It's as if you didn't even read my post.  Look at the positions he takes, not just "yes" or "no" issues.  The problem with these ranking and rating sites is that they label every bill as either a "liberal" bill or a "conservative" bill, so there's essentially no difference between an extreme left position or a slightly left of center position.  They both count the same.  And I'm not saying that examining his record is a bad way of determining his positions, but I am saying that this is a bad way to examine anyone's record.

Hillary Clinton and Barrak Obhama both claim to be (and are) progressives in the classical sense, the unfortunate problem is the vast majority of people do not know what the progressive era was all about. From Wikipedia:

When either of the candidates talk about an issue there is an underlying theme of reducing the rights and responsibilities of individuals in order to protect them from themself; in other words they talk about the reduction of the individual in favour of the state. The fundimemtal principle of Fascism is the supremacy of the state and the elimination of individual considerations.

So if a person votes, on average, 80% of the time for the libral (or precieved) liberal position, he is still moderate?

He might have a moderate position on Healthcare, but what about Abortion? He's 100% Pro Choice. What about Gun Control? He's Anti-NRA.

http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

Highest rated Liberal Senator in Congress in 2007. Exactly why is he moderate when he recieved a 95.5% Liberal rating? Speeches and plans are fine, but why should I randomly believe that he's going to be moderate when his actual voting record is different?

 What has he changed his opinion on in the last 2 years?

Since the Democrats beat the GOP in 2006 because the average American voter didn't like Bush and his war and things have gotten worse (know the economy is also downing sour), the Democrats should win again.

Maybe Ron Paul could have won, but McCain is not likely. There is still a chance McCain could beat Hillary but I doubt he could beat Obama. You see, conservatives don't seem to like McCain because he is not a conservative so I don't think he can bring out the base in huge numbers (same thing happened in 2006). He has a lot of support from independents, but Obama has even more support from Independents and liberals and socialists (the Democratic base) actually like him.

Not only will Obama likely beat McCain (if nominated) but the country will continue to elect more and more Democrats to state and congressional offices (a trend that started because of how unpopular Bush and his policies were).

So you haven't read either of my posts. I explained clearly why these ratings are not a good measure. I also never claimed that Obama was a moderate, I did claim that he is not as liberal as these ratings would have you believe.

EDIT: Specifically regarding the National Journal rating, Obama responded to this himself in the MSNBC debate last Tuesday.  About 3:30 into this video:

Hah, you've noticed that too. I've just atributed it to Ohio being Ohio and being a weird mix of normal people and hicks. I know someone who refuses to believe Barak O Bama isn't muslim. (the fact that means something says something.) They think he's lieing or something.

I don't think it's that prevelant and just that racists stick out like sore thumbs.

The more democratic areas should be fine as they've had no problem electing black guys anyway.    

I don't think it would be that much of a swing, as i think a lot of people who usually can't find time to vote, would for Obama in areas in cleveland.  Plus Ken Blackwell won't be around to screw everything up.  

That guy's idocy became so transparant when he was elected.  Even if he didn't do anything he should be smart enough to know it's a bad idea to be both head of the election board and head of the "re-elect george bush" comitee.

Also being head of the election board and mysteriously not knowing he owned stock in the company of the voter's machines he went out of the way to buy who didn't even fufill the requirements voted on. (to prvent fraud).

Man that guy was an idiot. 

A couple of questions by a European:

Who is most liberal/left - Hillary or Obama? And how do they compare to Bill?
(try to do a prediction.. picture the two in the role of the next president.. would they be less or more left/liberal than Bill Clinton?)

What is their policy about immigration? And how do they compare to Bush (about immigration). And is there much debate in the US about immigration?

Hard to say, Hilary Clinton used to be more conservative then Bill Clinton. Since then she seems to have moved to the left of him.

Buisness&Economics - Both are more "traditionally liberal" as Clinton was a bit of a Big Buisness Democrat

Social Issues - practically the same. Everything should play out the same way whether their positions are the same or not. Pro Choice judges are i can see.

Immigration - hard to say, it's really only a republican issue. It's a BIG issue among republicans because they tend to get the "immigrants stole my job" non-union vote. While the Democrats get the "Immigrants are going to steal are job" union votes. However the Union Democrats have been ignored for a while since they are basically stuck with the democrats one way or another.  The talk of NAFTA reform should be enough to keep them on the party line mostly.  Though i'd be the "renegotiations" won't get anywhere and the president won't pull out.

Also the borders being so lose is a national security issue which is more of a republican issue. (Despite the fact that the only state hit by terrorist attacks is mostly populated by democrats.)

Usually Democrats want to make them citizens and then secure the border, just like Bush did interestingly, i'd guess to make sure the republican party got a lionshare of latino voters.

Basically there wont' be much difference here between them and McCain. McCain might try a little harder to secure the border... that's about it.

Military deployment - Hilary More Liberal, Obama... about the same maybe slightly more conservative. Bill Clinton wasn't afraid to bomb other countries as well.

Healthcare - About the same, maybe. Clinton didn't seem to care much about Healthcare and let Hillary pursue universal healthcare and she failed at it. So there wouldn't be any policy differences.