FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

MrT · Sep 17, 2015

FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

- Donald Trump told a story linking vaccination to autism, but there’s no evidence that recommended vaccines cause autism. And Sen. Rand Paul suggested that it would be safer to spread out recommended vaccines, but there’s no evidence of that, either.

- Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Trump donated to his gubernatorial campaign to get him to change his mind on casino gambling in Florida. But Trump denied he ever wanted to bring casino gambling to the state. A former lobbyist says he did.

- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that Hillary Clinton was “under investigation by the FBI” because she “destroyed government records.” Not true. She had the authority to delete personal emails.

- Trump said that “illegal immigration” cost “more than $200 billion a year.” We couldn’t find any support for that. Actually, it could cost taxpayers $137 billion or more to deport the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, as Trump proposes.

- Trump again wrongly said that Mexico doesn’t have a birthright citizenship policy like the United States. It does.

- Carly Fiorina said that the Planned Parenthood videos released by an anti-abortion group showed “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” But that scene isn’t in any of the videos.

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said that U.S. policies to combat climate change would “do absolutely nothing.” The U.S. acting alone would have a small effect on rising temperatures and sea levels, and experts say U.S. leadership on the issue would prompt other nations to act.

- In the “happy hour” debate, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham glossed over the accompanying tax increases when he said only that Ronald Reagan and then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill “found a way to save Social Security from bankruptcy by adjusting the age of retirement from 65 to 67.”

prometeus · Sep 17, 2015

Facts do not matter, they have God on their side.

Crovax · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said that U.S. policies to combat climate change would “do absolutely nothing.” The U.S. acting alone would have a small effect on rising temperatures and sea levels, and experts say U.S. leadership on the issue would prompt other nations to act.

Looks like the fact checkers need to learn what a fact is. Speculation about what other countries might do in response to the US is not a fact

PeteEU · Sep 17, 2015

How on earth can you fact check such an event, when 90% of what they are saying is utter bull**** and lies?

Zyphlin · Sep 17, 2015

Crovax said:
Looks like the fact checkers need to learn what a fact is. Speculation about what other countries might do in response to the US is not a fact

This has long been an issue and contention I've had with that particular fact check outfit. They routinely determine a "fact" by actually making a subjective determination about something and simply calling it a "fact". They also at times make guesses or assumptions as to what a person meant or intended to say and judge based on that, but do so in an often uneven manner.

This is why I've said for some time, fact checkers are useful TOOLS for forming an opinion, but are not some kind of gospel truth regarding what "facts" are. Additionally, because there are numerous fact checking outfits out there, I believe it's far more prudent to do a review of many of them when forming ones opinion and take in a totality of the differing views. Doing this in previous elections I noticed a stark difference, with at times one fact checking outfit viewing a certain issue or instance significantly harsher than multiple other outfits.

ocean515 · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

- Donald Trump told a story linking vaccination to autism, but there’s no evidence that recommended vaccines cause autism. And Sen. Rand Paul suggested that it would be safer to spread out recommended vaccines, but there’s no evidence of that, either.

- Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Trump donated to his gubernatorial campaign to get him to change his mind on casino gambling in Florida. But Trump denied he ever wanted to bring casino gambling to the state. A former lobbyist says he did.

- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that Hillary Clinton was “under investigation by the FBI” because she “destroyed government records.” Not true. She had the authority to delete personal emails.

- Trump said that “illegal immigration” cost “more than $200 billion a year.” We couldn’t find any support for that. Actually, it could cost taxpayers $137 billion or more to deport the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, as Trump proposes.

- Trump again wrongly said that Mexico doesn’t have a birthright citizenship policy like the United States. It does.

- Carly Fiorina said that the Planned Parenthood videos released by an anti-abortion group showed “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” But that scene isn’t in any of the videos.

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said that U.S. policies to combat climate change would “do absolutely nothing.” The U.S. acting alone would have a small effect on rising temperatures and sea levels, and experts say U.S. leadership on the issue would prompt other nations to act.

- In the “happy hour” debate, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham glossed over the accompanying tax increases when he said only that Ronald Reagan and then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill “found a way to save Social Security from bankruptcy by adjusting the age of retirement from 65 to 67.”

Interesting. However, I'm not convinced a far left Progressive outfit is the most reliable judge of what a fact is, especially in the context of what they perceive the opposition is saying.

sawdust · Sep 17, 2015

- Trump said that “illegal immigration” cost “more than $200 billion a year.” We couldn’t find any support for that. Actually, it could cost taxpayers $137 billion or more to deport the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, as Trump proposes.

How can you say that they couldn't find any facts and call it a fact?

- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that Hillary Clinton was “under investigation by the FBI” because she “destroyed government records.” Not true. She had the authority to delete personal emails.

Hillary's server is being examined by the FBI. The FBI doesn't investigate machines. They investigate what people do with machines. Therefore, technically they are looking into Clinton's handling of classified material. Hillary can claim she's not being investigated but that is a political statement, not one based in fact.

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

So it's true the company doubled in size and the "fact checker" disqualifies the fact because they don't like how it doubled. This is nonsense.

MrT · Sep 17, 2015

Crovax said:
Looks like the fact checkers need to learn what a fact is. Speculation about what other countries might do in response to the US is not a fact

I would note that they do directly address the claim by pointing to the fact that the U.S. acting along would have a small effect. And then they cite to expert opinion on the topic - and when predicting the future, it is probably a better idea to rely on an expert in the field as opposed to Marco Rubio's opinion.

MrT · Sep 17, 2015

sawdust said:
How can you say that they couldn't find any facts and call it a fact?

If you go to the website, they explain these summaries a bit more. Here is the relevant quote:

"The most extreme estimate we found was a 2010 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which lobbies for less immigration. It estimated that the net cost of illegal immigration on the federal and state and local levels was $99 billion a year — half the sum Trump claimed.
A more neutral source is a 2007 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which examined 29 reports on state and local costs published over 15 years and concluded that while it is “difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets,” the impact 'is most likely modest.'"

sawdust said:
Hillary's server is being examined by the FBI. The FBI doesn't investigate machines. They investigate what people do with machines. Therefore, technically they are looking into Clinton's handling of classified material. Hillary can claim she's not being investigated but that is a political statement, not one based in fact.

An investigation does not mean that Huckabee's statement is accurate.

sawdust said:
So it's true the company doubled in size and the "fact checker" disqualifies the fact because they don't like how it doubled. This is nonsense.

And you will notice that FactCheck does not refer to her claim as a lie - only that it leaves out a very relevant detail. If you claim that your business went from 200 billion to 400 billion in 4 years, but neglect to mention that nearly half of that additional revenue came from a merger in the 3rd year, then you are not lying, but you are leaving a very pertinent point.

MrT · Sep 17, 2015

ocean515 said:
Interesting. However, I'm not convinced a far left Progressive outfit is the most reliable judge of what a fact is, especially in the context of what they perceive the opposition is saying.

FactCheck is a far left progressive outfit? That is an interesting allegation. Of course, even if FactCheck does qualify under the label, I would note that it would be a better practice to address their claims rather than dismiss it outright.

MrT · Sep 17, 2015

Zyphlin said:
This has long been an issue and contention I've had with that particular fact check outfit. They routinely determine a "fact" by actually making a subjective determination about something and simply calling it a "fact". They also at times make guesses or assumptions as to what a person meant or intended to say and judge based on that, but do so in an often uneven manner.

This is why I've said for some time, fact checkers are useful TOOLS for forming an opinion, but are not some kind of gospel truth regarding what "facts" are. Additionally, because there are numerous fact checking outfits out there, I believe it's far more prudent to do a review of many of them when forming ones opinion and take in a totality of the differing views. Doing this in previous elections I noticed a stark difference, with at times one fact checking outfit viewing a certain issue or instance significantly harsher than multiple other outfits.

Certainly a valid point. If you have some examples of other fact checking sources reaching a significantly different conclusion on any of these claims, I would appreciate the information.

KLATTU · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
I would note that they do directly address the claim by pointing to the fact that the U.S. acting along would have a small effect. .

Opinion

MrT said:
Iwhen predicting the future, it is probably a better idea to rely on an expert in the field as opposed to Marco Rubio's opinion.

Opinion.

sawdust · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
If you go to the website, they explain these summaries a bit more. Here is the relevant quote:

"The most extreme estimate we found was a 2010 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which lobbies for less immigration. It estimated that the net cost of illegal immigration on the federal and state and local levels was $99 billion a year — half the sum Trump claimed.
A more neutral source is a 2007 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which examined 29 reports on state and local costs published over 15 years and concluded that while it is “difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets,” the impact 'is most likely modest.'"

An investigation does not mean that Huckabee's statement is accurate.

And you will notice that FactCheck does not refer to her claim as a lie - only that it leaves out a very relevant detail. If you claim that your business went from 200 billion to 400 billion in 4 years, but neglect to mention that nearly half of that additional revenue came from a merger in the 3rd year, then you are not lying, but you are leaving a very pertinent point.

So five years ago they found some sort of number and felt they had the authority to even comment on the cost of illegal immigration? Bull spit.

So this outfit believes that investigation doesn't mean investigation. I see.

