I don't what rankings you are referring to, but the word progressive means different things to different people. And LOL at referring to the woman who refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin and called for weaker body camera regulations as part of the Bernie wing. Her half hearted endorsements of progressive ideas on healthcare and college (which she never mentions again after the initial photo op) don't make her a genuine progressive.
Cherry pick single issues if you want, but every ranking system out there that aggregates all of politicians' positions have Harris at the far left of U.S. Senators. I trust actual data way more than random Atlas posters' feelings, that's for sure.
Aren't DW-Nominate scores and the like based on numbers of yeas/nays relative to partisan skews? So if Harris overwhelmingly votes against Trump/GOP (which she does), she'd have a high aggregate "liberal" score. That doesn't mean that the things she's actually voting on are particularly far left.
There are probably other scoring systems that do this "better", but the same general critique applies to everything that relies on a spatial model of political behavior - who's to say what's more liberal of, say, the healthcare systems of Switzerland, Canada, and France? How do you quantify that?
TL;DR: Boiling down lawmakers' (or voters') political beliefs into an ideal point isn't a good indicator of anything IMO
Poll
