp?member=HI1&search=selectScore&chamber=House&zip=&x=75&y=7

The same kind of gap exists in the House of Representatives, where Raul Grijalva has the highest score (98%) among Democrats, and Gene Taylor of Mississippi has the lowest (48%).

Meanwhile, the most “liberal” Republican has a score of only 37%. Only 9 Republican Representatives score as high as 20%, with the vast majority scoring less than 10% on progressive issues.

[SteppingRazor]

1. Very enlightening, thank you...

This should be well-known by now, but for some reason, it tends to get forgotten pretty quickly -- when it comes to progressive issues, even the worst DINO is better than the best Republican.

[AtomicKitten]

11. indeed

[BillZBubb]

2. It's not the differences that are the problem.

Sure, even the most DINO Democrat is better than any Republican overall. The problem with the DINOs is that they undercut the party on major issues where that damage vastly over-shadows any benefit they give on the overall progressive issue spectrum.

For instance, when you have a major Democrat cheerleading for a Republican illegal invasion and occupation of another country, that allows the Repugs to paint other Democrats who rightly oppose the crime as just partisan complainers. They then claim what they are doing has "bipartisan" support. A lot of the public buys this. Worse still, it makes the Democrats appear rudderless and indecisive--they can't present a coherent, united front on any major issue. That indecisiveness is used time and again to paint Democrats as weak, unreliable flip-floppers. And it works for the Repugs every time.

I would rather surrender a 30% advantage on voting for all progressive issues than continue to have Democrats undercut the party on the big issues. We need a housecleaning badly. We can and should replace the DINOs with real Democrats who will support a unified party position.

[pnwmom]

4. I strongly disagree. We won't get a housecleaning. If we don't stick

together, we'll just help the Republicans to improve their already formidable margins in the House and Senate.

On the other hand, if we can hold our position, and even gain enough Democrats to control the House and/or Senate, then we'll be controlling Committee chairmanships. We'll be in a position to impeach and try Bush/Cheney, and to block appointments of people like Alito. At this critical time in our country's history, even the "worst" Democrat is better than a Republican.

[BillZBubb]

9. Dream on.

We controlled the Senate and House during Iran/Contra, but our DINO committee chairs agreed beforehand with the Repugs not to go after Reagan in any way.

We controlled the Senate and House, yet Clarence Thomas got onto the Supreme Court because of DINOs along with a number of neo-fascist appellate judges.

You are wrong. History proves it. Because of DINOs we will not impeach anyone. Because of DINOs we will still appoint RW judges. The DINOs have been damaging us for some time. Because of too many on our side who ignore history, they will continue to do so. But keep deluding yourself if that makes you happy.

[blm]

14. Taking over the Congress also will bring more of the centrists to the left

because they won't be in the position of HAVING to compromise with the Republicans to get what they need for their states - like Landrieu with postKatrina funds.

[LynneSin]

6. ME TOO - MORE RULE BY BUSH & HIS ILK PLEASE

Because that's what you're advocating

Sorry - not good enough for me.

When we had just a 1 vote advantage in the Senate, right-wing judges never made it out of committee. If they can't get out of committee then there is no chance of a vote and no worries about these judges getting on the bench.

I could think of a host of other reasons why I'll put up with a few DINOs including how Joe Lieberman helped bring an end to the California Energy Crisis when he got his chairmenship of the GOvernment Affairs committee. But if you don't look outside the box (ie - what's vote on the floor) then I feel sad for you.

Those committee chairs are 10000% more powerful than ridding us of a few bad moderate democrats who disappoint us on key votes.

[CTLawGuy]

25. when we had a one vote margin in the senate...

THE IWR PASSED!!

Yes, for those who don't remember, we controlled the senate when the IWR was going through congress.


As dems, we have the right to subject anyone we want to primary challenge to get the best possible candidate. Without this power, our leaders are not accountable to us.

[Jai4WKC08]

32. It wasn't just DINOs who voted for the IWR

The American people wanted to go to war, because of 9/11 and because they believed what they were told about WMD in the hands of al Qaeda, a "gathering" (imminent) threat from Saddam, and what a "cakewalk" it was gonna be.

With the mood of the country, a lot of senators, even ones who are quite liberal most of the time, voted for it because they were either afraid of losing re-election or had higher aspirations for '04.

You can't really pin the IWR solely on "DINOs."

[LynneSin]

3. Oh hell, you're making sense and you know that's just NOT allowed

Here's the biggest difference:

DINO democrats means if we have the majority then democrats get the leadership position, the chairs and control of what gets legislated on the floor

Republicans means that if they have the majority then republicans get the leadership position, the chairs and control of what gets legislated on the floor

[pnwmom]

5. Exactly!

[LynneSin]

7. Stop making sense and get re-ejumacated please

We don't like DINOs and would rather be under the rule of republicans because hell, what happens in committees means absolutely nothing to us whatsoever!

[pnwmom]

8. Hi LynneSin. Actually, it was your other Dino thread that got me

thinking about this one. So thanks!

[Zodiak]

10. Interesting methodology

This method count many bills more than once if they fall into more than one category.

Also, all resolutions and amendments are included....none of which carry much political weight.

When one boils down th issues just to bill passage, Nelson does not do so well. In fact, he has never voted with progressives in the last Congress on any bill passage or nomination.

