• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

PolitiFact - Biased Or Unbiased?

PolitiFact is :

  • Biased - Because :

    Votes: 8 50.0%
  • Unbiased - Because :

    Votes: 8 50.0%

  • Total voters
    16
I think that they are bias. Even more now then before. I had such high hopes for them, but they don't seem interested in tackling the tough issues. For example, today they have listed that Obama has directed the military leaders to cease the war in Iraq, but there has been no huge troop withdraw. How can that be a promise kept if there has been no real action?

Also, the comments for which they test Obama on the truth-o-meter aren't really that hard hitting. For example, "Will you be able to keep your current health care?" is rated at half truth. The better questions would be "Are you interested in the public plan taking over the private industry?", "Will Government workers be required to take the public option?", or "Will politicians (Senate and House) take the public option?"

They aren't that hard on him, but they fry others...:confused:
 
I think that they are bias. Even more now then before. I had such high hopes for them, but they don't seem interested in tackling the tough issues. For example, today they have listed that Obama has directed the military leaders to cease the war in Iraq, but there has been no huge troop withdraw. How can that be a promise kept if there has been no real action?

Also, the comments for which they test Obama on the truth-o-meter aren't really that hard hitting. For example, "Will you be able to keep your current health care?" is rated at half truth. The better questions would be "Are you interested in the public plan taking over the private industry?", "Will Government workers be required to take the public option?", or "Will politicians (Senate and House) take the public option?"

They aren't that hard on him, but they fry others...:confused:

I could not find that one exactly, but I found this: PolitiFact | Begin removing combat brigades from Iraq - Obama promise No. 126: Which does look accurate.

I like the sight. I can find no overt bias, and it's bookmarked right next to factcheck.org.

Edited to add: heh, I just saw the date of the original post. What a necro.
 
Last edited:
lol necro or not.. it's still important to voice concern over bias. It's kinda sad that you can't see the bias...

I haven't seen any troop removal yet. It's still early to be giving that one a check mark. The numbers are still high for Iraq and increasing for Afghanistan.

Also, you didn't comment on the softball statements that are covered...
 
Not biased because the site looks at whatever regardless of political colour. That at the moment it is mostly Republicans getting nailed there is due to the amount of lies and miss information they are producing.
 
Seems like a very interesting site so far.
 
It is unfortunate, but I have to go with it being biased. I really had high hopes for the concept and the site in general, and have often been checking the obameter to see how he is doing, but today I was going through the lies section and was starting to see a trend. Look for yourself, and tell me the difference between "pants on fire" and "false". Although both are saying the statement is blatantly incorrect one jumps out of the page at you. Pants on fire definitely catches the eye more, and makes you think the statement is more of a lie. Now look through and see how often republicans get "Pants on fire" vs Democrats. Further more, looking through the compromises part of the Obameter, and actually reading them makes one think they might be biased. :(
 
I don't know anything about PolitiFact, but I believe that absolutely everything written by humans is biased in some way or another.
 
I don't know anything about PolitiFact, but I believe that absolutely everything written by humans is biased in some way or another.
Good point. It is a shame though, because the idea of "just the facts please" would be really refreshing for any political site.
 
I like politifact. Prefer it to factcheck.org.
 
Biased - Because: As a previous poster stated, any written document produced by humans will be biased.
 
Although it is true that anything written by humans would be bias, I am shocked at how much material is touted as non-bias, but in reality it's spin.

Just the facts would be so refreshing, but manufacturers always claim a lack of profitability without the sizzle of opinion. FOX news caters one side, MSNBC to the other, so where can I find some truth?

Yeah people will name sites, but you can't trust anyone. You can never let your guard down because there is always someone trying to spin you. It's sad really.

I would have to agree that the right seems to be getting bashed more often then the left on politifact. More importantly, they have deemed items to be true, but the event is still ongoing. I am pretty sure they don't retract decisions and re-evaluate them after 1, 2, or 3 years in or after the event. Also, it really bothers me that they don't allow comments on the articles. Usually, I can find one or two gems of information by posters.

EDIT: I wanted to add this. A story from Politifact and NPR

So 46 Million uninsured...right...
Politifact:
"That 46 million number -- which to be exact, is actually 45.7 million -- comes from the U.S. Census Bureau, which releases estimates of the uninsured yearly...They run through a list of questions of all the ways people could have been covered to make sure....If a person had insurance for even one day during the year, they are not counted as uninsured."

PolitiFact | Number of those without health insurance about 46 million

NPR:
"The estimated number of uninsured — technically 45.7 million — comes from 2007 Census Bureau estimates. These are the latest official numbers available, but because Census only asks who was uninsured at any given time during the year, the number is quite fluid."

46 Million Uninsured: A Look Behind The Number : NPR

Who is right? lies, more lies, and damn lies.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom