What proof do Republicans have that Politifact are just a bunch of liars?

deanrd

Gold Member
May 8, 2017
29,411
3,634
290
Our latest fact-checks | PolitiFact

We know Trump lies. He does it every single time he's in front of the camera. Many Republicans have admitted it. The GOP base simply doesn't care.

But why do Republicans say Politifact lies all the time. Have they ever shown proof?
 
Here is my favorite one from the link provided:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
"Unemployment is low because everyone has two jobs. Unemployment is low because people are working 60, 70, 80 hours a week and can barely feed their family."

— PolitiFact National on Wednesday, July 18th, 2018

tom-pantsonfire.gif
 
Our latest fact-checks | PolitiFact

We know Trump lies. He does it every single time he's in front of the camera. Many Republicans have admitted it. The GOP base simply doesn't care.

But why do Republicans say Politifact lies all the time. Have they ever shown proof?


Here's where you strike out again:


On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
Using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.

Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.

PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?

But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:

For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.

On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.

Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.

That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."

This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.

There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.
VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way | Breitbart






This bias is evident in:

1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate

PolitiFact examination;2

2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;

and

3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis

and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf





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.

There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.

All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans






PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact - Wikipedia


The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ


"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.

Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest."
PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers





PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)






You set 'em up, I knock 'em down.
 
Last edited:
They are fact benders at best, like a lot of our fine feathered parrots.
 
Of what purpose does it serve to show bed wetters proof of anything?

There are volumes of proof for instance that leftist governments are more dangerous to those being governed than anarchy would be.

There are countless historical documentaries detailing mass murders, genocides, widespread illiteracy, poverty and forced famines carried out by leftist regimes.

There remains a couple countries still enriching a ruling class just like the soviets, complete with gulags and people who vanish yet there are still thousands of bed wetters considered "intellectuals" who will pass a polygraph while insisting these countries are better off than we are.

There is no amount of evidence that will cause the dead frontal lobe in a bed wetter's dense skull to suddenly activate and acknowledge that marxist philosophy is REgressive, that leftist "journalists" lie constantly, and that hitlery is a criminally insane sociopath hag.


.
 
Of what purpose does it serve to show bed wetters proof of anything?

There are volumes of proof for instance that leftist governments are more dangerous to those being governed than anarchy would be.

There are countless historical documentaries detailing mass murders, genocides, widespread illiteracy, poverty and forced famines carried out by leftist regimes.

There remains a couple countries still enriching a ruling class just like the soviets, complete with gulags and people who vanish yet there are still thousands of bed wetters considered "intellectuals" who will pass a polygraph while insisting these countries are better off than we are.

There is no amount of evidence that will cause the dead frontal lobe in a bed wetter's dense skull to suddenly activate and acknowledge that marxist philosophy is REgressive, that leftist "journalists" lie constantly, and that hitlery is a criminally insane sociopath hag.


.
You certainly have enunciated the thought process of the bed wetting regressive Right.
 
Our latest fact-checks | PolitiFact

We know Trump lies. He does it every single time he's in front of the camera. Many Republicans have admitted it. The GOP base simply doesn't care.

But why do Republicans say Politifact lies all the time. Have they ever shown proof?
No.

"No."

Yes.


On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
Using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.

Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.

PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?

But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:

For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.

On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.

Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.

That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."

This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.

There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.
VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way | Breitbart






This bias is evident in:

1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate

PolitiFact examination;2

2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;

and

3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis

and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf





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.

There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.

All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans






PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact - Wikipedia


The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ


"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.

Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest."
PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers





PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)






You set 'em up, I knock 'em down, C_Chamber_Pot
 
Our latest fact-checks | PolitiFact

We know Trump lies. He does it every single time he's in front of the camera. Many Republicans have admitted it. The GOP base simply doesn't care.

But why do Republicans say Politifact lies all the time. Have they ever shown proof?


Here's where you strike out again:


On a national level, most people now know PolitiFact is nothing but another Obama-shilling mainstream media joke -- an entity so in the tank for the White House it ruled as mostly true that "Barack Obama has lowest spending record of any recent president:"
Using inflation-adjusted dollars, Obama had the second-lowest increase -- in fact, he actually presided over a decrease once inflation is taken into account.

Yes, you read that correctly. According to PolitiFact, when indexed for inflation, Obama reduced spending.

PolitiFact's motto appears to be: The bigger the lie the more people will believe it. Hm. Sounds familiar. But how else can you palace guard for a failed president?

