Ranking the Candidates by their 'Clinton Score'

by protothad, Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 01:45:08 PM EST

We have a unique opportunity this election.  The remaining candidates are both sitting members of the Senate.  That allows us to go beyond just examining their stated platforms to actually compare their voting records.  Furthermore, since Clinton is also a senator, her supporters have the opportunity to compare each candidate's voting record to Clinton's.

To this end, I have extracted each Senator's voting record from votesmart.org and calculated some stats.  To make it an apples to apples comparison, I am using only the votes that occured when all three senators were in office.  That amounts to a sample of 225 votes according to votesmart.org.

The senators are consider to 'agree' on a vote if they voted the same, whether that was Yes, No, Present, or if they both missed it.  That means, if one of them voted Yes and the other missed the vote, it is still counted as a mark against, even if they agreed in principle on the issue.  If they both missed the vote, they are counted as 'agreeing' even if they might not.

Using this method, we find that Obama and Clinton agree 88.4% of the time.  McCain and Clinton agree only 36.9% of the time (less than half as much).  McCain and Obama agree 40.4% of the time (also less than half as much).  Let me say that one more time just to drive the point home.

Obama's Clinton score = 88.4%
McCain's Clinton score = 36.9%

If you support Clinton for the stands she takes on the issues, it seems rather clear which Presidential candidate is most likely to support her agenda.  Obama voted with Clinton nearly 90 percent of the time, more than 50 percent more than McCain.

I am working on another diary that will compare their votes based on issue.  It will also attempt to adjust the 'score' by weighing missed votes differently from real disagreements.  Taking it a step farther, I could allow one to compare each candidate's record to other Senators (curious what their Feingold scores are?) and even allow you to 'vote' on each bill yourself and see how your views match the candidates.  I'll be sure to include some pretty graphs in those diaries.  Nevertheless, I thought this first pass at the data was interesting enough to get the talking point out there.  Remember, Obama and Clinton agree almost 90 percent of the time.  Clinton and McCain agree barely more than a third of the time.

Raw voting record data can be found at VoteSmart.org.

Since we are talking about voting... here is the obligatory poll:
Body


Poll
Which issues are most important to you? (lifted right from the votesmart categories)
Abortion Issues
Budget, Spending, and Taxes
Campaign Finance and Election Issues
Education
Energy Issues
Environmental Issues
Health Issues
Veterans Issues
Womens Issues
Other (explain in the comments)

Votes: 49
Results : Vote Link : Polls


Tags: Barack Obama, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, comparison, voting record (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 54 Comments :: Post a Comment


Tips for geeking out on voting records... (2.00 / 11)

and any feedback is appreciated.


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 01:47:39 PM EST

Thank you... (2.00 / 1)

That must have been VERY time-consuming, but these "Clinton Scores" are SO worth it. :-)


No way, no how, no McCain! :-)
by atdleft on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:03:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks (none / 0)

The time consuming bit was slurping the raw data off of VoteSmart and loading it into a database.  Crunching the numbers should go much faster now.

Ultimately, I plan to make a page where you can compare the candidates issue by issue and vote by vote.


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:31:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Protohad (2.00 / 2)

If you would be interested, we would love to cross post this piece at Clintonistas for Obama.


That's it, baby; let's go win this election!
by Beltway Dem on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:15:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I would be honored (2.00 / 1)

If I get a chance, I'll visit and check the site out, but feel free to lift the content and repost it yourself if I don't get around to it.

Thanks!


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:33:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am going to put this (none / 0)

up first thing tomorrow morning.  


That's it, baby; let's go win this election!
by Beltway Dem on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 05:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ranking the Candidates by their (2.00 / 2)

You forgot social issues.


by Spanky on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 01:52:40 PM EST

Re: Ranking the Candidates by their (2.00 / 1)

Votesmart had too many categories, so I just picked a subset.


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:02:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Issues and positions only part of evaluation (1.00 / 0)

Issues and positions are not enough. If they were, we would elect bullet lists as president.

How somebody stands up in a difficult political storm is important. How easily do they waver. Will they be startled by a terrorist attack and lurch to a hawkish right-wing stance to recover their dignity.


by catfish2 on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:09:44 PM EST

Important for Clinton supporters to see (2.00 / 2)

if they're thinking of voting for McCain, though. This kind of comparison could be very valuable.