Any Democrat can pad their progressive record by voting with progressives on resolutions and amendments that have no chance at all to see the light of day. I am not saying that the methodology has no bearing, but we must keep in mind that progressivepunch (while MUCH better than ADA) does double-count bills and includes token votes.

Without the token votes, the story is a bit different, and suddenly Centrist Democrats look a lot more like Republicans.

As it stands, we have about 15 Democratic Senators who consistently let down the party and progressives when it really counts....when bills come to the floor and need passage (or to be fought) or some RW freak is annointed to a powerful position.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Zodiak%20Ironfist

I am not saying any one methodology is better than another. What I am saying is that when you measure the same population using different methodologies, trends can be elucidated...like voting with Dems on unimportant matters but betraying the party when it reall counts. ADA and progressivepunch's method makes centrist and RW Democrats look like misunderstood party loyalists with a few bad issues and the method that I employed only looking at bill passage and nominations reveals that a cadre of 15 Democrats vote more often with Republicans that with their own party.

Rockefeller (WV) 44.4
Kohl (WI) -DLC 44.4
Feinstein (CA) 41.7
Leiberman (CT) -DLC 38.9
Cantwell (WA) -DLC 38.9
Bingaman (NM) -DLC 38.9
Baucus (MT) -DLC 36.1
Johnson (SD) -DLC 33.3
Conrad (ND) -DLC 30.6
Carper (DE) -DLC 27.8
Salazar (CO) -DLC 22.2
Nelson (FL) -DLC 22.2
Lincoln(AR) -DLC 22.2
Pryor (AR) -DLC 19.4
Landrieu (LA)- DLC 16.7
Nelson (NE)- DLC 0.0


The same analysis also reveals that about 10 Republicans score better than Nelson when only bill passage and nominations are considered.

I am not here to change minds, just to add more data and offer another form of analysis.

[Aaaargh]

18. It's more bogus than that, even

From the site:

"After going through a number of steps and gyrations, we came up with a list of six hard-core progressive United States Senators (6% of that body) and 36 hard-core progressive United States Representatives (about 8-9% of that body). The algorithm that we've used to come up with these progressive scores is that we take ANY VOTE in which a majority of those progressives--so in the House say, if there were no absences, it would be 19 of the 36--voted in contradistinction to a majority of the Republican caucus then that vote then qualifies for the database. The same process is used in the Senate. So, non-ideological votes such as National Groundhog Day: 429-0 with 6 absences, do not qualify for the database. Any vote in which a majority of progressives vote against a majority of Republicans qualifies for the database."

Well, how surprising that Republicans come out under any Democrat!

No, I'm not defending the goddamn Republicans. The point made in the OP might be well-defended, but not by way of this silly-ass stacked deck.

[Zodiak]

19. good catch

A lot of times, these data collection methods seems designed to make Democrats look better than any Republicans. You have just shown that this may be the case.

I didn't count the Groundhog's day vote, either, but then again, I counted the one time Barbara Boxer stood up to the whole Sentate for the Ohio Vote. I didn't take a "majority" of progressives...just a courageous stand backed by her vote.

[pnwmom]

21. But you would expect to see some overlap. Not these huge gaps.

Progressive Punch does lay out all the issues that it uses to measure, so anyone who wants to use their own standard can. But I'm tired of people saying that there are NO differences between the two parties, when the differences -- at least in the Bush years -- have been huge.

[Placebo]

12. You need only watch the floor of the Senate RIGHT NOW...

where DLC Democrat Senator Wyden is filibustering to try and get rid of royalties for oil companies in a time of record prices and record profits.

[mmonk]

13. Liberal republicans do no harm.

[Capn Sunshine]

23. That's because they only exist in books

if you vote republican, like it or not, you're enabling the neocon agenda.

[mmonk]

31. I don't vote for republicans.

A vote for someone like Lieberman is a vote for the neocon agenda also.

[DrGonzoLives]

24. Wrong

People need to realize that committees do the real work in Congress, and unless you're a majority, you have dick to say about committee work.

A liberal Republican just means that some fucktard right-wing loon might get to control a committee.

[mmonk]

30. To the Democratic party

therefore, I am not WRONG. I didn't provide you with enough information in my post.

[orleans]

15. great link. thanks! n/t

[applegrove]

16. Yes - except for hawkishness in the ME, Lieberman has a great voting

record.

[AtomicKitten]

17. very true

which makes his hard turn to the right on the Iraq War that much more distressing and sad.

[MissMarple]

20. Progressives are the heart of America.

It's about the people, people.

[iconoclastNYC]

22. You expect Republicans to be sell outs

I expect more from Democrats than Republicans.

I will not let DINOS take over our party and turn it into the Republican's JV squad.

[IndianaGreen]

26. When it comes to the war, civil liberties, torture, spying, etc

DINO = GOP

[killerbush]

27. They're is plenty of difference, you just don't want to see it

and your blinding hatred for anyone who isn't you is quite striking.

[IndianaGreen]

28. Anyone that supports the war is a repugnant Bush enabler

and is as much of our enemy as Bush. There is no middle ground on the war!

[killerbush]

29. that include John Kerry??

[IndianaGreen]

34. John Kerry has called for all US troops out by year's end

in case you haven't kept up with the news lately.

[wyldwolf]

33. You're right, of course, BUT... and this is a big BUT...

... I don't automatically agree with any source that decides what "progressive issues" are and then assigns scoring methodology on them.