The ad says “Romney’s false claim of Jeep outsourcing to China”.
In the rally, he said he read a story about it, which he did. In his ad, he says nothing about outsourcing. All he says is that Chrysler was bought by Italians who “plan to build Jeeps in China”, which they do plan on doing. They claim they are not doing so at the expense of existing US jobs, but they still plan on building them in China, according to Chrysler:
So why did Romney bother mentioning it, then?
He was just sharing his Internet browsing history with the folks at the rally. He followed that up with a story he had just read about Jessica Biel taking Justin Timberlake’s last name. Admittedly it was kind of a strange political event.
How else to interpret this portion of the Bloomberg article (emphasis added)?:
I don’t see anything false about Romney’s comments if he’s referencing this. Obama’s ad is consequently a lie (and Chrysler / Fiat is weaseling). I wonder if getting caught in such a falsehood will hurt his chances? 
You’d have to ask him. Sure, he probably wanted people to think outsourcing, but he didn’t actually “claim” it, as Obama’s ad says. Romney’s ad is very misleading. But so is Obama’s. And Obama’s has an outright falsehood, which is, at best, an error and at worst, a lie.
If anyone wants to claim that Romney does this more than Obama, I’m not going to argue with him on that. But if the claim is that Obama never does it, well, you just haven’t spent enough time on factcheck.org.
Word. If you grouped the candidates’ statements in the debates, as rated by PolitiFact, placing “pants on fire”, “false”, and “mostly false” statements into one pile and “true” and “mostly true” into another, Romney was telling the truth about 40% of the time and Obama was telling the truth about 60% of the time. Once you correct for reality’s well-known liberal bias there’s not much difference between the candidates.
The ad shows a quote from the Detroit Free Press that states “Romney repeats false claim of Jeep outsourcing to China.”
See the difference between what you posted and what the ad actually shows?
No, I posted what the voice-over said, not what that quote from the DFP said. Go back and listen.
The free press quote is more damning as it shows that even after being told that the claims were false, they continued to make them. If he was just referring to an article he’d read, as you say, he could have walked it back and admitted the error once it was pointed out. Instead, he doubled down on the falsehood and then incorporated it into an ad. He’s being purposefully misleading and now you guys are butthurt that people are calling him out for it.
I think you’re (and John Mace) misreading the sentence. They’re talking about what they will build there. Are they going to offer all Jeep vehicles at the factories built in China or just some.
Re-read it and you’ll see that you’re injecting your bias into your interpretation.
I already said Romney was being misleading just a few posts ago. You, OTOH, are unwilling to admit that Obama’s ad contains an error (either a mistake or a lie, you choose). And I’m the one who is “butthurth”? :rolleyes:
I’m not mis-reading anything. I’m just saying that that’s probably the article Romney was referencing. It is a very poorly written article as it seems to contradict itself.
But I do agree that the guy from Chrysler was trying to say that they might build all their models in China, but that doesn’t mean they won’t also build those models elsewhere, too.
Yes you are misreading it. And everyone else without a dog in this race has said so, which is why there’s near universal backlash from everyone in the media today. Here’s the original article again:
“Fiat SpA (F), majority owner of Chrysler Group LLC, plans to return Jeep output to China and may eventually make all of its models in that country, according to the head of both automakers’ operations in the region.”
That says nothing whatsoever about moving production OUT of the U.S., only that it may start making all models of the cars they manufacture in that China plant, not just Jeep. You know, as in, “Hey, we might open a Jeep plant in China. And if all goes well, we might make other models there, as well.”
Then only a teeeeeny bit down you’ll find this:
“Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.”
It doesn’t get any more crystal clear than that. So when Romney said:
“I saw a story today that one of the great manufacturers in this state Jeep — now owned by the Italians — is thinking of moving all production to China”
That was a flat out, bold-faced LIE, since the article in question says OUTRIGHT, once more for clarity:
“Manley referred to adding Jeep production sites rather than shifting output from North America to China.”
It was right there, in the article he claims to have read. How you can say that isn’t a lie is beyond my comprehension.
And this is also patently false. How about instead of regurgitating a biased source, you follow the link even they provide you to the original article on the matter and read for yourself that they have misrepresented the story entirely.
They are contemplating increasing production in Italy to spur job growth there, having nothing whatsoever to do with manufacturing in the U.S., and potentially importing some of those vehicles to NORTH AMERICA, which consists of more than just the United States, as you may have forgotten. It says nothing whatsoever about MOVING plant operations to Italy. Nothing.
We don’t know which “story” Romney claims to have read, but that is the one that probably started the rumors. It wasn’t a very well written article. I’m not misreading anything. I’m just quoting where I this all started.
The OP, you will note, is referencing the Romney ad, which says absolutely nothing about outsourcing. It is misleading, but it’s not wrong.
Well, OK, but it’s the only one you’ve proposed to support his claim. Are you aware of some other article that supports his claim? Don’t you think the fact that they’re running ads about this means they should reconsider once Chrysler tells them it’s not true? Doesn’t the Obama campaign have the right to elide the fact that Romney claims to be citing some article if no such article exists?
Yes we do know which story, as it’s been widely reported all over the place for days now.
From 3 days ago:
“In fairness to Romney, the news story that gave rise to this tale seems to have been sloppily written. But all the relevant facts were in the original article. And in any case, there are no indications the Romney campaign bothered to check out its preferred story before working it into his stump speech.”
So just stop spinning; it’s unbecoming.
And the point people are making about the ad is that despite having been told outright that their “interpretation” of Fiat’s intentions were flat out wrong, they went ahead and spun it into an intentionally deceptive ad anyway, couching it in just enough “truth” to dig their big toe into the ground, bat their eyes and say, “Who, me?”
It’s bullshit and you know it.
No, we don’t know what “story” Romney was talking about. There were all sorts of spin-offs from that article, like this one. Stories that took a sloppily written article, and ran with it for partisan purposes.
Oh yes. For sure. A politician caught lying, especially in such a egregious and clear case as this on so vital an issue will surly lower his chances substantially in any US election, let alone a presidential election. I’d say that because of this, Romney has less than a 50/50 chance of victory now, instead of the slightly less than half a chance he had before. You are definitely onto something here…
What evidence do you have that Jeep was thinking about moving all production?
They weren’t, so Romney repeated false information. The first time, it was a stupid mistake, because he believes right-wing glurge is real. The second time, he just didn’t give a shit that it wasn’t true.
Is “I read a story that said…” a complete get out of jail free card?
I read a story that said there are credible questions about the validity of Obama’s birth certificate.
I read a story that said that Obama was indoctrinated in an Islamic school in Indonesia as a child, and that he did not swear his oath of office on a bible.
I read a story that said that Obama’s health care law will require elderly patients to go before a panel to determine whether they will receive end-of-life care.
All those statements are true. If I’m Romney and I use them in a stump speech am I being mendacious or not?