Senator McCain Gets A Conservative Rating Of 80 From ACU
The American Conservative Union has released it’s 2007 ratings (via Hot Air)
The American Conservative Union (ACU) the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots conservative lobbying organization, has released its 2007 “Rating of Congress.” ACU has rated every member of the House and Senate since 1971 and the ratings are widely regarded as the definitive conservative assessment of the federal legislative branch.
ACU Chairman David A. Keene said it is not surprising that the 2006 election has resulted in Congress taking a sharp leftward turn.
“Elections have consequences and the election of 2006 was no exception,” Keene said. “The overall average score of the House of Representatives fell from 53.1 percent conservative in 2006 to 42.91 percent in 2007 while in the Senate the average score in 2007 was 42.67 percent conservative compared to 49.5 percent in 2006.”
Senator McCain recieved an 80, giving him a lifetime rating of 82.16. Obamessiah? A seven. 21 Democrats in the Senate received a zero, to go along with a huge list of Democrats in the House.
Ed at Hot Air writes
For those who see no difference between McCain and the two Democrats, this serves as a reminder that while McCain drifts to the middle on some issues, a large chasm exists between the nominees that will face off in November.
Some may say that McCain is not conservative enough, however, he is conservative in the core principles, and, let’s face it, in today’s “what is the government going to do for me?” society, it would be tough to get someone elected who isn’t willing to do what is best for the country as a whole.
For me locally, Dole received a 96 and Burr received a 92, which is interesting, since both of them have had their names thrown around as VP picks.
My House rep, Brad Miller, got a perfect zero.
One thing that sticks out is comparing the 2007 ratings for Democrats to their lifetime ratings. For quite a few, their is a downward trend, which shows how far to the Left the Democrats have moved.







May 18th, 2008 at 5:58 am
Well there’s a misleading number. 80 isn’t what he earned, it’s what they gave him.
You get 100 for voting their way on everything (making a conservative shift in the votes)… I get that.
You get a 0 for voting liberal (making a liberal shift in the votes)… makes sense.
So a 50 is neutral, 100 conservative, 0 liberal. Easy enough scale to read.
And McCain votes 8 yes, 2 no, 15 no-show… why aren’t no-shows counted as anything?
They had the vote, and he didn’t make an impact either way. Which would give him a “neutral” earned on those votes, wouldn’t it?
So he “earned” ((100 *
+ (0 * 2) + (50 * 15)) /25
Or a 62 for those of you without a calculator handy.
Now that’s still better than Obama and Hillary; which is to be expected… but it isn’t the artificially inflated number bolstered by his no-shows.
Perhaps I’m wrong, and not voting at all helped Conservatives… but color me skeptical.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I understand your point, GGekkobear, but, by the same math, you would bring every conservative down towards the middle, and every liberal up towards the middle.