Obama has highest ranking from League of Conservation Voters of all Candidates.

calteacherguy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 12:28 PM
Original message

Obama has highest ranking from League of Conservation Voters of all Candidates.

Obama's first ad buy in California, running now, is on breaking our addiction to oil. I do expect a Gore endorsement before the convention, as Obama has clearly made this his #1 issue and has said he speaks to Gore regularly.

Here's the LCV rankings, based on their votes in congress and their profiles they personally submitted to the group:

> Obama - 96
> Kucinich - 92
> Clinton - 90
> Biden - 84
> Richardson -82
> Dodd - 77
> Edwards - 59
> Paul - 30
> McCain - 26
> Brownback - 14
> Thompson - 12
> Tancredo -11
> Hunter - 9

You can go here: http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/ to see the numbers and read their profiles. I don't know about you, but I choose substance over
rhetoric, and I trust the league of conservation voters quite a bit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

skipos

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message

1. Makes sense to me. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Hello_Kitty

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 12:35 PM
Response to Original message

2. The Edwards rating is a real surprise. Why so low?

The LCV is very important to me as well. Good to see Obama with such a high score but I've got some concerns about his support for nuclear and liquid coal.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Jane Austin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #2

3. Because he really didn't have a particularly progressive record

in the Senate - pro-War, for the 2000 bankruptcy bill, pro-China free trade, for Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage, etc.

I like what he says now, but I didn't and don't like the way he voted when it counted.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bishop Rook

(252 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. Most of those wouldn't matter to the LCV, would they?

Except for Yucca Mountain and possibly China free trade...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Jane Austin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #4

6. You're right.

I wrote that before my second cup of coffee. :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

unc70

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #3

7. No, because Edwards was absent from votes in 2004

There are several lists of ratings by groups of candidate's records. Many groups treat absences the same as voting against their positions. By using 2004 as a rating year for Edwards, his absences distort his record.

Most of these type things make no allowance for absent but paired with an offseting member on the other side of the issue so that neither would be forced to return to vote.

Also difficult comparing ratings between candidates whose terms never overlapped.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bishop Rook

(252 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #2

5. Just checked out the earlier years' scorecards...

Edwards' low scores come from 2003 and 2004, which was when he was campaigning for President. He missed several votes both years, and the LCV counts a missed vote as a negative response. In previous years (1999-2002) he had 78, 100, 88, 59.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Barack_America

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #5

10. "the LCV counts a missed vote as a negative response"

Hmm, I guess that Obama must be pretty good at showing up to vote then. Contrary to what *other* candidates may say.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Califooyah Operative

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:02 PM
Response to Original message

8. yea, but, but, but. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Barack_America

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 09:03 PM
Response to Original message

9. I didn't know that. Thanks for pointing it out! ...n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bagimin

(945 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. real facts on du?......tsk..tsk

we mustn't let this become a trend.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

waiting for hope

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Jan-13-08 11:05 PM
Response to Original message

12. Total Distortion here :

Edited on Sun Jan-13-08 11:06 PM by waiting for hope

League of Conservation Voters Applauds John Edwards Global Warming Plan

League of Conservation Voters (LCV) President Gene Karpinski issued the following statement regarding presidential candidate John Edwards' plan to combat global warming:

"The League of Conservation Voters applauds Sen. John Edwards for taking the lead in announcing aggressive plans to combat global warming. Senator Edwards' key policy is to enact a cap that will achieve 80 percent reductions in emissions by mid-century, mirroring the Sanders-Boxer (S.309) bill in Congress.

Senator Edwards also calls for an aggressive energy efficiency plan that will meet all of America's growing energy needs, while requiring that a quarter of our nation's electricity is produced from renewables by 2025.

Senator Edwards' plan demonstrates that he understands the magnitude of the challenge before us and the need for bold leadership to meet it.

America can lead the world in developing the technologies and jobs of the new energy economy instead of outsourcing those opportunities to other countries. Forward-looking approaches will restore America's credibility abroad and make us leaders in the fight to combat global warming.

Senator Edwards has outlined the most comprehensive global warming plan of any presidential candidate to date. We look forward to other 2008 presidential candidates outlining their plans to address this pressing issue."

http://www.lcv.org/newsroom/press-releases/page.jsp?itemID=32451178

Next?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemDogs

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Jan-14-08 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #12

13. Edwards in fact the best. Which is why Friends of the Earth

Friends of the Earth endorsed him.
Move On town hall on environment: he won both groups (those who watched videos and those in meetings).
Obama had a weaker plan until November when he adopted Edwards plan, with one important distinction. He dropped his support for liquified coal when a NH backer pushed him, but he still likes nuclear. So much for protecting the planet.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 16th 2024, 05:22 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

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.