# Progressives Unhappy With Politifact's Biggest Lie of 2011 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 21, 2011, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984 "2011-12-21T19:58:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/21 "2011-12-21T21:38:12Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > Do you really think that Obama believes in equality of outcomes? That’s what Romney said – Obama believes in equality of outcomes. I think there’s a zero chance that Obama believes working towards a perfectly flat society. And I agree with you. But notice you added “working towards” in there. I believe Obama is politically savvy enough to realize that it’s not a remotely realistic goal. And so, as you say, he doesn’t believe in working towards it. But I think he desires it. > [@](#): > > Questioning your ad’s accuracy is not equal to “Lie of the year.” Well, this is a fair point. Krugman’s attack was that the there was no lie at all. If you say to me, “Sure, there was a lie, but it wasn’t ‘The Lie of the Year’ because there were other, more worthy recipients of that title…” then I have no argument to make. I don’t know how we could ever agree on a rating system, much less apply it to actual misstatements, in any meaningful way. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/22 "2011-12-21T21:39:21Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > The _ad_ is misleading, as are most political ads to some degree or another. Does it constitute the “Lie of the Year,” in a year so rich with fragrant bullshit? That’s debatable, to say the least. Agreed completely. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/23 "2011-12-21T21:46:10Z")
I’m torn about how outrageous the lie is. Saying the proposal ends Medicare as we know it or kills it is at least subject to some interpretation but is an extreme claim, and saying it “ends” Medicare is somewhere in between but isn’t clear. Saying the Ryan plans ends Medicare within 10 years and implying that the proposal affects people who are on Medicare now (or people who are close to eligibility) is false, and so is saying that Republicans voted to end Medicare. You could argue the ads are not making that claim directly (seniors would be dumped off a cliff or have to strip to raise money after the changes go into effect, not right now), but the implication is there and a visual like that isn’t included for the purposes of nuance. I don’t know if that’s the biggest political lie of the year - I’d have to go back and think about it - but it’s a lie on one of the biggest topics. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/24 "2011-12-21T21:52:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I agree with you. > > But notice you added “working towards” in there. I believe Obama is politically savvy enough to realize that it’s not a remotely realistic goal. And so, as you say, he doesn’t believe in working towards it. > > But I think he desires it. I shouldn’t have added working towards, and we can agree to disagree on this point. I don’t think he desires a completely flat society. I think you have an oddly skewed impression of Obama. There is no mainstream politician in the US wants the US to be a fully communist society. I mean, really. > [@Bricker](#): > > Well, this is a fair point. > > Krugman’s attack was that the there was no lie at all. > > If you say to me, “Sure, there was a lie, but it wasn’t ‘The Lie of the Year’ because there were other, more worthy recipients of that title…” then I have no argument to make. I don’t know how we could ever agree on a rating system, much less apply it to actual misstatements, in any meaningful way. I can certainly see an argument over whether there was a lie – privatizing the system for anyone under [50], and designing it so that it will lag medical costs really does look like the end of Medicare to me. Sure, it’s delayed and sure, it’s still called Medicare. We’re arguing fine points and definitions. Is it a lie? Yes? No? It’s not pants-on-fire, that’s for sure. It looks like we’re agreed that it’s not really the “Lie of the Year.” Why, then, do you suppose Politfact called it that? Was it to look like it’s providing balanced commentary? If not, why then? That, I think, was the thrust of Krugman’s piece. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/25 "2011-12-21T22:01:45Z")
I’ll be honest: I really dislike PoliFact. In general, they’re always nitpicky, opinionated, and prone to weird interpretations, and their interpretations of the word “fact” leaves much to be desired. Leftists are simply upset because they’re the victims this time, but it’s the same game being played. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/26 "2011-12-21T22:06:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But I think he desires it. Because who doesn’t desire a perfectly egalitarian utopian paradise AND to be president? ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/27 "2011-12-21T22:10:34Z")
Politifact: [How we chose the 2011 Lie of the Year](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/how-we-chose-lie-year/). My apologies if this was already linked to above. It’s worth a look for context, and is fairly persuasive regarding the decision-making process and its rationale. It’s not that long, but I can’t quote the entire article. Excising a bit here or there wouldn’t give it a good summary, though I wouldn’t be surprised if someone else could. In any event, it does add a lot of background and context to the decision. I know it tempered my reaction. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/28 "2011-12-21T22:37:09Z")
