Part of the “Bernie or Bust” movement seems hinged on the notion that Hillary Clinton is essentially no different than Donald Trump, Ted Cruz or whomever the Republicans hilariously nominate. “She’s a corporate shill!!” they say. “She got paid to deliver speeches to corporate America” they say. “I could never vote for her” they say. Well, the fact of the matter, if you believe those who monitor and score such things, Hillary Clinton is your basic middle of the road Democrat (in terms of policy), and no where close to a standard card carrying Republican.
Crowdpac (www.crowdpac.com) has done a lot of heavy lifting in order to, in their own words,“calculate objective scores for candidates based on publicly available data including political donations. 10L is the most liberal and 10C is the most conservative”.
So, 10L is the MOST liberal, while 10C is the MOST conservative. 0 would be right smack dab in the middle.
Therefore, the scale would look something like this:
10L--9L--8L--7L--6L--5L--4L--3L--2L--1L--0--1C--2C--3C--4C--5C--6C--7C--8C—9C—10C
So, does the idea that Clinton is a DINO (Democrat in name only) hold up? Not, according to crowdpac and their scoring system. For some context, here is how some familiar names stack up.
Bernie Sanders: 8.2L (Pretty Liberal! But not as much as Dennis Kucinich in 2008!)
Hillary Clinton: 6.5L (Bernie is clearly to her left, no doubt)
Donald Trump: 5.1C (Whaaaa? About 12.5 points to the right of Clinton on a 20 point scale? But I thought they said the were the same!!??!!)
Ted Cruz: 9.9C (Ahh, isnt it nice to have some absolutes so that we normal people can view other nutcases in context? It just feels good to know that this scale captures, in a number, what we know to be true in reality!)
Joe Biden: 4.4L (Joe actually comes in as the most moderate federally elected democrat. Huh. That would make him right of Hillary)
Barrack Obama 7.8L (Slightly to the left of Hillary when they competed in 2008. She came in at 6.9L at that time)
Jeb Bush 4.2C (Making him a fairly moderate republican)
This comes after previous studies (see DW-NOMINATE) determined that Clinton was the 11th MOST liberal candidate in her time in the senate. Again, this wasn’t an opinion or a belief. It was hard data analyzed and calculated.
So, yes everyone. Bernie Sanders is more liberal than Hillary Clinton. That is clear, and the numbers support it. However, for anyone to argue that Clinton is no better than Trump shows that they have left reason out of their calculation. They have turned this into something that it is not. It is not about worshiping at the alter of either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, the people. It is about the movement to make sure our policies continue to trend left and not allowing the people on the “C” side of the scale to walk back decades of hard work. Bernie Sanders is not even the most liberal candidate to run in the last 10 years (check out Dennis Kucinich’s score), if you believe the numbers, but for some reason he has created a subset of individuals who are willing to blow up the election, based on some sort of unsubstantiated belief that he, the person, is worth risking the future of the country on. People, who if scored, would clearly land on the “L” side of the scale, are abandoning the Democratic party because Hillary is not far enough left? Based, on the numbers, this is an irrational and self destructive position.
Is Bernie an awesome guy and a wonderful senator? Without a doubt! Is it mind boggling for him to suggest that the super delegates vote disproportionately in an inverse relationship with the PLEDGED delegates. Yes. That is clearly disappointing.
It is clear that 2 things are true. Bernie Sanders is to the left of Hillary Clinton. More importantly, Hillary Clinton is right in the middle of the pack in terms of the “Liberalness” of democratic party, but no where close to her opponent, Donald Trump, in the general election. Arguments to the contrary are an indication that this has turned from a political campaign, to a religious experience for those making the case.