• 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!

Trump 4, Politifact 1

slick said:
Trump does not lie, he merely embellishes.
Click to expand...

Is that the new word for alternative fact? Is that what you call it when he says this country hasn't seen the violence it is seeing in 40+ years?

I feel like I'm living in the Twilight Zone.
 
TobyOne said:
Politifact is horrible. They utilize pretzel logic to bend their outcomes to their agenda. If you're going to go with a liberal fact checker at least go with WaPo. They do a more thorough job. For conservative fact checking sites you can look at news busters but they're more of a media watchdog site.

Some conservative writers out there like Charles Cooke specialize in fact checking arguments and they're good at it.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I'll check this guy out when I have more time.

"Charles C. W. Cooke
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Charles C. W. Cooke (born November 4, 1984) is the editor of National Review Online. He took over from Rich Lowry in June, 2016 (Lowry remains the editor-in-chief of National Review).[1]

A conservative, Cooke is known for his outspoken criticism of populists such as Donald Trump[2][3] and Sarah Palin,[4] for his opposition to censorship[5] and gun control,[6] for his support for more robust federalism,[7][8] and for his objections to the politicization of popular science.[9][10] On other issues, Cooke leans libertarian, such as his support for legalizing marijuana[11] and same-sex marriage.[12] He is the author of The Conservatarian Manifesto[13] and a frequent guest on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher.[14][15][16] In addition to National Review, Cooke has written for the New York Times,[17][18] the Washington Post,[19] and the Los Angeles Times.[20][21] Along with Kevin D. Williamson, he hosts the popular Mad Dogs and Englishmen[22] podcast on the Ricochet network."
 
Geoist said:
Why does it seem like every conservative posts a blog as their source?
Click to expand...

Powerline is one of the best blogs out there. Their reporting is more complete and factual than most news agencies.

Secondly, we cannot count on the major media networks to report about something like this, they simply report the fact checker findings like gospel because it supports their narrative and confirmation bias of what is going on.

But, I'm guessing you just wanted to ask a smarmy rhetorical question instead of getting a real response.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Powerline is one of the best blogs out there. Their reporting is more complete and factual than most news agencies.
Click to expand...

No, not it is not. That's an absolutely laughable claim.
 
Lesson to be learned here is, when what Trump says is devoid of fact, blame the fact-checkers for being biased. We are living in a post-factual society.
 
Kobie said:
No, not it is not. That's an absolutely laughable claim.
Click to expand...

First you need to quit acting like a blind and deaf partisan. It has a conservative viewpoint but it is regarded as one of the most factual blogs on the internet.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/power-line/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Line
https://www.minnpost.com/media/2016...es-scott-johnson-liberals-laziness-and-bias-m

You are really displaying a heavy bias here. In fact, I would suggest you know you are wrong and being factually dishonest, you simply don't care.
 
Kobie said:
Lesson to be learned here is, when what Trump says is devoid of fact, blame the fact-checkers for being biased. We are living in a post-factual society.
Click to expand...

If its devoid of fact , ( ie some type of opinion) then why do the fact checkers need to get involved?


(And you couldn't possibly be in the bubble so deep you don't realize Politifact has a left bias?)
 
KLATTU said:
If its devoid of fact , ( ie some type of opinion) then why do the fact checkers need to get involved?


(And you couldn't possibly be in the bubble so deep you don't realize Politifact has a left bias?)
Click to expand...

Again, where does politifact rate 1,4 and 5 as false? Do you have the individual pages?

It rates one claim as false, one claim as mostly false, and says that Trump omitted information and/or context in the other 3.

The blog clearly has an agenda, as it accuses politifact of rating things as wrong when it doesn't (And therein lies my issue with blogs, their lack of journalistic integrity and editorial standards).
 
OpportunityCost said:
First you need to quit acting like a blind and deaf partisan. It has a conservative viewpoint but it is regarded as one of the most factual blogs on the internet.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/power-line/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Line
https://www.minnpost.com/media/2016...es-scott-johnson-liberals-laziness-and-bias-m

You are really displaying a heavy bias here. In fact, I would suggest you know you are wrong and being factually dishonest, you simply don't care.
Click to expand...

Here's a thought -- anytime someone dares disagree with you, stop playing the "you're just partisan" card. It's getting quite old.
 
Kobie said:
Lesson to be learned here is, when what Trump says is devoid of fact, blame the fact-checkers for being biased. We are living in a post-factual society.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. The opposition is held to another standard. If the media screws up (and they do), they are expected to give a retraction. It becomes an embarrassment and a blemish for the journalist or talking head. That is how it should be.

If Trump screws up he plays the blame game. No one is allowed to hold him accountable.
 