Veterans issues are very important to me, and on several occasions I have posted links on various blogs wherein you can directly compare McCain, Obama and Hillary on their voting records for Disabled Vets. I submit that if more veterans and active duty service men/women looked at those records, they would think twice about McCain's claim of supporting the troops. For the record, here are those links again:

Disabled Veterans:
Key votes by Hillary Clinton: http://capwiz.com/dav/bio/keyvotes/?id=1 0902&lvl=C
Key votes by Barack Obama: http://capwiz.com/dav/bio/keyvotes/?id=3 181&lvl=C
Key votes by John McCain: http://capwiz.com/dav/bio/keyvotes/?id=1 92&lvl=C

And here is McCain's record according to VA Watchdog

Veterans Issues

2006 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 20 percent in 2006.

2006 In 2006 Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Senator McCain a grade of D.

2006 Senator McCain sponsored or co-sponsored 18 percent of the legislation favored by the The Retired Enlisted Association in 2006.

2005 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 25 percent in 2005.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 50 percent in 2004.

2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the The Retired Enlisted Association 0 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Vietnam Veterans of America 100 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Senator McCain supported the interests of the The American Legion 50 percent in 2003.

2001 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Vietnam Veterans of America 46 percent in 2001.

1999 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Disabled American Veterans 66 percent in 1999.

1997-1998 Senator McCain supported the interests of the Vietnam Veterans of America 0 percent in 1997-1998.

1989-1990 On the votes that the Vietnam Veterans of America considered to be the most important in 1989-1990 , Senator McCain voted their preferred position 50 percent of the time.

McCain's own voting record can sink him IF that record gets out!


by Swedie on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:45:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Issues and positions only part of evaluation (2.00 / 1)

"How somebody stands up in a difficult political storm is important."

I've been very impressed at the way Obama has stood up to political trials.

"How easily do they waver."

Based on how many times McLame has changed his positions and retracted his words, the answer is "very easily."

"Will they be startled by a terrorist attack and lurch to a hawkish right-wing stance to recover their dignity."

Now you're describing McBush to a "T."


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:45:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We see things differently (1.00 / 0)

very differently.


by catfish2 on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:03:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We see things differently (2.00 / 1)

That's because you're using a Democratic blog to sell Mad McCain.

Why you're allowed to get away with it is anybody's guess.


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:18:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Or maybe I'm expressing (1.00 / 0)

concerns about Obama that can be addressed by the candidate and the party before November.


by catfish2 on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:24:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Like I said (2.00 / 3)

You're selling McNut....under guise of concerning over Obama.


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:32:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or maybe I'm expressing (2.00 / 2)

The thing is, you're using the Fox News talking points to do so.  Ones that have very little basis in reality and have a lot based on innuendo, exaggeration and outright lies.


New Mexico politics from the local perspective.
by fbihop on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:39:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or maybe I'm expressing (2.00 / 1)

Ah. Concern. I see.


Visit Election Inspection for analysis, polls, and predictions!
by X Stryker on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:13:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Or maybe I'm expressing (none / 0)

you deserve a troll rate, this is mydd, not myrnc, please take your Bush years loving behind to the freepers or something...Only one number matters to me in this election 95%, do you know what that signifies...I'll give you a hint, it kind of goes against McCain's maverick image of Bush


by Dog Chains on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:32:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Irony thy name is catfish... (2.00 / 2)

"Will they be startled by a terrorist attack and lurch to a hawkish right-wing stance to recover their dignity."

How can you say this with a straight face, when McCain is promising to do this without even another catastrophic attack on the U.S.?  How can you say this when after the first attack Obama did not take the rightward hawkish lurch at the same time the Democratic Senate did?

And for you to claim that Obama has not demonstrated that he "stands up in a difficult political storm" after his Iraq stance in 2002 is silly.  For you to claim that Obama can "easily...waver" after he spoke out to some members of his most loyal demographic group about the homophobia in their community while seeking their vote is ridiculous.

You're nitpicking and even your nitpicking can be disproved.  Honestly, why don't you like the guy?  Because every answer I've seen you give to that question reflects distorted view (whether willful or not) of who the person is.  So please cite examples of the reasoning behind your "concerns."


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:19:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Issues and positions only part of evaluation (2.00 / 4)

Will they be startled by a terrorist attack and lurch to a hawkish right-wing stance to recover their dignity.

Yes, John McCain will.

Next.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:38:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

True, this is only one factor to look at... (none / 0)

... but I see it as a very important one and one that is too often overlooked.  Voting record is probably the single best indicator that we can use to see if a congressperson will actually stand up for the issues he or she claims to support.  The other public record worth examining is campaign finance reports (which I might write another wonkish diary about).


