Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1.    #1  
    I have no loyalty to any political party or to any candidate. I like to look at the facts from all sides no matter if it supports the Dems, The Reps, or a 3rd Party. In politics, my first thought when I hear a claim based on fact is "show me the source". Facts can be manipulated, flat out false, or only showing half of the reality of the matter in question.

    There is a lot of "facts" dropped all over the place to support or attack one candidate or the other with little or no supporting cites to back them up....and the same goes for those trying to refute a claimed fact.

    Along with that are the claims by the candidates themselves or statements by their campaigns that are questionable at best.

    This thread is dedicated to checking the facts leading up to the Presidential Election.

    The rules are simple:
    1) You cannot state a fact or question a fact without including documented sources.
    2) No generalizations, stereotyping, or name calling. This is just cutting to the core, the facts.

    Here are some excellent resources that can be used (and all MSM are accepted including NY Time, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc...):
  2. #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I have no loyalty to any political party or to any candidate. I like to look at the facts from all sides no matter if it supports the Dems, The Reps, or a 3rd Party. In politics, my first thought when I hear a claim based on fact is "show me the source". Facts can be manipulated, flat out false, or only showing half of the reality of the matter in question.

    There is a lot of "facts" dropped all over the place to support or attack one candidate or the other with little or no supporting cites to back them up....and the same goes for those trying to refute a claimed fact.

    Along with that are the claims by the candidates themselves or statements by their campaigns that are questionable at best.

    This thread is dedicated to checking the facts leading up to the Presidential Election.

    The rules are simple:
    1) You cannot state a fact or question a fact without including documented sources.
    2) No generalizations, stereotyping, or name calling. This is just cutting to the core, the facts.
    Here are some excellent resources that can be used (and all MSM are accepted including NY Time, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc...):
    I knew about factcheck.org and the factchecker but never paid any attention nor did not know about the other two - thanks Hobbes!
  3. #3  
    I have looked at each of these before. It is amazing that you have Fact Check.org listed - rather left wing. CNN a little less to the left. Why not take it a bit further and add a few conservative blogs - you know, balance it out.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I have looked at each of these before. It is amazing that you have Fact Check.org listed - rather left wing. CNN a little less to the left. Why not take it a bit further and add a few conservative blogs - you know, balance it out.
    factcheck.org is "left wing"?

    I think his point is to use sites that are known to be neutral and centrist. Conservative blogs fall pretty far outside that sphere of neutrality.
  5.    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I have looked at each of these before. It is amazing that you have Fact Check.org listed - rather left wing. CNN a little less to the left. Why not take it a bit further and add a few conservative blogs - you know, balance it out.
    I look at and source both ends of the scale. Generally speaking, if a person ignores the NY Post, MSNBC, or the LA Times because they are certainly oriented to the left side of the scale or if a person flippantly ignores all articles just because they are from Fox News who leans more to the right, then that person is choosing to be self imposed ignorant on the full scope of the issues.

    To answer you question though, I only listed sites solely dedicated to taking statements and claims from political figures and organizations and document their accuracy with valid and thorough sourcing. Each of the sites I listed blasts both Dems and Reps.

    Since not every site has an official Fact Check section, but does Fact Check articles, I did not include them in the list above. Fox News is great example of this as you can see with their Presidential Debate Fact Check Article. This is why I made the statement that ALL MSM sources are valid.

    If you have a dedicated Fact Check site you want me to add to the original post, I sure will.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    factcheck.org is "left wing"?

    I think his point is to use sites that are known to be neutral and centrist. Conservative blogs fall pretty far outside that sphere of neutrality.
    I wouldn't say factcheck.org is left wing, but I noticed during the primaries that they're certainly liberally biased.

    When Democrats were incorrect, they usually were said to have flubbed or mispoken. Republicans, on the other hand, were usually characterized as lying and twisting the facts. I actually emailed Brooks Jackson a list of their headlines showing their clear bias, and he didn't defend it, deny it, or promise to correct it. Instead he asked that they be judged by the body of their work. And the bias continued.

