Politifact.com (non-partisan fact-checking site) final campaign comparison (1 Viewer)

superchuck500

guarding the potatoes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
57,350
Reaction score
86,625
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Online
<iframe src="//e.infogr.am/7812e450-5e8f-4a19-b9e2-00fe6df22991?src=embed" title="Clinton vs Trump through Oct 30" width="550" height="1264" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none;"></iframe>
 

Three Monkeys

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Jan 1, 2005
Messages
2,181
Reaction score
937
Age
57
Offline
Does it really matter?

Moynihan's opinion on your facts and opinions is so useless in a society which holds so little regard for facts.
 

Soundwave

Terribly Vexed
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
5,809
Reaction score
4,102
Location
Danger Zone
Offline
Don't like that the total number of fact checks are so different. Leaves them open to criticism.
 

Galbreath34

Very Banned
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
May 8, 2008
Messages
32,273
Reaction score
30,806
Offline
It's a real George Costanza line ;)

I think her line was that "a lie would mean that he knew" saying that making **** up when you don't know for sure isn't the same as lying. I think it was over calling Holt a Democrat.
 

Dave

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
7,054
Reaction score
1,657
Offline
Politifact claims they are non-partisan. This article from 2013 highlights a study from George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that makes it seem like they aren't as non-partisan as they claim.
Now comes a study from the George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that demonstrates empirically that PolitiFact.org, one of the nation's leading "fact checkers," finds that Republicans are dishonest in their claims three times as often as Democrats. "PolitiFact.com has rated Republican claims as false three times as often as Democratic claims during President Obama's second term," the Center said in a release, "despite controversies over Obama administration statements on Benghazi, the IRS and the AP."

The fact that, as the Lichter study shows, "A majority of Democratic statements (54 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely true, compared to only 18 percent of Republican statements," probably has more to do with how the statements were picked and the subjective bias of the fact checker involved than anything remotely empirical. Likewise, the fact that "a majority of Republican statements (52 percent) were rated as mostly or entirely false, compared to only 24 percent of Democratic statements" probably has more to do with spinning stories than it does with evaluating statements.
Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans | Thomas Jefferson Street | US News

I'm not posting this to defend Republicans who I think are full of **** just like Democrats.
 

Soundwave

Terribly Vexed
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2008
Messages
5,809
Reaction score
4,102
Location
Danger Zone
Offline
actually ...i see it as more of a confirmation that he lies almost 50% of the time.

:idunno:
No Doubt, the pie chart clearly references that, but surely if they could find 313 statements from Trump, they could find just as many (or close to) statements from Clinton. It may even help her percentages, but they still leave themselves open to criticism by not doing so.
 

Galbreath34

Very Banned
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
May 8, 2008
Messages
32,273
Reaction score
30,806
Offline
Politifact claims they are non-partisan. This article from 2013 highlights a study from George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that makes it seem like they aren't as non-partisan as they claim.

Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans | Thomas Jefferson Street | US News

I'm not posting this to defend Republicans who I think are full of **** just like Democrats.
I'd actually imagine the difference in the numbers has a lot more to do with the relatively large number of vocal members of the party who say things like in cases of "legitimate rape" a woman's body can choose not to become pregnant, or that "Climate change is a Chinese hoax" etc. I'm not saying there aren't reasons to dislike either party, but I guarantee I'd have a much easier time putting together a list of 500 absolutely ridiculously easy to spot as false claims by GOP Congressmen and Governors than to do the same for Democrats.

When you ideologically battle with science or spend a lot of time on rearguard defenses of women or minorities being less equal you need to fib a bit more.

BTW, Trump has given a lot more speeches than Hillary, hence more raw public claims to be checked. During debates or during conventions the numbers checked for each is equal, but these numbers are for the entire campaign. He simply said more on twitter and in front of a microphone than she did by a lot more than 50% extra.
 

Saint_Ward

Don't be a Jerk.
Staff member
Administrator
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
46,729
Reaction score
40,428
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Online
Politifact claims they are non-partisan. This article from 2013 highlights a study from George Mason University Center for Media and Public Affairs that makes it seem like they aren't as non-partisan as they claim.

Study Finds Fact Checkers Biased Against Republicans | Thomas Jefferson Street | US News

I'm not posting this to defend Republicans who I think are full of **** just like Democrats.
It's a valid critique of how they pick subjects. I think they mostly stick to Debates, Big public comments, and Political Ads. However, unless you're trapped in the same echo chamber, you're going to see more flat out wrong comments coming out of the Republicans, or misleading comments for two reasons. 1, that's the echo chamber they're in, so they're just going with it instead of fighting their voters. 2, they are the party who isn't president.. so whoever it out of power tends to be more fast and loose with the truth, from my opinion. EDIT: and 3rd, they tend to machine gun false facts (especially Trump), so his volume is immense.

I don't like at their overall "so and so lies more times than this person". The number of lies, while attention grabbing isn't that important to me. It's what kind of stuff they lie about, how often, what breadth of issues, and I tend to read over the analysis they do as much as I can. Sometimes, especially on the partial lies / partial truth, it's a judgment call.

An example would be Obama a few years ago that our Steel production is back to where it used to be. Well, all time, no. We're still well behind what we were in the 70's. But since the 2008-2010 recession? Yes, we're bout where we were. I think in context you can tell he was framing it as a recent thing, but they nailed him for it.
 

WhoDatPhan78

Definitely not part of the deep state.
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
9,533
Reaction score
18,537
Offline
I imagine that fact checkers have a hard time maintaining the balance between the appearance of being balanced and actually doing their job.

If one side lies way more than the other, it's going to appear that the fact checker is biased.

If the fact checker goes out of it's way to fact check each side about the same number of times, it's kind of defeating the purpose of being a fact checker.

Liars are going to get fact checked more often if a fact checker is doing its job.
 

lapaz

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
7,001
Reaction score
4,123
Age
58
Offline
So Hillary has 7 Pants on Fire out of 293 statements analyzed, 2 of which were from 2008, while Donald has 57 Pants on Fire out of 331 statements analyzed, 4 of which were 2014 or earlier. So in reality Hillary has had 5 during this campaign to Donald's 53 during the campaign. After adjusting for the fact that Politifact analyzed Donald lies more than 9 times as much as Hillary. That is a microcosm of the choices. No matter what bad things you can say about Hillary, Donald is nearly 10 times worse.
 

efil4stnias

one lonely Beastie i be...
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
33,346
Reaction score
32,496
Location
Covington
Online
No Doubt, the pie chart clearly references that, but surely if they could find 313 statements from Trump, they could find just as many (or close to) statements from Clinton. It may even help her percentages, but they still leave themselves open to criticism by not doing so.
one of Donalds criticisms this election was him completely going off script.

There is you differential.

He spoke about things he should have never even mentioned. And when he did, 50% of the time it was a lie.

lolol
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Headlines

Top Bottom