Kobie said:
Here's a thought -- anytime someone dares disagree with you, stop playing the "you're just partisan" card. It's getting quite old.
Click to expand...

You are letting confirmation bias get in the way of examining how they dissect the news and report it. Saying their coverage in incomplete and false is not a true statement. Yet, you made it. So if you don't want to look like a partisan quit letting it formulate all your decisions and influence your posts. Quit pretending you have an ounce of objectivity, you don't.
 
OpportunityCost said:
And Time's as well. But I get you didn't read the links provided.
Click to expand...

I simply do not think it is worth my time. I am not here to defend Politifact. No doubt they have a bias against Trump. No doubt they, like everyone else, mess up. I just don't feel like reading a whole defense of the King of Lies against a source that is more accurate than most.
 
Geoist said:
I simply do not think it is worth my time. I am not here to defend Politifact. No doubt they have a bias against Trump. No doubt they, like everyone else, mess up. I just don't feel like reading a whole defense of the King of Lies against a source that is more accurate than most.
Click to expand...

Of course you didn't. More accurate than most is a cute way of saying you don't want to look too hard and find out how honest they really are.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Powerline is one of the best blogs out there. Their reporting is more complete and factual than most news agencies.
Click to expand...

I also disagree with this statement. While I do agree with a couple of their points in this article I also disagree with a couple. But I have to point out that they also frequently get their facts wrong and sometimes outright lie about stuff. Like they did a couple of days ago....

https://www.debatepolitics.com/....
 
May I add that the newspapers of Jefferson's era were essentially limited to rags of fine reputation like our Think Progress,The Daily Kos, World Net Daily, and Breitbart​, or would that be too eggheaded?
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
A trophy no one with any sense of decency would want to have.
Click to expand...

Get your nose out of the air and out of joint. Newspapers surrendered any sense of ethics a long time ago.
 
Buzz said:
I also disagree with this statement. While I do agree with a couple of their points in this article I also disagree with a couple. But I have to point out that they also frequently get their facts wrong and sometimes outright lie about stuff. Like they did a couple of days ago....

https://www.debatepolitics.com/....
Click to expand...

Oh. So Slate was wrong, too? Because they were commenting on the Slate story with similar conclusions and data.

So, I guess I will ask, what did you find to be a lie ?
 
calamity said:
lol..smackdown with a blog written by who knows who.
Click to expand...

Truth is the truth regardless of source. I really wish DP policy had rules about the use of logical fallacy.

Also, it should be pointed out that Politifact is also a blog.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Oh. So Slate was wrong, too? Because they were commenting on the Slate story with similar conclusions and data.

So, I guess I will ask, what did you find to be a lie ?
Click to expand...

Did you bother to read any of my one post in that thread? I said Slate was right and listed some of Power Line's lies.
 
I think it's hilarious that Powerline essentially whines that Politifact "simply presents the Democratic Party’s contrary perspective" when they repeatedly ignored the context of what Politifact posted and why it was posted. Nothing Politifact said was untrue and all of it was relevant. I read both articles and read them against one another. Powerline spins most of what Politifact says to provide yet another example of persecution complex. For example:

1) Trump has repeatedly called news he doesn't like "fake news", which means he is claiming they are illegitimate. Not biased, but illegitimate. Further, using only one piece of writing from Jefferson and saying it was totally reflective of his views is merely spin, as Politifact rightly points out by sourcing another document where Jefferson does not hold that view.

Politifact 1, Powerline 0

2) This is easy. Politifact in their linked article cites numerous pieces of evidence showing the price was already coming down, including direct quotes from Lockheed F-35 general manager in 2015. Politifact is right, Powerline is simply presenting the Republican Party's contrary perspective.

Politifact 2, Powerline 0

3) Powerline agrees with Politifact. We'll call that a draw.

4) Trump DID spin polls to claim more optimism. Politifact showed one poll which supported Trump (which means he wasn't lying), but showed other polls which disputed Trump's claim. And a poll of Trump's approval rating IS relevant to optimism in the country, despite what Powerline tries to pretend. So Trump didn't lie, but he did spin...which is exactly what Politifact said.

Politifact 3, Powerline 0

5) Trump DID spin the seven countries. Obama's actions did not do what Trump's executive action attempted to do. It IS spin to try and compare them, as Trump has done numerous times. Again, Politifact didn't call Trump's statement a lie, but rather spin. Which is accurate.

Politifact 4, Powerline 0


Once we do a head to head matchup, it's clear to see that NOTHING Politifact said was incorrect or irrelevant.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Of course you didn't. More accurate than most is a cute way of saying you don't want to look too hard and find out how honest they really are.
Click to expand...

All I have to say for that blogger:

Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

One cannot defend Trump AND the Truth. The two are diametrically opposed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom