Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

2003 ADA Ratings

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-05 07:37 PM
Original message
2003 ADA Ratings
I wanted to post this so people can see that just about all the Democratic Senators are voting with us most of the time.

http://www.adaction.org/2003senatevr.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. I want people to look at this some more
Most of our Senators do a great job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
2. Not applicable. This is 2003 data
It's now 2005. This data is outdated and does not apply to today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. They Didn't Have Numbers Compiled For 04 Yet...
It would seem to be more logical to assume they are more or less the same than radically different...

Wouldn't you agree?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. No, I wouldn't agree
And 2005 is radically different, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. the fact is
these Senators have good records. I'm sure the 2004 records will reflect the same thing as will the 2005 records when the year is over. Its time to stop creating divisions where none exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Nope, I will hold their feet to the fire
and donate to candaidates who run AGAINST traitors like Feinstein and Lieberman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. so you are saying you will ignore the facts
and continue to create division where none exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. No, you're saying that
I'm saying I will hold their feet to the fire and try to defeat the ones I see as being divisive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. nope
you are saying you are going to work to defeat Democrats with mostly progressive records. You are the one who is planting the seeds of division.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Obsolete records!
2003 was two years ago. Lieberman sucks. Feinstein has sold out for a $600 million contract.

Boith deserve defeat and I will do whatever I can to see both defeated in teh primaries. They should lose their jobs!

Don't like it? TOO BAD IT'S MY CHOICE!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. I bet when the 2004 rankings come out
they will show the same thing. They won't be obsolete at all. You have the right to your own opinion, but you don't have the right to your own facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-05 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. It doesn't mean shit if the ratings don't reflect the votes that matter to
me.

And your precious ratings don't reflect these sorts of votes, so your preciouys ratings are meaningless to me and my opinion. The votes that matter to me are not taken into account br the raters, so the ratings are bullshit on their face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FightinNewDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #15
27. Fine
When REAL Democrats overwhelmingly renominate both Joe and DiFi, I will have a good, hearty laugh at your expense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. I think he is saying he will work to elect Democrats who will have better
progressive records.

Saying someone voted "with us" a certain percentage of the time is meaningless ehn the information is
1) old
2) not weighted to my particular values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. ADA is a beacon of liberalism
their rating serve to point out which members are voting like progressives. I submit that the ratings stay consistent for most members over time. It is certainly weighted to liberal values.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FightinNewDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
26. What you mean is...
Divisive=Doesn't agree with my preconceived notion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff in Cincinnati Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. No Lifetime Rating...
They should provide this -- lets you know if the score is a one-time abberation or a consistent measure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. you can find the lifetime rating
but its not up to date.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jeff in Cincinnati Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. Chaffee at 65% is the highest-rated Republican
Actually higher than Breaux, Landrieu and Miller (not a surprise there). Followed closely by Snowe (55) and Collins (45) of Maine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. not too surprising
Breaux was really bad. Miller wasn't really a Dem. Landrieu runs is a tough place for a Dem to win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why does Rockefeller not run for president?
someone tell me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WI_DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
17. I'm impressed with Lieberman's 70% rating
It's the lowest among democrats in the northeast, but still higher than Chaffee (65%) a Republican from RI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. key point
it points out that Lieberman should still be much better, but he's still better than any Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaneQPublic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. John Edwards is at 65% -- lower than Lieberman? That's surprising (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-05 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. that's a pretty good rating
considering the state he represented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveConn Donating Member (820 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:52 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. Look at 2002.
It rates him higher than Dodd in 2002. Which is 100% insane.

You have to remember that you have to give in sometimes if you want to be a member of a party. Check out Jeffords records before and after he left the GOP. =)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proudbluestater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-05 04:37 AM
Response to Original message
24. West Virginia and Michigan tie with the highest scores
100% and 95%.

Still a proudbluestater...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu May 09th 2024, 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC