he first said this:
1.23.2009
link Is Kennedy's Loss Conservatives' Gain?by Nate Silver @ 9:28 AM
More on this later on, but if as is widely anticipated, Kristin Gillibrand is named today as the junior senator from New York, this is not a terrific outcome for progressive Democrats.
Gillibrand, statistically speaking, has been one of the more conservative Democrats in the House. Moreover, she is a somewhat proud conservative, being a member of the Blue Dog caucus. In a state like New York, which is capable of electing and re-electing a very liberal senator, that's a somewhat underachieving result for the Democrats.
And I know the objection/counterargument: Gillibrand was representing a relatively conservative district in upstate New York; perhaps she will change her stripes and become more liberal upon representing the entire state. I don't doubt that's true to an extent. But
Gillibrand's R+3 district wasn't that conservative by any means, especially since an upstate New York sort of conservative is different from an Alabama sort of conservative.
I think, in other words, that her conservativism (or moderateness, really), is in substantial part a matter of her personal philosophy rather than merely an attempt to position herself politically.I also don't doubt that she'll be effective, compelling and popular, and may turn out to be a very good senator for New York. I just don't know that she'll be an especially good senator for Democrats.
and now says this:
6.06.2009
linkNew York's Gillibrand Has Become Lockstep Liberalby Nate Silver @ 3:06 PM
New York voters seeking a progressive alternative to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand may have found one: Gillibrand herself.
According to ratings compiled by ProgressivePunch.org (Progressive Punch founder Joshua Grossman is a contributor to FiveThirtyEight.com), Gillibrand has thus far compiled a progressive score of 98.45% in the 111th Congress, and 94.12% on critical votes. Although there has been little to distinguish the first 30 or so Democratic senators, most of whom have voted in lockstep with the President's agenda, those scores rank Gillibrand 15th among the 59 Democratic Senators; her ratings are essentially identical to those of reliably liberal Senators like Tom Harkin and Pat Leahy, as well as those of her colleague in the Senate, Chuck Schumer. Gillibrand has also been among the most liberal of the 11 freshman Democratic Senators:
Progressive Scores for Freshman Democrats
ProgressivePunch.org
Merkley OR 98.69%
Burris IL 98.65%
Kaufman DE 98.65%
Gillibrand NY 98.45%
T. Udall NM 96.73%
Shaheen NH 95.33%
M. Udall CO 92.16%
Warner VA 90.20%
Begich AK 89.47%
Bennet CO 88.89%
Hagan NC 88.08%
It's not as though Gillibrand, who rated as a
relatively conservative Democrat while representing New York's 20th Congressional District in the House of Representatives, has done much to conceal her newly more liberal politics;
she flipped to become a supporter of gay marriage almost immediately upon taking office, for instance, and she has become a regular contributor on progressive websites like Daily Kos and The Huffington Post.
Still, this might help to explain why the White House has been not-so-subtly trying to dissuade other Democrats -- first Steve Israel and then Carolyn Maloney, both U.S. Representatives with solidly liberal voting records -- from issuing a primary challenge to Gillibrand.
Voting this way, of course, is probably an asset to Gillibrand in New York, where Obama retains a 73 percent approval rating, including getting the thumbs-up from about half of the state's small but hearty base of Republicans.
It's a reminder, indeed, that with very few exceptions, electoral considerations bear far more firmly on a Congressperson's voting record than any sort of deep-seated personal convictions.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