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:39:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ranking the Candidates by their 'Clinton Score (2.00 / 3)

I like the idea, I think it's definitely something you should flesh out more.  Gives you a good snapshot as to how certain Senators rate in comparison to others you may be more familiar with, gives a point of comparison.

I want a Barbara Boxer score...she's my favorite senator :-)


by Raumfahrer on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:14:41 PM EST

Rec'd (2.00 / 2)

Cool diary!


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:30:19 PM EST

A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 2)

This is a great illustration of how and why, from a standpoint of policy, unity is important.

It neglects the fact, however, that for many in the Clinton camp (and many in our country, actually) there is more than just policy to be considered when electing a President.

Now, don't get me wrong, I find myself personally warming up to Barack Obama with each passing day.  Granted, there's a lot of warming up to be done, so I'm still not there yet.  I'm not making any decisions either way until I'm comfortable with being committed to it.

However, if you think that the driving force in the split between Clinton supporters and Barack Obama is policy-based, then your diary actually quite well illustrates that the issues are not it.

It's nice to see the comparison of the issues presented so simply.  Still, it is not going to make our unity issues disappear.  That takes time and good behavior on the parts of all involved.


No candidacy is more important than the right to vote.
by hornplayer on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:34:09 PM EST

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 0)

"However, if you think that the driving force in the split between Clinton supporters and Barack Obama is policy-based, then your diary actually quite well illustrates that the issues are not it."

Everybody but the reality challenged knows it's about disappointment over loss and petty personal animosities.

But I fully expect all but a few cranks will come around and vote in their own interests come November. In the meantime they don't have to actively support Obama, but they should refrain from doing the GOP's dirty work.


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:52:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (none / 0)

Well I guess you can call me reality challenged.  I spent some time working on the Clinton campaign, albeit not much and at a low level, but there are serious material grievances that many of us have with the way that Senator Obama waged his campaign.  In fact, this is what has held me back from making a decision about voting for or against Senator Obama, because I want to get more time to watch him in action, and see how he does.

Talking down to those who believe, and in many cases have witnessed explicit wrongdoings by Barack Obama and especially his campaign, is not going to help him win in November.  The sooner you and others like you realize that, the better off we'll all be.


No candidacy is more important than the right to vote.
by hornplayer on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:56:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 3)

"but there are serious material grievances that many of us have with the way that Senator Obama waged his campaign."

I won't even bother to ask "such as?" since beating McCrazy is what the campaign is now about. I'll let  history books document the primary campaign.

Nurse your real or imagined grievances all you want. But don't use them as an excuse to injure your own interests.


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:08:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 3)

couldn't have said it better. thanks.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:40:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 5)

It was a hard fought primary by both camps, it got ugly, both sides threw mud, I think the history books will show who threw more mud, but that is beyond the point.  It is over, please don't harp on perceived wrongs from your fellow democrats, there are many of us who feel the same way, but have moved on because it doens't do any good to wallow in dissappointemnt and negativity.

We need to focus on our efforts to elect a democrat into the office and not let McCain take this country even farther down than it already is.

Please, for love of country and decent people around the world, get over it and move on.


by KLRinLA on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:12:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (none / 0)

Sounds good to me.


by Beren on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:20:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 1)

or seriously, it will take people like you acting like adults. Sorry if that offends but what you are talking about is utterly immaterial to anything anyone should be concerned with in my opinion. Guess what, if you picked 100 Obama supporters, most likely 75% of them (from what I've seen) would cite exactly what your citing about the Obama campaign with HRC's, that's what primaries tend to devolve into since the majority of candidates have many policy similarities. But to turn around and state you could consider someone who completely counters every policy you supposedly want this country to proceed with, then you are not acting like an adult, but a petulant child, and may not have supported what you claimed too. Good luck with your decision though, I hope it works out for you however you may go.


by Dog Chains on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:26:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (2.00 / 1)

"It neglects the fact, however, that for many in the Clinton camp (and many in our country, actually) there is more than just policy to be considered when electing a President."

Like one's genitalia?  Or skin color?

Please elaborate.


by paul minot on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:41:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A truth, but with a caveat. (none / 0)

How about, oh, spending more than 2 years in national government prior to assuming the Presidency?