But PolitiFact isn't just a national cancer on all of us. This reprehensible outfit also "fact-checks" in a number of individual states, including the crucial swing states of Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

Unfortunately, my lack of superpowers makes it impossible for me to monitor the left-wing propaganda PolitiFact is surely spewing in each individual state. Thankfully, though, the Republican Party of Virginia has had enough and late yesterday hit back at PolitiFact Virginia with both barrels:

For quite some time we've had growing concerns regarding PolitiFact Virginia's approach towards Republicans in general, and in specific, "separating fact from fiction" against Republican candidates, officials and committees.

On February 16th of this year, the Republican Party of Virginia had a meeting with the Editor and Publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch regarding the paper's PolitiFact Virginia unit. In late April - two months later - we had a subsequent conference call to follow up on our original meeting.

Since the original meeting - nearly five months ago - PolitiFact Virginia has meted-out 36 rulings, not including recent "Ad Watch" articles. Of those rulings, 26 targeted Republican candidates, elected officials, our State Party, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads. At the same time, PolitiFact Virginia handed down only 10 rulings on Democrats and one 3rd party organization.

That might not sound like both barrels, but included in the press release is this 87-page document which goes into great detail to refute a number of PolitiFact's lies, some of them nearly as absurd as PolitiFact's mostly true ruling that "Obama has the lowest spending record of any recent president."

This pushback is crucial and hopefully this is just the beginning. Whether it's on a national or local level, Republicans must treat the media as what it truly is: an adversary.

There is no downside anymore in pushing back and going on offense against the corrupt media. New Media is here to stay and not fighting back against the likes of PolitiFact is no different than not fighting back against the DNC.
VA Pushes Back Against PolitiFact, Shows Other States the Way | Breitbart






This bias is evident in:

1) The targeting of Republican political figures for lopsidedly disproportionate

PolitiFact examination;2

2) The showering of Republican politicians with suspiciously negative determinations;

and

3) The basing of these supposed “factual” determinations on highly subjective analysis

and even opinion masquerading as “fact checks.
http://library.constantcontact.com/...nia+--+Political+Bias+--+Final+--+7-10-12.pdf





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.

There is a "truth gap" in Washington, but it doesn't exist along the lines the fact checkers would have you think. It was Obama who said you could keep the health care you had if you liked it, even if Obamacare became law. It was Obama who said the Citizens United decision would open the floodgates of foreign money into U.S. campaigns. It was Obama who said Benghazi happened because of a YouTube video. It was Obama's IRS that denied conservative political groups had been singled out for special scrutiny. And it was Obama who promised that taxes would not go up for any American making less than $250,000 per year.

All of these statements and plenty more are demonstrably false,
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...inds-fact-checkers-biased-against-republicans






PolitiFact.com is a project operated by the Tampa Bay Times, in which reporters and editors from the Times and affiliated media outlets "fact-check statements by members of Congress, the White House, lobbyists and interest groups".PolitiFact - Wikipedia


The St. PetersburgTampa Bay Times, which started PolitiFact in conjunction with the Congressional Quarterly, is a traditionally liberal paper. We note that PolitiFact's stories appear to damage Republicans far more often than Democrats despite the fact that PF tends to choose about as many stories dealing with Republicans as for Democrats. If the selection process was blind then either proportions should be approximately even or else the party with worse ratings should receive more ratings overall according to what PolitiFact lists as its selection criteria. Plus our independent research helps confirm the hypothesis. PolitiFact Bias: About PolitiFact Bias/FAQ


"The Tampa Bay Times, which produces the PolitFact Truth-o-Meter, has not endorsed a single Republican candidate this century for any of the three most important positions on the Florida election ballot. Accordingly, the Times scores a “Pants on Fire” for its lack of objectivity, according to an extensive analysis by Media Trackers Florida.

Since 2000, the Times has issued 10 endorsements in elections for U.S. President, U.S. Senate, and Florida Governor. Nine of the 10 endorsements went to Democrats, with the sole exception being theTimes’ endorsement of Democrat-leaning Independent Charlie Crist in the 2010 U.S. Senate contest."
PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers





PolitiFact’s liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)
PolitiFact's liberal bias, yet again (Arizona law; Climategate)






You set 'em up, I knock 'em down.
Have you looked at your links?

My favorite wasn't Breitbart, it was the Tampa Bay times.

They said Politifact must be biased because they haven't endorsed any Republican for years. Really?

Was that because Bush told the truth about Iraq being behind 9/11?

Hilarious!
 

Forum List

Back
Top