Posted on 12/15/2014 11:27:18 AM PST by cotton1706
Report card time. Yes, anyone with less than a 70% average total needs to have a special meeting with the principal. And, just may be Cruzing for a bruising.
It’s not rocket science. Our efforts should be directed to those that are up for reelection next, and how they voted.
bump
the ratings are all suspect for various reasons
I don’t know how that was a response to my post, do you lean libertarian?
You seem to manipulate your postings to favor it.
I don’t manipulate my postings in any way. I post what I like or what interests me or what I think others may find interesting. Whether they lean libertarian or not, I have no idea. In general I focus on electing conservatives and exposing those in power.
If your concern is that Paul is at the top, and he is sometimes considered a libertarian, it has nothing to do with the list. Paul is at the top because he is up for reelection next year and has voted well. There is no intended manipulation.
How are you and libertarianism?
Don’t you think it would make more sense to just list them from high to low in their ratings?
Do you really think that what readers take, or want from your list, is which names are in which future election cycle?
Here it is sorted by ‘Average’...most conservative on top
Lee (UT) 2016 99% (Average)
Paul (KY) 2016 96% (Average)
Cruz (TX) 2018 96% (Average)
Scott (SC) 2016 92% (Average)
Rubio (FL) 2016 90% (Average)
Risch (ID) 2020 89% (Average)
Johnson (WI) 2016 88% (Average)
Inhofe (OK) 2020 88% (Average)
Sessions (AL) 2020 88% (Average)
Cornyn (TX) 2020 86% (Average)
Cotton (AR) 2020 86% (Average)
Crapo (ID) 2016 84% (Average)
Grassley (IA) 2020 83% (Average)
Roberts (KS) 2020 81% (Average)
Toomey (PA) 2016 80% (Average)
Enzi (WY) 2020 80% (Average)
Lankford (OK) 2016 78% (Average)
Shelby (AL) 2016 76% (Average)
Barrasso (WY) 2016 75% (Average)
Vitter (LA) 2016 75% (Average)
McConnell (KY) 2020 75% (Average)
Heller (NV) 2018 73% (Average)
Thune (SD) 2016 71% (Average)
Fischer (NE) 2018 71% (Average)
Daines (MT) 2020 71% (Average)
Gardner (CO) 2020 70% (Average)
Burr (NC) 2016 69% (Average)
Moran (KS) 2016 69% (Average)
Flake (AZ) 2018 69% (Average)
Coats (IN) 2016 66% (Average)
Cassidy (LA) 2020 65% (Average)
Boozman (AR) 2016 64% (Average)
Hatch (UT) 2018 64% (Average)
Portman (OH) 2016 63% (Average)
McCain (AZ) 2016 62% (Average)
Corker (TN) 2018 62% (Average)
Graham (SC) 2020 60% (Average)
Ayotte (NH) 2016 59% (Average)
Blunt (MO) 2016 58% (Average)
Isakson (GA) 2016 55% (Average)
Wicker (MS) 2018 55% (Average)
Cochran (MS) 2020 53% (Average)
Alexander (TN) 2020 51% (Average)
Hoeven (ND) 2016 50% (Average)
Capito (WV) 2020 50% (Average)
Kirk (IL) 2016 47% (Average)
Murkowski (AK) 2016 31% (Average)
Collins (ME) 2020 27% (Average)
Ernst (IA) 2020
Perdue (GA) 2020
Rounds (SD) 2020
Sasse (NE) 2020
Sullivan (AK) 2020
Tillis (NC) 2020
“Don’t you think it would make more sense to just list them from high to low in their ratings?”
Originally I had it that way. But a freeper suggested putting those up for reelection on top, so we could quickly see who to work to remove. I thought that was a good idea so for the last two years, I’ve posted these that way.
“Do you really think that what readers take, or want from your list, is which names are in which future election cycle?”
Yes, it’s important for people to know if they can immediately do something to remove those with bad voting records. Screaming about Bob Corker for example, would do absolutely no good this year or next, just as screaming about Murkowski wouldn’t do any good last year or the year before. I’ve been posting these for two years with very little confusion.
“How are you and libertarianism?”
Libertarian has become a loaded word, causing unnecessary arguments, so you’d have to be specific. I’m for advancing liberty, through law, but I’ve found that that’s not what people mean by libertarianism.
What we want to see is the ratings of the Senators and the context of their rating, for that to work, then they need to be in order.
We can handle the primaries when they come up in real time, it isn’t like we don’t know which Senators are up for reelection when that election cycle approaches.
This argument is starting to sound like the old arguments from when you accidentally kept posting (consistently) in a manner that kept promoting the libertarian like, social liberal, Liz Cheney.
Great post.
Thank you.
Do you know if anyone has done the same for the House?
Yup, how did I know that you would somehow bring up Liz Cheney?? Your favorite argument.
I’ll repeat, and you can do a search, I’ve been posting these lists for two years, and prior to November, Paul was way down the list, because he wasn’t up for reelection in the upcoming cycle, and now he is. There’s no libertarian conspiracy promoting Paul. Run the same numbers yourself and you’ll find that Paul’s voting record is among those voting most conservative that are up for reelection in 2016.
“We can handle the primaries when they come up in real time, it isn’t like we don’t know which Senators are up for reelection when that election cycle approaches.”
We need to start thinking about this NOW! Not around April of 2016. We need to start fielding candidates NOW. Get them known, get them exposure and funding. We can’t do a damn thing about those that were just elected or those elected in 2016. And a slew of those elected in 2010 have voted terribly.
Oops. Mistype. I meant to type that we can’t do about those elected in 2012, not 2016.
Why not just list them in order, since that is the usefulness in your list?
We need to know who is liberal and who is conservative, not when their next election comes up, that will come to our attention naturally.
I think that other Freeper was right that it’s helpful to have those up for reelection on top, but I can easily do both.
I was intrigued by your question on libertarianism, and not really knowing what they supposedly stand for, I took one of those political spectrum tests. While I’m far to the right (almost at the line) on the left right test, I’m right in the middle between the authoritarian and libertarian extremes, which sounds about right. The founders would call it (as would I) “ordered liberty.”
LOL, you know those “tests” are just things that people write for fun, it doesn’t really measure anything.
The “founding generations”, the people were conservative, as were their political leaders, the “founding fathers”.
They would be lynching libertarians from the trees, if they tried to sell their leftism in public.
Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”, eliminate the Border Patrol and INS.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments full 9 months.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science and marketers can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Well I thought the test was fair. Asked a lot of issue questions. But as I suspected, I’m a conservative, not a libertarian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.