Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

PolitiFact?

Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 11:53:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
How reliable is this source? http://www.politifact.com...
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 12:27:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 12:23:06 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
Tampa Bay Times

Winner of the Pulitzer Prize

Seems pretty legit.

Thanks. They seem impartial to the political views of the person in question.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 1:04:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.

Perhaps not 100% impartial, but they do expose some democrats for lies and having their "pants on fire."
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 2:00:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 1:04:59 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.

Perhaps not 100% impartial, but they do expose some democrats for lies and having their "pants on fire."

They've got a liberal bias because the conservative people tend to lie more. Which is the equivalent to saying historians have an egalitarian bias due to them stating the racism of Hitler, Mao and Stalin.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 4:04:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 2:00:41 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:04:59 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.

Perhaps not 100% impartial, but they do expose some democrats for lies and having their "pants on fire."

They've got a liberal bias because the conservative people tend to lie more. Which is the equivalent to saying historians have an egalitarian bias due to them stating the racism of Hitler, Mao and Stalin.

I agree. However, they rated Obama's statement that "we created over 3 million jobs in the past 22 months" as false, even though the statement WAS true. Their reason why? That said that Obama made the statement to benefit himself. They later switched their rating as 'true'.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 5:00:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 4:04:56 PM, Contra wrote:
At 5/10/2012 2:00:41 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:04:59 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.

Perhaps not 100% impartial, but they do expose some democrats for lies and having their "pants on fire."

They've got a liberal bias because the conservative people tend to lie more. Which is the equivalent to saying historians have an egalitarian bias due to them stating the racism of Hitler, Mao and Stalin.

I agree. However, they rated Obama's statement that "we created over 3 million jobs in the past 22 months" as false, even though the statement WAS true. Their reason why? That said that Obama made the statement to benefit himself. They later switched their rating as 'true'.

Not sure about that particular statistic but this is the reason I don't trust them, it's not even so much that their facts are off, it's just that the reasons and justifications for their conclusions are often awful and make no sense
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 5:08:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 5:00:32 PM, jat93 wrote:
At 5/10/2012 4:04:56 PM, Contra wrote:
At 5/10/2012 2:00:41 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:04:59 PM, Microsuck wrote:
At 5/10/2012 1:03:51 PM, lewis20 wrote:
Politifact tends to have a liberal bias.

Perhaps not 100% impartial, but they do expose some democrats for lies and having their "pants on fire."

They've got a liberal bias because the conservative people tend to lie more. Which is the equivalent to saying historians have an egalitarian bias due to them stating the racism of Hitler, Mao and Stalin.

I agree. However, they rated Obama's statement that "we created over 3 million jobs in the past 22 months" as false, even though the statement WAS true. Their reason why? That said that Obama made the statement to benefit himself. They later switched their rating as 'true'.

Not sure about that particular statistic but this is the reason I don't trust them, it's not even so much that their facts are off, it's just that the reasons and justifications for their conclusions are often awful and make no sense

Link to one, I'll try and explain it.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/10/2012 5:17:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I look at it all the time. I think it's fairly reliable.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2012 11:07:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/10/2012 11:53:55 AM, Microsuck wrote:
How reliable is this source? http://www.politifact.com...

Really, it's silly to engage in the campaign. Campaigns distort facts and put the focus on what people say rather than what they did. You ge so caught up in what a person says or doesn't say rather than their history. We focus on flip flopping based on what was said in an interview rather than what was said in a congressional hearing or how they voted on a particular bill.

It takes the focus away from what matters and puts the spotlight on just two people, which is I guess what they want in order to drown out the voices of the independents.

But, I just started looking at this when I read this thread.

Interesting. It seems to have a slight liberal bias and sympathy toward Obama to sway ratings (e.g. "Mostly True" or "Half True" because "Obama not to blame" even when the statement didn't blame Obama directly).

They also rely on a lot of other sources in their determination, and media sources themselves tend to be bias.

It's a good place to check simple facts.
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
imabench
Posts: 21,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2012 8:06:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I kind of like it, ive noticed though that Rachel Maddow sh*ts on it all the time so i dunno if its biased or not.

It seems trustworthy to me.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2012 8:58:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Criticism of Obama's policies are very rarely "Completely false," unlike criticism of Mitt Romney's policies.

Also, criticisms that Romney posed against Obama are "red herrings." WTF?! Need I define words for them? Red herrings don't exist when you are checking the truth of one phrase.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2012 9:37:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/12/2012 8:58:29 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Criticism of Obama's policies are very rarely "Completely false," unlike criticism of Mitt Romney's policies.
1) They don't criticize policy, they verify veracity.
2) I'm glad to see you never even considered the likelier possibility: Romney lies more than Obama. Of course....it just HAS to be a bias. Just like I supposes IQ's tests are biased because liberals have higher average intelligence. Or colleges must breed liberals, because liberals are more educated.


Also, criticisms that Romney posed against Obama are "red herrings." WTF?! Need I define words for them? Red herrings don't exist when you are checking the truth of one phrase.
Sapere Aude!
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2012 11:11:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/12/2012 9:37:07 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 5/12/2012 8:58:29 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Criticism of Obama's policies are very rarely "Completely false," unlike criticism of Mitt Romney's policies.
1) They don't criticize policy, they verify veracity.

It's what I meant. The fact that you have to resort to these criticisms is astounding.

2) I'm glad to see you never even considered the likelier possibility: Romney lies more than Obama. Of course....it just HAS to be a bias. Just like I supposes IQ's tests are biased because liberals have higher average intelligence. Or colleges must breed liberals, because liberals are more educated.

Straw mann.

You never addressed the real question of putting statements as "Red Herrings."

6th statements down (http://www.politifact.com...).

"Argument is a red herring."

There are no red herrings when it comes to specific statements.


Also, criticisms that Romney posed against Obama are "red herrings." WTF?! Need I define words for them? Red herrings don't exist when you are checking the truth of one phrase.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/13/2012 11:34:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/13/2012 11:11:54 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 5/12/2012 9:37:07 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 5/12/2012 8:58:29 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Criticism of Obama's policies are very rarely "Completely false," unlike criticism of Mitt Romney's policies.
1) They don't criticize policy, they verify veracity.

It's what I meant. The fact that you have to resort to these criticisms is astounding.
I guess the words "policy" and "statement" can be easily confused by someone who has no knowledge of either.

2) I'm glad to see you never even considered the likelier possibility: Romney lies more than Obama. Of course....it just HAS to be a bias. Just like I supposes IQ's tests are biased because liberals have higher average intelligence. Or colleges must breed liberals, because liberals are more educated.

Straw mann.
?
But please. Use an irrelevant logical fallacy to justify you ignoring all of my arguments.

You never addressed the real question of putting statements as "Red Herrings."
That's not what a straw man is. *facepalm*

6th statements down (http://www.politifact.com...).

"Argument is a red herring."

There are no red herrings when it comes to specific statements.
The actually went into great detail about how it was misleading.
And if you had actually read it at all, you would have known they didn't rule it as a red herring. They ruled it as "Mostly False." But I can understand how you can't be bothered to actually know what you're talking about.

http://www.politifact.com...


Also, criticisms that Romney posed against Obama are "red herrings." WTF?! Need I define words for them? Red herrings don't exist when you are checking the truth of one phrase.
Sapere Aude!