Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

rocktivity

(44,585 posts)

8. But by their OWN admission, "more" can have more than one meaning in this case

Reply to grantcart (Reply #5)

Wed Feb 8, 2012, 04:28 PM

Feb 2012

Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2012, 10:28 PM - Edit history (11)

Did Obama put out a LARGER NUMBER of negative ads? Yes. Then in terms of the NUMBER of ads, Rubio's statement is 100% true.

But were Obama's ads more negative IN SUBSTANCE than everyone else's? Based on their research, they say no. Then in terms of the SUBSTANCE of the ads, Rubio's statement is 100% FALSE.

That leaves ONLY ONE possible rating for Rubio's statement -- based on their own criteria, it HAS to be "HALF true!"

rocktivity

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Politifact strikes again! [View all] Proud Liberal Dem Feb 2012 OP

This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Feb 2012 #1

I can't wrap my head around it either Proud Liberal Dem Feb 2012 #2

Another Epic Fail! One of the 99 Feb 2012 #3

Politifact EC Feb 2012 #4

the whole statement grantcart Feb 2012 #5

But by their OWN admission, "more" can have more than one meaning in this case rocktivity Feb 2012 #8

It's unfortunate a site like politifact has become so obviously flawed... Drunken Irishman Feb 2012 #6

is there a way to make them as reviled of a source as FoxNews? Obama3_16 Feb 2012 #7