> [@](#): > > …We received 9,214 votes, nearly triple the number from 2010. The full results are below… Well, no, actually, the full results are not given. The “full results” would include the numbers of votes cast for each particular candidate. > [@](#): > > …The “Zero jobs” claim, which won the readers’ poll with 24 percent of the vote, had been a popular Republican talking point that was uttered by everyone from Rick Perry to the National Republican Senatorial Committee. But we concluded it was more a falsehood from last year… So, that is the only actual number we are going to be given? May one ask why? Mr. Kyl’s whopper about Planned Parenthood came in second, hence, less than 24 per cent. Very informative. Ms Bachman’s vaccine retardation claim we may fairly conclude got significant support as lie of the year, as did Mr Romney’s remark. The voting in this regard was over-ruled. Then why have the voting at all, if the results are not definitive, or even particularly important? And, more to the point, perhaps, why this coy refusal to lay out the actual numbers, while implying that the “full results” are available? And where, exactly, did this “Mediscare” mendacity actually rank? Five percent? Fifteen? Less than twenty four is about all we’re gonna get. Something mighty fishy going on here. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/29 "2011-12-21T23:01:13Z")
> [@](#): > > They ignored the fact that the Ryan plan would not affect people currently in Medicare – or even the people 55 to 65 who would join the program in the next 10 years. They didn’t ignore it so much as they didn’t mention it. The Republicans voted for a plan that would end Medicare (as we know it). That’s a true statement. How much detail are they expected to include? > [@](#): > > They used harsh terms such as “end” and “kill” when the program would still exist, although in a privatized system. As **Bricker** discusses above, this comes down to whether you consider the Ryan plan different enough from the current incarnation of Medicare that it essentially ends the current program. If Medicare were changed to a program that just send a coupon book for 25% off various OTC medications I don’t think anyone would call it a lie to say Medicare was over. The Ryan plan’s “Medicare” is qualitatively different in that Medicare currently guarantees a level of health care to eligible Americans and the Ryan plan would not. If you consider that guarantee to be essential to what Medicare is–and I do–then it is certainly true to say that the Ryan plan kills Medicare. > [@](#): > > They used pictures and video of elderly people who clearly were too old to be affected by the Ryan plan. The DCCC video that aired four days after the vote featured an elderly man who had to take a job as a stripper to pay his medical bills. This is just weak. The people who would eventually be affected by the Ryan plan will be elderly when it happens. Let’s say they had passed a plan to end health insurance for everyone 8 years old and under starting in 2016. If an attack ad featured an 8-year-old, would it be fair to argue that the 8-year-old in the ad will be 13 when the law takes effect and that the people affected are only 3 years old right now at the most? No, that would be ridiculous. I see the bind that Politifact is in. They’ve picked a right-wing lie as Lie of the Year two years in a row, so they have to pick a Democratic one this year or they’ll just be dismissed as another tool of the left-wing lamestream media. There were plenty of outright falsehoods this year, so there was no reason to pick something so arguable other than avoiding the appearance of bias. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/30 "2011-12-21T23:16:29Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Something mighty fishy going on here. Another site’s description of the goings-on implied that the LotY was determined by an open vote. That alone made me roll my eyes and become relatively uninterested other than to wonder why Politifact would give any credence to an Internet poll. Bricker’s thread brought my attention back and I dug a bit deeper. It turns out, though that the Politifact editorial board owns this: > [@](#): > > For the first time since PolitiFact started naming a Lie of the Year, readers and editors have made different choices for the top falsehood. > > PolitiFact editors chose the Democratic line that Republicans voted “to end Medicare” as the 2011 Lie of the Year, while the winner in our reader poll was the Republican claim that “zero jobs” were created by the economic stimulus. I believe most of the percentages/numbers you’re asking about are in regards to the reader poll—something I daresay is (generally) inherently unreliable. I think **DoctorJ’s** last paragraph is a good suggestion of what kind of conversations when on behind the scenes. The article gives no mention of how the ‘finalists’ for LotY were chosen, so can’t say what or how they got stuck with the ‘lie’ they chose. Again, there are enough straight-out lies to have avoided this situation. Even if you are in whole agreement with it, you could easily find another Democratic whopper that would have made for a shorter thread. However, would those other tales have met the conversation and influence criteria? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/31 "2011-12-21T23:22:24Z")
