No, it would not, because it’s a bad metric. The use of that metric is misleading, and omitting that that’s the metric used is doubly so. Why is this hard to understand?
It’s like a kid saying a painting is the best painting in the museum because it’s the most colorful. There is no definite answer to the “best” painting, and even if there were I wouldn’t be qualified to judge it, but I can say with certainty that the kid’s metric is wrong. And if I said “I heard that this painting is the best in the museum” to a stranger, my statement (directly analogous to AFF’s) would be “mostly false” on the PolitiFact scale
What confuses me about how you phrased that is that, as you say, you accept the possibility of bias on your own part (and, I assume, of people who might agree with you rather than disagree). Yet, when it comes to talking about the general situation, you focus solely on what you see as defensive errors. Put another way, the problem is* them*, not us, even though you’ve already said that you accept there could well be bias on your own part.
I mean, somewhat ironically it seems like the same kind of problem you see here; two problems of the same nature, only one of which seems to matter to the judge. People defending this seem potentially biased, so defending it is problematic. I attacking this seem potentially biased, so… I don’t mention attackers on the point as being a problem in any way.
That’s unfortunate. I’m sure you know the issues with personal recollection over a statistical analysis, so I don’t think there’s any reason to go into them. But I for one don’t think I’d be willing to accept my own personal recollection alone, judged by my personal system, as much cop when it comes to good analysis. I have to admit this does make me probably more questioning of your personal views in the future, but then I’m sure that doesn’t matter much to you!
It doesn’t, so far as I can tell. Politifact seems to be looking at two different situations, part of which each have a particular identical (~) point of contention, but which does not constitute the whole of the final judgement. The same sieves are used, among other sieves appropriate to the differing nature of the questions, and where the question is the same the sieves seem to be the same.
Parsing specific Politifact claims seems like idle masturbation. That newspaper project has no legal jurisdiction; it’s just another Internet thing. Suppose Bricker has found some cases where a Democrat is favored over a Republican? How do we know there aren’t many cases where the vice versa applies? And anyway, maybe Politificact is exercising good taste! A gourmet disgusted with a particular restaurant might find a fault with a salad he’d ignore if he liked the restaurant overall.
Some of us have better uses for our time than scrutinizing misplaced commas, but we’d still like to know if Politifact is biased overall.
@Bricker — can you name a politician you would rank high for honesty who is ranked as largely dishonest by Politifact, or vice versa?
Some youtube video. I honestly didn’t pay it much mind because if the President wanted to launch nukes and the S of Def said no we’d have another Saturday Night Massacre.
The link goes to a YouTube posting of a “Stop and Kiss,” policy in which the NYPD will stop and kiss people without probable cause. The video does not allege it was a policy approved by Trump, but rather by former Democrat and now Independent NYV Mayor Bloomberg. And since the entire video is produced by the Onion, it fails to describe a real-life event.
However, to the extent you’re interested, the policy would not be legal.
Looking at the map of who’s leading in each state, I believe Trump has more square footage. If you’ve seen the movie “War of the Roses” you know that’s the most important thing.
Accelerationism. Like the German Communists who supported Hitler because they thought he’d make things so bad in Germany that afterwards everyone would support Communism instead.
There is something to be said for razing to the ground, and rebuilding from the ashes, and there is also something to be said for just patching the leaky roof.
My God you’re one self-absorbed motherfucker. I don’t even think you know how tired your posts get, you’re too busy posting them. The fact you’re so unaware is what makes your posts so enjoyable.
Whatever you say Mr. White Knight sycophant. I’ve been reading here for awhile now and finally decided to post. So what. Not a shocker you immediately consider me a sock or troll though - it’s kind of standard practice around here - anyone with a dissenting opinion is considered a threat to the group-think.
