Fact checking the debate

[Joecooool]

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ential-debate/

Doesn't look like I missed anything last night.

[DJ_Critterus]

Get used to the hissy fits, people. I predict joe will have a few more over the next 6-8 weeks.

[Taurus]

And there it is. Now who wants to fact check his fact check?

[VITE1]

You missed Romney looking presidential and B looking like a lost liberal professor.


And BHO got his butt kicked.

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by Taurus

And there it is. Now who wants to fact check his fact check?

No point. He would just poopooh the results as "biased."

[Taurus]

Originally Posted by Loco Vette

No point. He would just poopooh the results as "biased."

True, and I wouldn't want to be a racist.

[Craig]

Even the liberal medea is saying Romney won.

[Joecooool]

Had any of you bothered to read what I posted, it knocked both sides.

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Had any of you bothered to read what I posted, it knocked both sides.

They're mostly related to Romney...but either way, none of them could prove ANY of Romneys statements false...jsut that it considered Romney death panel comment a bit off.

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Had any of you bothered to read what I posted, it knocked both sides.

Had you even bothered to watch the debate before you posted somebody else's fact-checking points, you would have had an actual frame of reference with which to be able to form your own opinion as to it's validity.

Since by your own admission you did not watch the debate last night, it is obvious to the rest of us that you have simply posted something which meets your own agenda... it's just another self-fulfilling prophesy of "research" on your part.

Why don't you take yourself over to some dark corner of the Internet, actually watch the debate, and then post some fact check opinions? Because at that point they will actually have some relevant meaning to the rest of us.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Stangkiller

They're mostly related to Romney...but either way, none of them could prove ANY of Romneys statements false...jsut that it considered Romney death panel comment a bit off.

Its a non partisan source. If they are mostly related to Romney, then its because he was the one that mostly stretched the truth.

I guess its easy to win a debate when a Romney figures he can say anything and then get away with it. Everything people are saying Romney nailed Obama with turns out to be bullshit or a half truth at best.

Regardless, do any of you really think there are people out there that are so out of touch that still haven't made their minds up yet? How can that be? Every time I hear that there are four or five percent undecided, I think that those people either don't give a shit and are not going to vote or they are going to vote and just don't want to give up who they are voting for.

That's why I didn't bother to watch, We know who these guys are. Hell, I didn't bother to watch Romney last month when we were in the same building. No conservative is going to vote for Obama because he said he doesn't give a shit about the 47% any more than any liberal would vote for Romney because he may have done better in a debate.

[Blademaker]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Had any of you bothered to read what I posted, it knocked both sides.

Yup

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Its a non partisan source. If they are mostly related to Romney, then its because he was the one that mostly stretched the truth.

I guess its easy to win a debate when a Romney figures he can say anything and then get away with it. Everything people are saying Romney nailed Obama with turns out to be bullshit or a half truth at best.

Regardless, do any of you really think there are people out there that are so out of touch that still haven't made their minds up yet? How can that be? Every time I hear that there are four or five percent undecided, I think that those people either don't give a shit and are not going to vote or they are going to vote and just don't want to give up who they are voting for.

That's why I didn't bother to watch, We know who these guys are. Hell, I didn't bother to watch Romney last month when we were in the same building. No conservative is going to vote for Obama because he said he doesn't give a shit about the 47% any more than any liberal would vote for Romney because he may have done better in a debate.

The reason they're focusing on Romney is two fold.

First Bias, we ALL have it.

Second, is because Romney was really the only candidate out there that clearly knew his facts. Sure you might disagree with the way he says something or how he perceives something, but those complaints against Romney are more an issue of perception than of facts.

Lastly, Obama was pounding Mitt for details...those same details Obama won't describe. Romney gave some of those details last night. Of course people are going to try and tear them apart, this is why politicians now speak in such generalities.

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

. No conservative is going to vote for Obama because he said he doesn't give a shit about the 47% any more than any liberal would vote for Romney because he may have done better in a debate.

BUT there maybe a couple of 'liberals' with some sense of financial reality, not the nitwits like Reid/Palosi/Frank/Dodd/Kennedy/hell most of the D party leadership.....many libs really CAN add 2+2 and cum up with the RIGHT answer....

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Stangkiller

The reason they're focusing on Romney is two fold.

First Bias, we ALL have it.

Second, is because Romney was really the only candidate out there that clearly knew his facts. Sure you might disagree with the way he says something or how he perceives something, but those complaints against Romney are more an issue of perception than of facts.

Lastly, Obama was pounding Mitt for details...those same details Obama won't describe. Romney gave some of those details last night. Of course people are going to try and tear them apart, this is why politicians now speak in such generalities.

If they were biased, they would not have been so hard on Obama.

And according to most of the people that check facts, Romney did not know the facts. Having read over the transcript, I don't see where Romney made a single point last night that was grounded in absolute truth other than maybe his comment about reducing the deficit - to which the president should have retorted that congress passes the budget.

But again, debates are increasingly pointless. Did you learn something new about Romney or Obama? No. They both said the same shit they've been saying for the last year, except for Romney who appears to have just changed his whole tax platform.

Obama left the gloves on last night, and people are giving this round to Romney as a result. I doubt he will be doing that in the next two debates. And I sincerely doubt that there are many people left that haven't already made up their minds on who they are going to vote for.

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

If they were biased, they would not have been so hard on Obama.

And according to most of the people that check facts, Romney did not know the facts. Having read over the transcript, I don't see where Romney made a single point last night that was grounded in absolute truth other than maybe his comment about reducing the deficit - to which the president should have retorted that congress passes the budget.

But again, debates are increasingly pointless. Did you learn something new about Romney or Obama? No. They both said the same shit they've been saying for the last year, except for Romney who appears to have just changed his whole tax platform.

Obama left the gloves on last night, and people are giving this round to Romney as a result. I doubt he will be doing that in the next two debates. And I sincerely doubt that there are many people left that haven't already made up their minds on who they are going to vote for.

As far as talking politics...Romney talked more "facts" last night than either campaign has for the last 4 years. You don't like his talking points? Fine, we know who you're voting for.

But as a whole, Obama just looked lost & pissed that he was even there, it shows how little he really cares about earning the presidency, he just expects it to be handed to him again.

But for the people who do care about the direction of our country it was good to see somebody trying to hold Obama accountable for his last 4 years.

Dare I ask where his cut the deficit in half promise went?

[Stangkiller]

If you take anything away from this debate, take away the fact that Romney was FAR better prepared, far better spoken, and VERY ready to take Obama to task about his last 4 years. I was a bit surprised by both how well Romney did but more so how poorly Obama did.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Stangkiller

If you take anything away from this debate, take away the fact that Romney was FAR better prepared, far better spoken, and VERY ready to take Obama to task about his last 4 years. I was a bit surprised by both how well Romney did but more so how poorly Obama did.

Better prepared how? Because he had rehearsed the lines over and over again - with "facts" that Politifact have debunked?

Are we really electing our politicians based on how well they deliver bullshit?

[Stangkiller]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Better prepared how? Because he had rehearsed the lines over and over again - with "facts" that Politifact have debunked?

Are we really electing our politicians based on how well they deliver bullshit?

No, Romney actually understood what he was talking about. When Romney would say something that debunked Obama, he was clearly unable to comprehend and debunk what Romney said, and would just repeat his prior statement.

[Loco Vette]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Better prepared how? Because he had rehearsed the lines over and over again - with "facts" that Politifact have debunked?

Are we really electing our politicians based on how well they deliver bullshit?

It happened in 2008!