    I also noticed that they often stray from their stated mission of checking facts and get argumentative against the Republicans: Yes, everything this guy said is completely true, but here's why the Democrat's position is justified.

    I've found the Washington Post's Fact Checker to be pretty fair.
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I wouldn't say factcheck.org is left wing, but I noticed during the primaries that they're certainly liberally biased.

    When Democrats were incorrect, they usually were said to have flubbed or mispoken. Republicans, on the other hand, were usually characterized as lying and twisting the facts. I actually emailed Brooks Jackson a list of their headlines showing their clear bias, and he didn't defend it, deny it, or promise to correct it. Instead he asked that they be judged by the body of their work. And the bias continued.

    I also noticed that they often stray from their stated mission of checking facts and get argumentative against the Republicans: Yes, everything this guy said is completely true, but here's why the Democrat's position is justified.

    I've found the Washington Post's Fact Checker to be pretty fair.
    What about politifact.com ?
  8. #8  
    I also only knew about factcheck.org and fact checker.
  9. #9  
    I hope you also realize that left wing blogs fall WAY outside the sphere of neutrality and common sense.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    I hope you also realize that left wing blogs fall WAY outside the sphere of neutrality and common sense.
    Can I remind you of hobbes second rule?
    2) No generalizations, stereotyping, or name calling. This is just cutting to the core, the facts.

    Lets keep this a clean discussion and not escalate this into a left is worse than right or vice versa debate...

    Thank you..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  11. #11  
    When it comes to checking facts - either it is or it ain't. If there is "spin" added, it's no longer fact checking so there should be no question of left or right.
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT View Post
    Can I remind you of hobbes second rule?
    2) No generalizations, stereotyping, or name calling. This is just cutting to the core, the facts.

    Lets keep this a clean discussion and not escalate this into a left is worse than right or vice versa debate...

    Thank you..
    Thanks.

    From this post on....see rule number one.
  13. #13  
    Is politifact.com too liberal or does the right-wing lie more than the left-wing? Why do I ask?

    If you look at the "Attack File" at politifact.com http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/attacks/ and count the number of "Barely True" and "Pants on Fire" lies told by both sides, and interesting statistic jumps out of me - the right-wing lies outpace the left-wing lies by a factor of 3 to 1. Specifically, if you eliminate the internal party attacks (from the primary) you should come up with around 32 lies from the Dems/Surrogates and 90 from the GOP/Surrogates.

    So does this mean politifact.com is too liberal? Or does it mean that one side lies more than the other?
  14.    #14  
    Like Toolkit mentioned above, this is not who is more evil, the Right or the Left, thread.

    This is simply fact check thread if any political organization, or individual politician, or a campaign makes a factual statement.

    If you want to support a fact with detailed and valid sourcing great. If you want refute a stated fact with detailed and valid sourcing perfect.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    This is simply fact check thread if any political organization, or individual politician, or a campaign makes a factual statement.

    If you want to support a fact with detailed and valid sourcing great. If you want refute a stated fact with detailed and valid sourcing perfect.
    Got it - all this talk about the credibility of the links you posted got me going. My apologies.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Here are some excellent resources that can be used (and all MSM are accepted including NY Time, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc...):

    Hey, you forgot to list me as a resource (though I don't have no fancy webpage and all) . . . Would I lie or misrepresent the truth?
    No problem should ever be solved twice.

    Verizon Treo650 W/Custom ROM
  17. #17  
    Obama and Ayers - the truth as told by factcheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...ill_ayers.html
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Obama and Ayers - the truth as told by factcheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...ill_ayers.html
    Good fact based article. In summery the "radical 'education' foundation" that Obama and Ayers shared some board experience also included major support and participation from quite a number of Republicans and McCain people. It is a really comprehensive debunking.
  19. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by aero View Post
    Good fact based article. In summery the "radical 'education' foundation" that Obama and Ayers shared some board experience also included major support and participation from quite a number of Republicans and McCain people. It is a really comprehensive debunking.
    Here is politifact.com take on one of McCain's Ayers Ads.
    http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/790/
    Last edited by moderateinny; 10/11/2008 at 10:01 PM.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions