OnTheIssues.org's take on the Democratic presidential candidates from left to center

I concluded Democratic presidential candidates from left to center from Voteview with a promise to revisit the topic.

[T]his won't be the last time I plan on examining the ideology of the candidates.  On The Issues has pages and ideological evaluations of just about all the candidates, including ones who never served in Congress.  Compared to Voteview, it's more complete, but less objective and based on rhetoric, not action....Still, ranking the candidates by ideology, and comparing it to their DW-NOMINATE scores, if available, should be both entertaining and informative.

Since the participants in the debates later this month have been selected, it's time to follow through.

As I did for the rankings using Voteview, I'm sharing the methodology.

Candidate's Political Philosophy
The below is a way of thinking about the candidate's political philosophy by dividing the candidate's VoteMatch answers into "social" and "economic" questions.  It is only a theory - please take it with a grain of salt!

Social Questions:  Liberals and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while conservatives and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictive answers.

Economic Questions:  Conservatives and libertarians agree in choosing the less-government answers, while liberals and populists agree in choosing the more-restrictive answers.
...
Social Score

This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's personal lives or on social issues. These issues include health, morality, love, recreation, prayer and other activities that are not measured in dollars.

• A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in tolerance for different people and lifestyles.
• A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that standards of morality & safety should be enforced by government.

Economic Score

This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.

• A high score (above 60%) means the candidate believes in personal responsibility for financial matters, and that free-market competition is better for people than central planning by the government.
• A low score (below 40%) means the candidate believes that a good society is best achieved by the government redistributing wealth. The candidate believes that government's purpose is to decide which programs are good for society, and how much should be spent on each program.

This measures how much the candidate believes government should intervene in people's economic lives. Economic issues include retirement funding, budget allocations, and taxes.

How We Score Candidates

How we determine a candidate's stance on each VoteMatch question:

1. We collect up votes, excerpts from speeches, press releases, and so on, which are related to each question. Each of these are shown on the candidate's VoteMatch table.
2. We assign an individual score for each item on the list. The scores can be: Strongly Favor, Favor, Neutral/Mixed, Oppose, Strongly Oppose. The scoring terms refer to the text of the question, not whether the candidate strongly opposed a bill, for example.
3. We then average the individual scores, using the numeric scale: Strongly Favor = 2, Favor = 1, Neutral/Mixed = 0, Oppose = -1, Strongly Oppose = -2.
/OL>
• If the average is above 1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Favor.
• If the average is above 0, the overall answer to the question is Favor.
• If the average is exactly 0, the overall answer to the question is Neutral.
• If the average is below 0, the overall answer to the question is Oppose.
• If the average is below -1, the overall answer to the question is Strongly Oppose.
...
• To get the political philosophy of the candidate, we sum up the answers on two scales, the Personal/Social scale and the Economic Scale. Some questions aren't used in the political philosophy calculations.
• The VoteMatch table indicates the number of scale points from each answer (any one question can provide from 0 to 10 scale points on one scale or the other).
• The combination of social/moral scales and economic scales produces a political philosophy description.

Enough of On The Issues' methodology.  Mine was to rank the candidates by economic score from low (left) to high (right, or in this case center) to make it comparable to the liberal-moderate (there are no true conservatives running for the Democratic nomination) ranking I used two weeks ago which was based on the economic dimension.  I then used the social score to break ties in the economic score with high scores being considered more liberal and low scores being considered more conservative.

Follow over the jump for the rankings.


Unlike last week, when Voteview did not support that he was "objectively further left then the rest of the Dem[ocratic] primary field," On The Issues ranks Bernie Sanders as the most liberal based on the ten economic questions they ask and grade the answers on with an economic score of 3.  Sanders is also tied for the most liberal socially with a score of 98.  At least based on 20 focused questions and his stances on them as opposed to his votes on whatever the Senate considers, he is the most liberal candidate both economically and socially.



Four candidates tie for next most liberal economically with a score of 10.  However, all have different social scores that break the tie.  Elizabeth Warren has the highest social score, 85.  This makes her the second most liberal candidate overall.  Kamela Harris has the next most liberal social score, 78, placing her third.  So far, no surprises.  However, On The Issues considers Joe Biden to be the next most liberal candidate with a social score of 75 to place him fourth.  Well, it's been ten years since he was in the Senate, so his Voteview score may be out of date and Biden has probably moved to the left since then.  That certainly applies to his position on the Hyde Amendment, which might change his social score, as the three point difference between Biden and Harris appears to be based on the two candidates' stances on abortion.  On the other hand, that does not apply to Amy Klobuchar, who is still in the Senate and also has an economic score of 10.  Considering that she was one of the most centrist candidates according to Voteview, that's even more surprising.  However, she is tied for the lowest social score with 65, which leads On The Issues to consider her a Populist-Leaning Liberal in contrast with the other four candidates so far, which have the label of Hard-Core Liberal.  It's possible that her social ideology influences her votes.  I may have to use another method to figure out where she really fits on a left-right number line.*

By the way, where's Cory Booker, who Voteview ranked as the third most liberal?  Be patient; I'll get to him.


