![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neonvincentOnce again, it was too much work disentangling the text so it would fit the images, so I just posted the block as a whole.
I told my readers above to be patient, as I'd get to Cory Booker, whose stated positions result in his being rated as a lot less liberal economically with a score of 25 than his votes place him on VoteView's scale. This score ties him on the economic scale with Marianne Williamson. However, his high social score 80 combined with his more moderate economic score leads On The Issues to consider him a Libertarian-Leaning Progressive. On the other hand, Williamson's much more centrist social score of 65, which ties her with Klobuchar as the most moderate socially, has On the Issues to rate her as a Moderate Liberal, the only one running for the nomination.
Two announced candidates and one who hasn't declared (and may never) have tied economic scores of 28 John Delaney, Bill de Blasio, and Stacey Abrams. The most liberal socially is Delaney, with a score of 85. Despite his very liberal reputation, De Blasio doesn't score as hight with an 83. Meanwhile, Abrams, who is not an announced candidate and so is not debating this month, is the closest to the center of three socially with a score of 78. On The Issues to considers all three to be Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.
Mentioning Abrams reminds me that Wayne Messam has a page but no ratings on positions yet, so I'm skipping him for now. When he gets a real rating, I'll return to him. That written, he's not in tonight's debate anyway.
Neither is Mike Gravel, who ties Tulsi Gabbard with an economic score of 30. However, he also ties Sanders' social score of 98 to make him one of the two most socially liberal candidates in the contest. On the other hand, Gabbard's social score of 75 confirms the hypothesis I set out to test, first on Twitter and then in the entry I posted at the beginning of the month, that she was one of the more moderate candidates running for the Democratic nomination, not "objectively further left then the rest of the Dem[ocratic] primary field." Instead, she's objectively farther to the right than most of the Democratic field, including all of the other currently serving members of Congress. Despite the big difference in social scores, On The Issues rates both as Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.
Excerpted from OnTheIssues.org's take on the Democratic presidential candidates from left to center at Crazy Eddie's Motie News.
I told my readers above to be patient, as I'd get to Cory Booker, whose stated positions result in his being rated as a lot less liberal economically with a score of 25 than his votes place him on VoteView's scale. This score ties him on the economic scale with Marianne Williamson. However, his high social score 80 combined with his more moderate economic score leads On The Issues to consider him a Libertarian-Leaning Progressive. On the other hand, Williamson's much more centrist social score of 65, which ties her with Klobuchar as the most moderate socially, has On the Issues to rate her as a Moderate Liberal, the only one running for the nomination.
Two announced candidates and one who hasn't declared (and may never) have tied economic scores of 28 John Delaney, Bill de Blasio, and Stacey Abrams. The most liberal socially is Delaney, with a score of 85. Despite his very liberal reputation, De Blasio doesn't score as hight with an 83. Meanwhile, Abrams, who is not an announced candidate and so is not debating this month, is the closest to the center of three socially with a score of 78. On The Issues to considers all three to be Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.
Mentioning Abrams reminds me that Wayne Messam has a page but no ratings on positions yet, so I'm skipping him for now. When he gets a real rating, I'll return to him. That written, he's not in tonight's debate anyway.
Neither is Mike Gravel, who ties Tulsi Gabbard with an economic score of 30. However, he also ties Sanders' social score of 98 to make him one of the two most socially liberal candidates in the contest. On the other hand, Gabbard's social score of 75 confirms the hypothesis I set out to test, first on Twitter and then in the entry I posted at the beginning of the month, that she was one of the more moderate candidates running for the Democratic nomination, not "objectively further left then the rest of the Dem[ocratic] primary field." Instead, she's objectively farther to the right than most of the Democratic field, including all of the other currently serving members of Congress. Despite the big difference in social scores, On The Issues rates both as Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.
Excerpted from OnTheIssues.org's take on the Democratic presidential candidates from left to center at Crazy Eddie's Motie News.
