Over the course of the campaign, there has been a theme that HRC and Sanders are really not that far apart on most issues. In fact, they voted the same way 93% of the time while both were in the Senate. Why, they are almost like identical twins, right?

What does not get said is what those pesky 7% votes involved, and they make all the difference.

The first big one, of course, would be the vote on authorizing GWB to invade another country, Iraq. Both gave speeches regarding their votes on this bill. Sanders warned of the day after. HRC stated that she cast her vote with "conviction." A little known follow up vote was on the Levin Amendment that would have delayed the invasion. HRC voted against the delay; Sanders voted for a delay.

The next big one would be the Patriot Act. Sanders voted against it twice. HRC voted for it twice. Some other civil liberty issues were they differed: HRC co-sponsored a bill and voted to ban flag burning and voted to loosen restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. ACLU rating indicating a pro-civil rights voting record: HRC-60%, Sanders-93%. The Human Rights Campaign rating indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: HRC-89%, Sanders-100%.

They also differed on a 2007 vote regarding the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners within the US. Sanders voted to allow the transfer, HRC to block it. The illegal and immoral detention and treatment of the prisoners at Guantanamo was well known by this time.

In 2007 Sanders opposed the bill to develop and deploy effective defense against Iranian ballistic missiles. HRC supported this bill which was highly praised by the Heritage Foundation.

Congress and the American people need to under­stand that while the United States has made progress in putting missile defense systems in the field in recent years, in most respects the U.S. remains vul­nerable to this threat. This is no time for the U.S. to slow the pace of developing and deploying effective defenses against ballistic missiles. Indeed, the Bush Administration and Congress need to accelerate the effort by focusing on developing and deploying the systems that offer the greatest capability.

In 2007 Sanders opposed the bill to "combat, contain, and roll back" Iranian activities in Iraq which is coded war talk for invading Iran.

Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment to press the army toward war with Iran. This was an important step, for her, and a vote as closely considered as her vote to authorize the bombing and occupation of Iraq.

In 2008, Sanders opposed the defense budget bill. HRC supported it. As with all bills of this size, it had some good things (a pay raise for military personnel--although, this may not really be so good as it also delinks the raise from the Employment Cost Index) and some bad. The cost ($603.03 billion) and fraud were some of the major issues that Sanders had with this bill:

Note: If the video does not play, it can be found here: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT): Defense Spending and Our Unmet National Needs

In 2008, HRC voted for and Sanders opposed the US-India civilian nuclear deal which separated India's civilian and military nuclear activity. Why is this one important? First, it delays seeking green energy solutions by promoting nuclear energy with all its waste products and other dangers. Second, to ensure the passage, the US offered to trade nuclear material, equipment and technology with India and lead to India's Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act, 2010 which opened the door to US corporations involvement in nuclear activities in India with little to no liability in case something were to go wrong.

Other vote differences occurred while Sanders was still in the House including the 2001 Bankruptcy bill and the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). Most here have probably already seen the condemnation of HRC's vote for the bankruptcy bill by Elizabeth Warren. The PLCAA bil is discussed here: Fairytales, Guns and Sanders. However, it is much more difficult to compare House vs Senate votes as the language often changes, so this essay deals with the votes while they were both members of the Senate, and only some of the main ones have been included.

So while HRC and Sanders may have voted the same way 93% of the time, there is a vast difference in that pesky 7% of votes in which they differed. Nonetheless, this will be an argument that has been and will be used often to suggest that voting for HRC is one in the same as a vote for Sanders. So relax, folks, the only real difference between them is an equally pesky FBI investigation into emails, private server, the foundation, and a few quid pro quo appointees.