The fifth most liberal candidate according to Voteview is the sixth most liberal according to On The Issues, Kirsten Gillibrand with an economic score of 13 and a social score of 70.  At least her rhetoric matches her votes, although her relatively low social score leads On The Issues to label her as a Populist-Leaning Liberal.



Three candidates tie with an economic score of 15.  The one with the highest social score of 85 and therefore the most liberal is Jay Inslee.  That makes him appear more liberal than his Voteview score, but that's eight years out of date.  Again, he's probably moved left since he went from Congress to the Washington statehouse.  Two candidates tie with social scores of 80, Tim Ryan and Andrew Yang.  This makes Yang the most liberal non-politician in the contest.  Considering that his signature issue is Basic Guaranteed Income, that shouldn't be a surprise.  On The Issues considers all three Hard-Core Liberals.

The two Texans in the contest tie with an economic score of 18.  Of the two, Beto O'Rourke has the second highest social score with a score of 88, ranking him under only Sanders and Mike Gravel, while Julian Castro is closer to the center with a social score of 78.  Despite the clear difference in social score, On The Issues rates both as Hard-Core Liberals.

Two U.S. Representatives, Seth Moulton and Eric Swalwell tie with economic scores of 20.  Moulton is the more liberal socially with a score of 85, tying with Warren and Inslee, while Swalwell is more moderate with a social score of 75.  Swalwell qualified for this month's debate, while Moulton was one of four candidates who missed the mark.  On The Issues rates both as Hard-Core Liberals, despite Swalwell's social score being only five points away from Gillibrand and just two points away from Pete Butigieg (below).  Gotta draw the line somewhere.


Speaking of Pete Butigieg, he and Michael Bennet tie at 23 on the economic scale.  Butigieg is more socially liberal with a score of 73, while Bennet is more moderate with a social score of 68, tying him for the second (or third, depending on how on resolves ties) most conservative candidate socially running with Steve Bullock and John Hickenlooper.  Only Klobuchar and Marianne Williamson are rated as closer to the center socially with scores of 65.  On The Issues rates both Butigieg and Bennet as Populist-Leaning Liberals.



I told my readers above to be patient, as I'd get to Cory Booker, whose stated positions result in his being rated as a lot less liberal economically with a score of 25 than his votes place him on VoteView's scale.  This score ties him on the economic scale with Marianne Williamson.  However, his high social score 80 combined with his more moderate economic score leads On The Issues to consider him a Libertarian-Leaning Progressive.  On the other hand, Williamson's much more centrist social score of 65, which ties her with Klobuchar as the most moderate socially, has On the Issues to rate her as a Moderate Liberal, the only one running for the nomination.


Two announced candidates and one who hasn't declared (and may never) have tied economic scores of 28 John Delaney, Bill de Blasio, and Stacey Abrams.  The most liberal socially is Delaney, with a score of 85.  Despite his very liberal reputation, De Blasio doesn't score as hight with an 83.  Meanwhile, Abrams, who is not an announced candidate and so is not debating this month, is the closest to the center of three socially with a score of 78.  On The Issues to considers all three to be Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.

Mentioning Abrams reminds me that Wayne Messam has a page but no ratings on positions yet, so I'm skipping him for now.  When he gets a real rating, I'll return to him.  That written, he's not in tonight's debate anyway.


Neither is Mike Gravel, who ties Tulsi Gabbard with an economic score of 30.  However, he also ties Sanders' social score of 98 to make him one of the two most socially liberal candidates in the contest.  On the other hand, Gabbard's social score of 75 confirms the hypothesis I set out to test, first on Twitter and then in the entry I posted at the beginning of the month, that she was one of the more moderate candidates running for the Democratic nomination, not "objectively further left then the rest of the Dem[ocratic] primary field."  Instead, she's objectively farther to the right than most of the Democratic field, including all of the other currently serving members of Congress.  Despite the big difference in social scores, On The Issues rates both as Libertarian-Leaning Progressives.


Finally, two candidates tie as most conservative economically and next to most conservative socially Steve Bullock and John Hickenlooper, both of whom have economic scores of 40 and social scores of 68.  Hickenlooper made one of the debates, while Bullock missed.  On The Issues considers both to be Moderate Libertarian Liberals, the only ones running for office.

There, that's the most complete take from one source at one time on the candidates I can muster.  There is one other method, which involves looking at the ideology of the candidates based on their donors.  That data won't be available for at least a month, so my readers will have to be patient.  In the meantime, stay tuned for a Father's Day post.

*I'm thinking of graphing all of the candidates' scores on a Nolan Grid and then projecting the locations of the dots onto the line that extends from the left corner to the right corner, then measuring and ranking the result.  That might serve as a better determination of left to center than ranking the candidates by the economic score and then by social score.  If I do that, I'll post the results.  Stay tuned, but my readers shouldn't hold their collective breaths.  This entry was quite the project!