To me it is a lie because it gives the implication that Medicare is gone with nothing to take its place. Now arguably, the private Medicare would not be as good as the government one. That being said, Medicare isn’t cast aside and leaving the elderly with absolutely nothing. To be it would be the equivalent of saying that Obama wants to make light bulbs illegal. It’s true that the current ones will be illegal, but there will be a replacement. We can argue the merits of the replacement, but the lie is one of knowing that seniors will think: no more medicare, full stop. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/32 "2011-12-21T23:38:38Z")
Weak sauce. Does saying that Ryan wants to end Medicare foreseeably mislead people? Absolutely. It would be much less prone to misunderstanding to simply say Ryan wants to phase out Medicare and replace it with funding for private insurance. But is it a lie to foreseeably mislead people? I’m nearly certain I can find \*\*Bricker \*\*refuting that notion circa 2005. If the claim is that Democrats actively stated that the plan would end Medicare benefits for current seniors, then the best evidence of that claim seems to be the commercial showing old people. How does one represent old people from the future? Were they supposed to have old people on hover-wheelchairs or what? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/33 "2011-12-21T23:58:17Z")
If the left turn signal is constantly blinking, might work. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/34 "2011-12-22T00:12:15Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Weak sauce. > > Does saying that Ryan wants to end Medicare foreseeably mislead people? Absolutely. It would be much less prone to misunderstanding to simply say Ryan wants to phase out Medicare and replace it with funding for private insurance. > > But is it a lie to foreseeably mislead people? I’m nearly certain I can find \*\*Bricker \*\*refuting that notion circa 2005. > > If the claim is that Democrats actively stated that the plan would end Medicare benefits for current seniors, then the best evidence of that claim seems to be the commercial showing old people. How does one represent old people from the future? Were they supposed to have old people on hover-wheelchairs or what? you wouldn’t show, or imply, old people caught flat-footed by a change. The old people of the future would have known this was coming for many years, and not been caught by surprise… and even that assumes the Ryan plan to be a complete flop at providing funding, which isn’t a fair assumption. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/35 "2011-12-22T00:19:38Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > It looks like we’re agreed that it’s not really the “Lie of the Year.” Why, then, do you suppose Politfact called it that? Was it to look like it’s providing balanced commentary? If not, why then? > > That, I think, was the thrust of Krugman’s piece. I take no position on how big a lie it is, because I have no idea how to quantify how big a lie is with anything approaching repeatable, predictable, objective results. But Krugman’s first sentence says that there’s no lie at all: > [@](#): > > This is really awful. Politifact, which is supposed to police false claims in politics, has announced its Lie of the Year — and it’s a statement that happens to be true, the claim that Republicans have voted to end Medicare. Not sure how you think you can spin the idea that the thrust of his piece is merely that there are other bigger lies more deserving, when Krugman leads with the claim that there was no lie at all. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/36 "2011-12-22T00:36:06Z")
Krugman is probably thinking that it’s not a lie in the sense that they’re not just making shit up, they’re just overreaching, being disingenuous, or exaggerating to support something he sees as inherently true. Krugman is an economist, not a lawyer or even really a politician, so he’s not as adept at understanding the nuance of twisting words as others do. Still, from a standpoint of was this the biggest lie of 2011, I’d guess it’s not even close. Maybe the lie or exaggeration with the most impact. I wonder if Politifact didn’t award it to a Dem claim just to give themselves an air of impartiality. Not sure what the purposes of creating a biggest lie award even is; it seems self-aggrandizing. I’d rather they just stick to individual claims without the need to rank them or score some points. That would help them to maintain some sense of neutrality. Once you ranking things they tend to move from objective to subjective quite quickly. ---
