I presume the context for this is the forgetable the National Review piece. Ezra and folks at the lively academic blog Crooked Timber point us to VoteView, hosted at UCSD, but involving academics from throughout the U.C. system, Princeton and elsewhere.

For the incomplete 110th Senate through 2007, Obama is tied for 10th (with Biden) and Clinton is tied for 20th (with Schumer). McCain is 94th (between Cornyn and Allard).

By the way, there is complete separation between Dems and Repugs, making this, and the 109th, the most partisan congress since Reconstruction! The most conservative voting Democrat Ben Nelson being more liberal in voting then the most liberal Repuglican Snowe

For the 109th Senate ending in 2006: Obama is 21st (between Menendez and Mikulski) and Clinton is 25th (between Schumer and Kerry); McCain was 99th (between Sununu and Kyl).

Back in the 108th Senate which is before Obama was there, Clinton was 21st (tied with Kerry, and interestingly just ahead of John Edwards who was 20th). McCain was tied for 96th (with Ensign). Then Repuglican Senator from Illinois Fitzgerald was 69th (between Talent and Grassley).

Conclusions:

- These are just one analysis, based solely on Senate roll call votes, not overall philosophy, committee and subcommittee work, agenda setting and leadership, etc.

- Obama has been consistently and significantly more liberal in his voting pattern then Clinton.

- Comparing the data for the 110th to the 109th senate, Obama was possibly less liberal and more like Clinton in his voting record when that record was more complete and further away from the primaries.

- Clinton has been pretty consistent in her relative ranking.

- Obama is much more liberal in his voting record then Fitzgerald was. Duh. Elections have consequences.

- During this head-to-head period, McCain is much more extemely conservative (i.e. among the 5 or more most conservative Senators; at least by his voting record), then either Obama (10 to 20 Senators more liberal in their voting pattern then himh) or Clinton (20 to 25 more liberal then her) are liberal. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thng is up to you (as for me, hey, I wish Paul Wellstone was president).

- Will the press report that McCain's voting record is more extremist conservative then either Clinton or Obama are liberal? We can help them do so!

Caveats:

Oddly back in the 107th Senate McCain was "only" ranked at 67 (between Collins and Smith). Clinton was, in line with her consistency, at 22nd between Schumer and Hollings. I am not sure what the votes were in that Senate which moved McCain up, perhaps McCain-Feingold, Bush Taxes... or some other Conservative purist apostasy?

So far as I can tell, this system does not go any further back. Most reports I heard suggest that McCain was consistenely very very conservative in his early years, filling the Goldwater Arizona seat as a true conservative. So that ranking in the 107th is likely to be the outlier. But it would be nice if the same methodology could be extended further back.

Don't forget publishing articles in The Guardian as a solid market indicator of liberalism! :)

LOL...Ok Reader, which articles are you referring to?

[...]

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=539

heard you on rachel maddow...
maybe obama could use that quote... fantastic...

Although I support Barack Obama, it is with deep sorrow that I will no longer support MoveOn. Ever since its beginning MoveOn has been able to objectively criticize politics, and politicians from all sides. However, with its political endorsement (of anyone) it has lost its objectivity and now might as well be a member of the mainstream media.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

There is no more objective definition of either liberal or conservative. The defining concepts, terms, ideologies, philosophies, policies and constituencies framing either liberals or conservatives are wildly mangled. What do these terms and concepts mean, and what ideologies or policies differentiate these two constituencies? JFK's quote above is a good starting point for liberals, - and I'm certain there are similar quotes by Reagan or Goldwater, or Bush that summarize some like idea of conservatism.

Yet, what we have now in the kabuki theater that is American politics is both sides framing and defining the other, and neither side holding to their core values, ideologies, policies, and contituencies.

First let's define exactly what are these two things called liberals and conservatives. What exactly are the beliefs, the ideologies, the philosophies, and the policies that mark one American as conservative, and another as liberal?

Then perhaps there could be some starting point to begin restoring some sanity to America political discourse. Now there is nothing but babal, a constant chari vari of cacaphonous noise, "...full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'!

I am also a proud liberal holding dear the idea's articulated in JFK quote above.

"Deliver us from evil!"

the 'liberal' and 'conservative' word used to mean something as words, but no longer.. bush, as so called 'conservative' he has demonstrated fiscally his ability to outspend the most deranged liberal by a very long shot... these words liberal/conservative mean nothing anymore.. they are racist labels in the language of politics at present and nothing more... too bad language has devolved to this point in american politics...

RE: "..." entry at 3:04AM.

'the 'liberal' and 'conservative' word used to mean something...'

yeah, you are really clear on those old meanings when you wrote: 'he has demonstrated fiscally his ability to outspend the most DERANGED liberal...'

i'm surprised you didn't supply us with the happiest of happy endings ala 'tax & spend'.

signed,

borrow & spend

RE: "..." entry at 3:04AM.

'the 'liberal' and 'conservative' word used to mean something...'

yeah, you are really clear on those old meanings when you wrote: 'he has demonstrated fiscally his ability to outspend the most DERANGED liberal...'

i'm surprised you didn't supply us with the happiest of happy endings ala 'tax & spend'.

signed,

borrow & spend

National Journal may not be most reliabel analyzer of Left-Right voting records, given their history of hatchet job on Kerry in 2004.

You and your readers might be interested in the academic Political Science professors' work on this at: http://voteview.ucsd.edu/

For the incomplete 110th Senate through 2007, Obama is tied for 10th (with Biden) and Clinton is tied for 20th (with Schumer). McCain is 94th (between Cornyn and Allard).

By the way, there is complete separation between Dems and Repugs, making this, and the 109th, the most partisan congress since Reconstruction! The most conservative voting Democrat Ben Nelson being more liberal in voting then the most liberal Repuglican Snowe

For the 109th Senate ending in 2006: Obama is 21st (between Menendez and Mikulski) and Clinton is 25th (between Schumer and Kerry); McCain was 99th (between Sununu and Kyl).

Back in the 108th Senate which is before Obama was there, Clinton was 21st (tied with Kerry, and interestingly just ahead of John Edwards who was 20th). McCain was tied for 96th (with Ensign). Then Repuglican Senator from Illinois Fitzgerald was 69th.

GOP has a plan. Not the pledge to the American people last but, the President Obama plan. They are waiting to take over so that they can reintroduce the same plans that they vote no to when President Obama introduced them. They will pass them and pretend that they were all their ideas and plans and take credit for them. GOP does not want the President to achieve anything positive. Wake up Democracts and middle class and poor people why can not you see where your help is coming from? The Rep. are not trying to help you no matter how much help you have need the help, the Rep. volted on your behave. The are only thinking of themselves and the rich. Wake up,wake up please before it is too late. Poor people and middle class, they are bot going to like you or care about you any more just because you vote for them. It just allows them to screw over you more. How did you get it so twisted?????? HOW,,HOW,HOW. It trips me out A.Brown