Fact Check should stick to facts instead of innuendo. They have no credibility.

Crovax · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
I would note that they do directly address the claim by pointing to the fact that the U.S. acting along would have a small effect. And then they cite to expert opinion on the topic - and when predicting the future, it is probably a better idea to rely on an expert in the field as opposed to Marco Rubio's opinion.

Rubio is a US senator and a serious canidite for president, you dont think he would qualify as an expert in predicting how other countries would act in relation to US policy?

In fact if you follow the links their "experts" are a single NASA climate scientists. I think Rubio is the better expert at geopolitical predictions in this case

ALiberalModerate · Sep 17, 2015

News flash for everyone: People in debates when given 90 seconds to answer a complex question will either gloss over details, supply half truths, exaggerate for effect, or not even answer the question at all. That is what candidates do regardless of party because it is such a crappy way of trying to convey complex issues. Sure, Trump is usually totally full of ****, but some of the critiques factcheck.org is using are a bit petty.

Really, a much better format for debate if you actually want to learn what a candidate really thinks would be something like what scientists engage in when they have written questions, answers, and challenges to their answers.

Dittohead not! · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

- Donald Trump told a story linking vaccination to autism, but there’s no evidence that recommended vaccines cause autism. And Sen. Rand Paul suggested that it would be safer to spread out recommended vaccines, but there’s no evidence of that, either.

- Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Trump donated to his gubernatorial campaign to get him to change his mind on casino gambling in Florida. But Trump denied he ever wanted to bring casino gambling to the state. A former lobbyist says he did.

- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that Hillary Clinton was “under investigation by the FBI” because she “destroyed government records.” Not true. She had the authority to delete personal emails.

- Trump said that “illegal immigration” cost “more than $200 billion a year.” We couldn’t find any support for that. Actually, it could cost taxpayers $137 billion or more to deport the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, as Trump proposes.

- Trump again wrongly said that Mexico doesn’t have a birthright citizenship policy like the United States. It does.

- Carly Fiorina said that the Planned Parenthood videos released by an anti-abortion group showed “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” But that scene isn’t in any of the videos.

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said that U.S. policies to combat climate change would “do absolutely nothing.” The U.S. acting alone would have a small effect on rising temperatures and sea levels, and experts say U.S. leadership on the issue would prompt other nations to act.

- In the “happy hour” debate, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham glossed over the accompanying tax increases when he said only that Ronald Reagan and then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill “found a way to save Social Security from bankruptcy by adjusting the age of retirement from 65 to 67.”

Three hours of "debate" consisting mostly of pure and utter rubbish, and that's all they could find?

Surely, the heap must be higher than that.

betuadollar · Sep 17, 2015

MrT said:
If you go to the website, they explain these summaries a bit more. Here is the relevant quote:

"The most extreme estimate we found was a 2010 study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which lobbies for less immigration. It estimated that the net cost of illegal immigration on the federal and state and local levels was $99 billion a year — half the sum Trump claimed.
A more neutral source is a 2007 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which examined 29 reports on state and local costs published over 15 years and concluded that while it is “difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets,” the impact 'is most likely modest.'"

An investigation does not mean that Huckabee's statement is accurate.

And you will notice that FactCheck does not refer to her claim as a lie - only that it leaves out a very relevant detail. If you claim that your business went from 200 billion to 400 billion in 4 years, but neglect to mention that nearly half of that additional revenue came from a merger in the 3rd year, then you are not lying, but you are leaving a very pertinent point.

Well doesn't that in itself negate FactChck, since it is well known that Carly battled to ensure this merger that she proposed. As for autism, what the public at large suspects is the heavy recreational drug use of the past two generations. So Trump is not too far from wrong. In virtually all of the above I agree either in whole or in part with the candidates.

iguanaman · Sep 17, 2015

Crovax said:
Rubio is a US senator and a serious canidite for president, you dont think he would qualify as an expert in predicting how other countries would act in relation to US policy?

In fact if you follow the links their "experts" are a single NASA climate scientists. I think Rubio is the better expert at geopolitical predictions in this case

In other words he said what you wanted to hear so he is right. What do you think the chances are of other nations limiting carbon output if we don't? We are the 2nd largest emitter of carbon you know and have among the highest per person too.

Skeptic Bob · Sep 17, 2015

I don't think Trump was lying about the casino thing. Maybe it didn't happen or maybe he forgot. It just doesn't strike me as something he would lie about. He isn't exactly ashamed about paying politicians off.

Singe · Sep 18, 2015

sawdust said:
So it's true the company doubled in size and the "fact checker" disqualifies the fact because they don't like how it doubled. This is nonsense.

This one struck me as odd too. They should have rewritten this...

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

...to read like this...

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that it was due in large part to an acquisition of Compaq that she championed, although she cherry-picked other statistics.

MrT · Sep 18, 2015

Crovax said:
Rubio is a US senator and a serious canidite for president, you dont think he would qualify as an expert in predicting how other countries would act in relation to US policy?

In fact if you follow the links their "experts" are a single NASA climate scientists. I think Rubio is the better expert at geopolitical predictions in this case

Do you really think that countries would do nothing in response to US action? Especially when you consider that other countries are usually much more active on this topic than the United States AND action by the US has already prompted some countries, in very recent history, like China and India to act additionally on this topic?

Regardless - FactCheck addressed the direct aspect of his statement. US action would have a measurable impact on climate change.

MrT · Sep 18, 2015

betuadollar said:
Well doesn't that in itself negate FactChck, since it is well known that Carly battled to ensure this merger that she proposed. As for autism, what the public at large suspects is the heavy recreational drug use of the past two generations. So Trump is not too far from wrong. In virtually all of the above I agree either in whole or in part with the candidates.

What are you talking about? Autism is caused by recreational drugs? Just...no.

MrT · Sep 18, 2015

sawdust said:
So five years ago they found some sort of number and felt they had the authority to even comment on the cost of illegal immigration? Bull spit.

So this outfit believes that investigation doesn't mean investigation. I see.

Fact Check should stick to facts instead of innuendo. They have no credibility.

Five years ago, a study was published by the a think tank which advocates for less immigration and they reached a number that is 100 BILLION less than the number cited by Trump. Fact Check also noted a study from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office published roughly 8 years ago. They provide you with that information.

And again, investigation is not synonymous with illegal.

tres borrachos · Sep 18, 2015

MrT said:
FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

- Donald Trump told a story linking vaccination to autism, but there’s no evidence that recommended vaccines cause autism. And Sen. Rand Paul suggested that it would be safer to spread out recommended vaccines, but there’s no evidence of that, either.

- Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Trump donated to his gubernatorial campaign to get him to change his mind on casino gambling in Florida. But Trump denied he ever wanted to bring casino gambling to the state. A former lobbyist says he did.

- Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said that Hillary Clinton was “under investigation by the FBI” because she “destroyed government records.” Not true. She had the authority to delete personal emails.

- Trump said that “illegal immigration” cost “more than $200 billion a year.” We couldn’t find any support for that. Actually, it could cost taxpayers $137 billion or more to deport the 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, as Trump proposes.

- Trump again wrongly said that Mexico doesn’t have a birthright citizenship policy like the United States. It does.

- Carly Fiorina said that the Planned Parenthood videos released by an anti-abortion group showed “a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.” But that scene isn’t in any of the videos.

- Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

- Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said that U.S. policies to combat climate change would “do absolutely nothing.” The U.S. acting alone would have a small effect on rising temperatures and sea levels, and experts say U.S. leadership on the issue would prompt other nations to act.

- In the “happy hour” debate, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham glossed over the accompanying tax increases when he said only that Ronald Reagan and then-House Speaker Tip O’Neill “found a way to save Social Security from bankruptcy by adjusting the age of retirement from 65 to 67.”

Unimpressive list. 4 hours and 15 people and that's the best they have?

Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

That one is really a reach to discredit her. It doesn't matter why a company doubles in size. If it does, that is the correct statement. Companies go through mergers and acquisitions all the time. Do we have a run through of the histories of Exxon and Mobil when we discuss the size of ExxonMobil? Her statement was correct.

MrT · Sep 18, 2015

tres borrachos said:
Unimpressive list. 4 hours and 15 people and that's the best they have?

Fiorina repeated familiar boasts about her time at Hewlett-Packard, saying the size of the company “doubled,” without mentioning that was due to a merger with Compaq, and she cherry-picked other statistics.

That one is really a reach to discredit her. It doesn't matter why a company doubles in size. If it does, that is the correct statement. Companies go through mergers and acquisitions all the time. Do we have a run through of the histories of Exxon and Mobil when we discuss the size of ExxonMobil? Her statement was correct.

And you will notice that they did not say she was wrong or that she lied. Only that she left out a fairly critical detail.

FactChecking the CNN Republican Debate

MrT

prometeus

Crovax

PeteEU

Zyphlin

ocean515

sawdust

MrT

MrT

MrT

MrT

KLATTU

sawdust

Crovax

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist

Dittohead not!

master political analyst

betuadollar

iguanaman

Skeptic Bob

Singe

Member

MrT

MrT

MrT

tres borrachos

HoHoHo

MrT