**Author:** ![RitterSport](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rittersport/32/6326_2.png) [@RitterSport](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RitterSport)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/37 "2011-12-22T01:14:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Not sure how you think you can spin the idea that the thrust of his piece is merely that there are other bigger lies more deserving, when Krugman leads with the claim that there was no lie at all. I think the thrust of his piece is that they went out of their way to find a Democratic lie, in order to seem balanced. And, the lie they chose was, arguably, not a lie. Or, it arguably was a lie. Either way, it’s debatable, as you can see from the discourse here. Krugman thinks it’s not, others think it is. The other lies in the running lost out to it. Why? Because they weren’t lies? No, because they were so laughably, obviously lies that they basically had no effect on the political conversation. It looks like their method is: (falsehood index)\*(effect on politics) So, something that has a very small falsehood index (slightly misleading, for example), but has a large impact on the political discussion, would win over a total whopper with no impact. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/38 "2011-12-22T01:27:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > you wouldn’t show, or imply, old people caught flat-footed by a change. The old people of the future would have known this was coming for many years, and not been caught by surprise… and even that assumes the Ryan plan to be a complete flop at providing funding, which isn’t a fair assumption. Can you point me to an ad showing old people suddenly denied all medical coverage, or a speech making that assertion? Politifact certainly didn’t cite one. Indeed, the vast majority of Politifact’s citations aren’t even examples of the so-called lie about terminating current benefits, and instead are true statements about ending Medicare. The closest thing they cite is the ad showing Paul Ryan pushing an old lady off a cliff – a woman we might interpret as a current recipient given that the actor is supposed to be a current Paul Ryan. But, of course, Paul Ryan isn’t \*literally \*going to push old people off cliffs, so it’s a bit odd to be taking the whole thing literally with respect to the timeline. It’s a metaphor, for taking away a benefit – full medical coverage – and replacing it with what the Democrats argue will be a partial voucher. Whether the policy will have that effect or not is entirely fair political game. The Dems have plenty of cogent and neutral analysis to support their position about the effect of the plan on benefits, and I daresay the GOP hasn’t bothered to offer much of their own save vague assurances about the operation of the free market. Indeed, if the Dems are right about the policy effects, there probably would be a lot of surprised seniors who turn 65 and learn that the guarantee they’d been sold for most of their life has been reduced to a payout that only covers some of what they need – even though the GOP had been telling them that the privatization scheme wouldn’t reduce their coverage. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/39 "2011-12-22T02:35:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, but if you put forth a plan to end the armed services in fifteen years, and I ran an ad against that plan showing current soldiers standing helplessly outside their locked barracks, you would have cause to question my ad’s accuracy. Of course. Let’s say the average private is 20 years old. The only accurate thing to do would be to show a bunch of 5-year-olds standing helplessly outside of the locked barracks, since those are the people who will be affected by the change. Or, y’know, you could trust people to understand that the humans in an ad are **actors** , and that if you’re talking about a proposal that will go into effect in fifteen years, they’re acting like people from the future, people who will, in fifteen years, be affected by the proposal. Sure, these future-old-people will have had time to prepare for the change, and in **Republitopia** , everyone would prepare for the change, right after they floss their teeth and balance their checkbooks. The reality, of course, is that not everyone will do so, and then we’ll have a lot of old people who are SOL. And the bit about the old man having to take a job as a stripper? Uh, **Politifact**? Are you now ranking the veracity of jokes? I’m not seeing the lie, I’m afraid. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2011, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984/40 "2011-12-22T13:46:23Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Or, y’know, you could trust people to understand that the humans in an ad are **actors** , and that if you’re talking about a proposal that will go into effect in fifteen years, they’re acting like people from the future, people who will, in fifteen years, be affected by the proposal. But most people wouldn’t know that the plan doesn’t go into effect for 15 years and with Bricker’s hypothetical ad, he would be knowingly giving people the impression that it would happen now. And by having soldiers locked out of the barracks, he would be knowingly implying that ALL funding was being cut for the armed forces instead of a replacement plan that arguably may not provide the same level of forces. And when you take an issue like Medicare that many people currently depend on and make them think that they will lose these benefits tomorrow, it is not only misleading and false, it is a cruel attempt at gaining votes through sleight of hand. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/progressives-unhappy-with-politifacts-biggest-lie-of-2011/606984.md?page=3)