No candidacy is more important than the right to vote.
by hornplayer on Sat Jun 14, 2008 at 03:14:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As a stat wonk... (2.00 / 2)

What happens when you discount "present" or "absent" votes and only count "Yes" or "No" votes?


by TCQuad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 02:54:11 PM EST

I'm working on that. (2.00 / 1)

I decided to get this first set of stats out their to get a conversation going and gather ideas for my next diary.  Thanks for the input in that regard.  :)


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:07:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As a stat wonk... (none / 0)

I heard on Air America Radio that of 260 some votes where both Hillary and Obama were present and voted yes or no, that they only voted dfferently 10 times.  Not sure how outdated the number was, and can't give a link since it was on the radio.

I am guessing that one of the 10 was the Obama Ethics Legislation which he voted against in protest at how watered down it became.


Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win. ~ Sun Tzu
by Tumult on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:51:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Interesting (none / 0)

I will dig into the data and doublecheck that the percentages I am getting are accurate.  One possible source of error I just discovered, my formula treats a paired yes/no vote as different than a non-paired vote.  The stat you mentioned might have treated them as equivilent.  Also, I should find out why I am ending up with a lower vote total (perhaps certain procedural votes are not counted?... VoteSmart not up to date?).

Thanks


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 05:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Interesting (none / 0)

Could be I remember the 260 number wrong and it was lower than that.  I new I did not have it exact.  The 10 vote diffrence was definately said though.  However you said you considered any occurance where one person voted and the other person did anything other than vote the same way as an opposing vote, which would be vastly different than only taking into consideration votes they both placed.  Also depending on the type of votes considered could put out different numbers.  The numbers are interesting,  but I agree with your point regardless of number differences.


Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win. ~ Sun Tzu
by Tumult on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 06:41:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama and McCain agree more often than (2.00 / 2)

Clinton and McCain? What about that accusation that Hillary was more like McCain? Sounds like a fairy tale to me!


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:13:47 PM EST

Re: Obama and McCain agree more often than (2.00 / 1)

Exactly indy---you rang the bell.


by linfar on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent research... (2.00 / 2)

I would really like to see the Feingold score, so I would formally like to make a formal request for the Feingold score diary.  Truly excellent work!  This needs to be the main focus for out effort to win back some of the more wary Clinton supporters.  If we are concerned about progressive issues, then we must ensure that we rid ourselves of conservative government.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:26:14 PM EST

Feingold is my Senator (2.00 / 2)

So I've already imported his voting record. At a glance, when we compare him to the other three, this is what we get for a Feingold score:

Obama = 40.4%
Clinton = 36.9%
McCain = 13.8%

As you can see, Obama agrees with Feingold the most, though Clinton is close behind.  McCain plummits to less than 14% agreement with my favorite senator.

Digging into the raw data, while Feingold is known to break from voting the party line, it also appears he is more reliable at showing up for votes than any of the other candidates.  That might acount for much of the gap with his Dem colleagues

I'll be digging in a breaking things down by issue and even make some side-by-side vote comparison tables this weekend.  I've already done the hard work of importing the vote data into a database, so it should go quickly from here on.

Cheers


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:23:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Feingold is my Senator (2.00 / 1)

Thank you for the diligence, it is so nice to see dedication and backup for opinions


by Dog Chains on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:35:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Just curious.. (none / 0)

What is the Obama- McCain score?


by rjarnold on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 03:53:15 PM EST

Re: Just curious.. (2.00 / 1)

McCain and Obama voted the same 40.4% of the time, just slightly more than Clinton and McCain.


by protothad on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 04:24:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Just curious.. (none / 0)

thank you.


by rjarnold on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 07:35:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton Score Revised (none / 0)

Obama revised score: Negative 11.6 (88.4 - 100) McCain: 36.9

McCain is 48.5 better than Obama on the Clinton Score.

Personal attacks can do great damage. Race-bating personal attacks can turn a whole demographic against a candidate for life, just ask Hillary how she's doing with the AA community.

For that reason I deduct 100 points from anyone who levels a race-bating personal attack against Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton.

In the interest of party unity I'm only going to deduct 100 points against Obama even though it should be 200 points. He can get the 100 points back by puting Hillary on the ticket.


by mmorang on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 06:17:43 PM EST

Re: Clinton Score Revised (none / 0)

yeah, and I deduct 300 points from McCain for being a crazy neo-con. Obama is still up by more than 100.


by rjarnold on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 07:38:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ranking the Candidates (none / 0)

You can forgive people who disagree with you.
You cannot forgive people who disrespect you.
99% perspiration
by DaveOinSF on Fri Jun 13, 2008 at 06:20:36 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: