Redactors Does An Analysis Of Politifacts.com

[shira]

They all lie or deceive to stay in office. All of them.
Ever notice politicians are regularly clarifying statements or "mis speaking". How often does this happen in your life, I know it doesn't happen with important stuff in my life. This alone proves politicians straddle the truth vs lie line quite often.
Why we tolerate this behavior is a better question.

I agree with you that all politicians lie, but it's apparently the case that conservative politicians lie more frequently.

 

[1prophet]

I agree with you that all politicians lie, but it's apparently the case that conservative politicians lie more frequently.

My guy lies less than your guy is not a bar one should aspire to, because it is still a race to the bottom,

just because your guy is in second place doesn't mean you are a winner.

 

[Moonbeam]

My guy lies less than your guy is not a bar one should aspire to, because it is still a race to the bottom,

just because your guy is in second place doesn't mean you are a winner.

What does aspiration have to do with anything. One political party has been shown by some organization that attempts to measure honesty, in some manor or other, to lie more than the other. We are looking at data, not aspirations. What the fuck are you talking about?

 

[michal1980]

I agree with you that all politicians lie, but it's apparently the case that conservative politicians lie more frequently.

or that politifact is biased.

 

[brycejones]

or that politifact is biased.

Horribly biased:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

 

[thraashman]

You have to know this will just get played as politifact is obviously a liberal organization and this proves nothing.

Well, historically facts have always had a bit of a liberal slant to them since to be a conservative you have to live in a racist, sexist, elitist fantasy world.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

tbh I'm looking over PolitiFact right now and it seems inconsistent. There's a big difference between making an authoritative lie to make an argument, and mis-attributing a quote.

EDIT: lol, the vast majority of their 'False' claims involving an individual are about Trump.

 

[Moonbeam]

tbh I'm looking over PolitiFact right now and it seems inconsistent. There's a big difference between making an authoritative lie to make an argument, and mis-attributing a quote.

EDIT: lol, the vast majority of their 'False' claims involving an individual are about Trump.

So what you're saying is that Trevom Martin wasn't allowed to defend his castle?

 

[MongGrel]

It was heavily skewed "False" way before Trump started his campaign.

 

[trenchfoot]

Repubs in Congress have offered the vast majority of Americans an opportunity to help the very rich get obscenely stupid rich in order for them to feel benevolent enough to allow the rest of us to receive the crumbs off their tables.

This gift that the Repubs in Congress is giving to *us* also allows the very wealthy to enact laws and public policies at their whim without ever being elected to office, thus circumventing the very foundations of our form of REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, OF, FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE.

In order for the Repubs in Congress to completely surrender our government to the very wealthy without raising alarm and resistance from the masses that they hope to dupe into servitude, they have to lie, deceive, misrepresent, deflect and unconscionably pander with wholesale dishonesty to accomplish the mission they were tasked with.

That there are Dems complicit with this policy does not escape my purview. However, when Dems like Sanders and Warren outwardly and clearly champion the concerns and wishes of the middle class/poor and rightly accuse Wall Street and BIG CORP. USA of victimizing the nation for obscene fun and profits, it reminds me that not a single solitary Repub in Congress is shouting the same message, nor are any of the Repub candidates for president either.

They're all the same? I don't think so.

 

[1prophet]

Repubs in Congress have offered the vast majority of Americans an opportunity to help the very rich get obscenely stupid rich in order for them to feel benevolent enough to allow the rest of us to receive the crumbs off their tables.

This gift that the Repubs in Congress is giving to *us* also allows the very wealthy to enact laws and public policies at their whim without ever being elected to office, thus circumventing the very foundations of our form of REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, OF, FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE.

In order for the Repubs in Congress to completely surrender our government to the very wealthy without raising alarm and resistance from the masses that they hope to dupe into servitude, they have to lie, deceive, misrepresent, deflect and unconscionably pander with wholesale dishonesty to accomplish the mission they were tasked with.

That there are Dems complicit with this policy does not escape my purview. However, when Dems like Sanders and Warren outwardly and clearly champion the concerns and wishes of the middle class/poor and rightly accuse Wall Street and BIG CORP. USA of victimizing the nation for obscene fun and profits, it reminds me that not a single solitary Repub in Congress is shouting the same message, nor are any of the Repub candidates for president either.

They're all the same? I don't think so.

Republicans never would have been able to do what they have done if Democrats didn't turn their backs on the middle class,

The damage Reagan did was with a democrat controlled congress, and likewise the republicans did a lot of damage when they ran congress,
in the end both have failed, one being the lesser of two evils is irrelevant and is used as divisive tool to keep the koolaid drinking party faithful busy pointing fingers while the ship is sinking.

 

[LegendKiller]

Repubs in Congress have offered the vast majority of Americans an opportunity to help the very rich get obscenely stupid rich in order for them to feel benevolent enough to allow the rest of us to receive the crumbs off their tables.

This gift that the Repubs in Congress is giving to *us* also allows the very wealthy to enact laws and public policies at their whim without ever being elected to office, thus circumventing the very foundations of our form of REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, OF, FOR AND BY THE PEOPLE.

In order for the Repubs in Congress to completely surrender our government to the very wealthy without raising alarm and resistance from the masses that they hope to dupe into servitude, they have to lie, deceive, misrepresent, deflect and unconscionably pander with wholesale dishonesty to accomplish the mission they were tasked with.

That there are Dems complicit with this policy does not escape my purview. However, when Dems like Sanders and Warren outwardly and clearly champion the concerns and wishes of the middle class/poor and rightly accuse Wall Street and BIG CORP. USA of victimizing the nation for obscene fun and profits, it reminds me that not a single solitary Repub in Congress is shouting the same message, nor are any of the Repub candidates for president either.

They're all the same? I don't think so.

Wait, who was Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act signed by? When Barney Frank was saying there was absolutely nothing wrong with the mortgage industry, he was actually a Republican, right? Who has stopped the outflow of jobs? Who has fixed college education? Who has raised capital gains taxes? Who has increased the top marginal tax bracket significantly?

This is the laughable part of American politics. Neither party is interested in comprehensive campaign finance reform to counter Citizens United. Why? Because they'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

It doesn't matter what party is in charge, it's the same person, controlled by the same people, and the same thing (money).

 

[FerrelGeek]

This. The fact that our politicians lie to us is a given. But it's merely a reflection of our overall character. We, as a nation, keep these liars in office and take some satisfaction in thinking that our side isn't as bad at lying as the other.

To all you self-righteous dems who think you defecate doughnuts, remember it was your precious Obama that was credited with the lie of the year.

And saying that doesn't mean I think the reps are any better.

Wait, who was Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act signed by? When Barney Frank was saying there was absolutely nothing wrong with the mortgage industry, he was actually a Republican, right? Who has stopped the outflow of jobs? Who has fixed college education? Who has raised capital gains taxes? Who has increased the top marginal tax bracket significantly?

This is the laughable part of American politics. Neither party is interested in comprehensive campaign finance reform to counter Citizens United. Why? Because they'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

It doesn't matter what party is in charge, it's the same person, controlled by the same people, and the same thing (money).

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Politifact...aren't those the guys who said Obama's statement "if you like your health care plan, you can keep it" was True in 2008? Rated it Half-True in 2009 and 2012? Then called it the Lie of the Year in 2013?

 

[fskimospy]

Politifact...aren't those the guys who said Obama's statement "if you like your health care plan, you can keep it" was True in 2008? Rated it Half-True in 2009 and 2012? Then called it the Lie of the Year in 2013?

What would be the problem with that? As the plan and implementation of the law changed, so did their rating of his statements.

Or were you praising their honesty and willingness to revisit prior ratings in the light of new evidence? I would agree with you if that's what you're going for.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

What would be the problem with that? As the plan and implementation of the law changed, so did their rating of his statements.

Or were you praising their honesty and willingness to revisit prior ratings in the light of new evidence? I would agree with you if that's what you're going for.

Please cite these changes.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Six pages of Obama's broken promises on Politifact

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/

Including the lie of the year
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

You silly goose - the liberal sprinkle things like this to give of the false impression that they are not biased!

How can you fall for such a blatant act of uhm, you know, uhm,... lying to lie about the lie (?) to make sure their lie isn't,.. or is,.. not not a lie. Man, thinking like a conservative sure is painful - quite defective in fact.

 

[fskimospy]

Please cite these changes.

Wait, you really didn't know this and were trying to make a snarky comment? Since it's highly unlikely you thought of this comparison yourself, what right wing site were you duped by this time?

Politifact's 2008 rating was based on Obama's plan as he described it during the 2008 campaign. It was just a broad outline, and not legislation, but within the confines of what he had released the statement was true. To show how different this plan was from what was enacted, his plan at that point also did not include an individual mandate.

That's a pretty HUGE change, wouldn't you say?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ck-obama/obamas-plan-expands-existing-system/

Then, when they got actual legislation to look at, they changed their evaluation of it because that promise was less explicit. Basically, he had shifted to saying the government wouldn't force people to change, and while that's true it was unlikely to be the case that everyone could keep it. This was also at a time when the final bill had not been passed nor rulemaking done.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-promises-you-can-keep-your-health-ins/

Similar rating in 2012:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-under-his-health-care-law-those-/

After actual implementation and more people getting cancellation notices than in the past, along with Obama trying to walk his previous statements around the issue, they said it was the 'lie of the year'. All of their interpretations came from assessments of what was available at the time, and you should be happy that an organization like them is willing to honestly and objectively reevaluate things in the light of new evidence.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

Instead, we get a passive-aggressive attempt to find a way to avoid accepting an uncomfortable fact. It's better to believe Politifact is incompetent or biased than to believe that conservatives are less honest in their public statements I imagine.

 

[brycejones]

Politifact...aren't those the guys who said Obama's statement "if you like your health care plan, you can keep it" was True in 2008? Rated it Half-True in 2009 and 2012? Then called it the Lie of the Year in 2013?

Yes they did. Do you have a point?

 

[Newell Steamer]

Wait, you really didn't know this and were trying to make a snarky comment? Since it's highly unlikely you thought of this comparison yourself, what right wing site were you duped by this time?

Politifact's 2008 rating was based on Obama's plan as he described it during the 2008 campaign. It was just a broad outline, and not legislation, but within the confines of what he had released the statement was true. To show how different this plan was from what was enacted, his plan at that point also did not include an individual mandate.

That's a pretty HUGE change, wouldn't you say?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ck-obama/obamas-plan-expands-existing-system/

Then, when they got actual legislation to look at, they changed their evaluation of it because that promise was less explicit. Basically, he had shifted to saying the government wouldn't force people to change, and while that's true it was unlikely to be the case that everyone could keep it. This was also at a time when the final bill had not been passed nor rulemaking done.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-promises-you-can-keep-your-health-ins/

Similar rating in 2012:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-under-his-health-care-law-those-/

After actual implementation and more people getting cancellation notices than in the past, along with Obama trying to walk his previous statements around the issue, they said it was the 'lie of the year'. All of their interpretations came from assessments of what was available at the time, and you should be happy that an organization like them is willing to honestly and objectively reevaluate things in the light of new evidence.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

Instead, we get a passive-aggressive attempt to find a way to avoid accepting an uncomfortable fact. It's better to believe Politifact is incompetent or biased than to believe that conservatives are less honest in their public statements I imagine.

Thanks, but, could you provide these details in a line chart? He seems to only listen to line charts.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Again, look at where we've come to. 'YAYYYYY!!!. We suck less than you!!!' Wow. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back, my friend.

Wait, you really didn't know this and were trying to make a snarky comment? Since it's highly unlikely you thought of this comparison yourself, what right wing site were you duped by this time?

Politifact's 2008 rating was based on Obama's plan as he described it during the 2008 campaign. It was just a broad outline, and not legislation, but within the confines of what he had released the statement was true. To show how different this plan was from what was enacted, his plan at that point also did not include an individual mandate.

That's a pretty HUGE change, wouldn't you say?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ck-obama/obamas-plan-expands-existing-system/

Then, when they got actual legislation to look at, they changed their evaluation of it because that promise was less explicit. Basically, he had shifted to saying the government wouldn't force people to change, and while that's true it was unlikely to be the case that everyone could keep it. This was also at a time when the final bill had not been passed nor rulemaking done.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-promises-you-can-keep-your-health-ins/

Similar rating in 2012:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-under-his-health-care-law-those-/

After actual implementation and more people getting cancellation notices than in the past, along with Obama trying to walk his previous statements around the issue, they said it was the 'lie of the year'. All of their interpretations came from assessments of what was available at the time, and you should be happy that an organization like them is willing to honestly and objectively reevaluate things in the light of new evidence.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

Instead, we get a passive-aggressive attempt to find a way to avoid accepting an uncomfortable fact. It's better to believe Politifact is incompetent or biased than to believe that conservatives are less honest in their public statements I imagine.

 

[jackstar7]

Again, look at where we've come to. 'YAYYYYY!!!. We suck less than you!!!' Wow. Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back, my friend.

You're dealing with politicians, so isn't sucking the least exactly the best you can hope for?

404 Jefferson Smith not found

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Wait, you really didn't know this and were trying to make a snarky comment? Since it's highly unlikely you thought of this comparison yourself, what right wing site were you duped by this time?

Politifact's 2008 rating was based on Obama's plan as he described it during the 2008 campaign. It was just a broad outline, and not legislation, but within the confines of what he had released the statement was true. To show how different this plan was from what was enacted, his plan at that point also did not include an individual mandate.

That's a pretty HUGE change, wouldn't you say?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ck-obama/obamas-plan-expands-existing-system/

Then, when they got actual legislation to look at, they changed their evaluation of it because that promise was less explicit. Basically, he had shifted to saying the government wouldn't force people to change, and while that's true it was unlikely to be the case that everyone could keep it. This was also at a time when the final bill had not been passed nor rulemaking done.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-promises-you-can-keep-your-health-ins/

Similar rating in 2012:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-under-his-health-care-law-those-/

After actual implementation and more people getting cancellation notices than in the past, along with Obama trying to walk his previous statements around the issue, they said it was the 'lie of the year'. All of their interpretations came from assessments of what was available at the time, and you should be happy that an organization like them is willing to honestly and objectively reevaluate things in the light of new evidence.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ar-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

Instead, we get a passive-aggressive attempt to find a way to avoid accepting an uncomfortable fact. It's better to believe Politifact is incompetent or biased than to believe that conservatives are less honest in their public statements I imagine.

Nothing changed in the law between 2012 and 2013 in this regard...nothing. Yet Politifact's opinion certainly did as reality reared its ugly head for millions of people. The fact is that Politifact got its facts wrong in 2012 and offered their opinion instead. Kinda embarrassing for a fact-checking organization wouldn't you say? Opinion and fact...two different things and they seem to have trouble differentiating at times.

 

[fskimospy]

Nothing changed in the law between 2012 and 2013...nothing. Yet Politifact's opinion certainly did as reality reared its ugly head for millions of people. The fact is that Politifact got its facts wrong in 2012 offering their opinion instead. Kinda embarrassing for a fact-checking organization wouldn't you say? Opinion and fact...two different things and they seem to have trouble differentiating at times.

They don't seem to have difficulty doing that at all, and they are making a qualitative judgment on how dishonest something is which by definition requires them to use personal judgment. They appeared to underestimate how many people would be affected, and so in that case got their facts wrong. That will always happen in any organization from time to time, it's not particularly special or interesting.

What's more important is when they got new information they changed their reporting to reflect it. That's the kind of honesty you want in a source and something you should be congratulating them for. I would imagine we can all agree on that.

As I figured though, you're trying to make some passive-aggressive statement of nebulous bias that requires no evidence to back it up. It is pretty amusing that the example you used though was them giving Obama the 'lie of the year' award, haha.

 

[Moonbeam]

Nothing changed in the law between 2012 and 2013...nothing. Yet Politifact's opinion certainly did as reality reared its ugly head for millions of people. The fact is that Politifact got its facts wrong in 2012 offering their opinion instead. Kinda embarrassing for a fact-checking organization wouldn't you say? Opinion and fact...two different things and they seem to have trouble differentiating at times.

This, I predict, will be answered by Eskimo. I just want to say that I clearly read that he said the changes that happened in the time frame you mentioned were not changes in THE LAW, but changes in reported cancellations and Obama's rationalization so far them. Just want you to know that I could not have felt honest to argue as you just did.