I find mysloef shaking my head in disagreement more with Trump and Cruz than anyone.
I'm behind in the debate but those two seem particualarly bad.
Well, so far they've graded 21 claims (which is a fair amount) and the breakdown is:
0 True (0%)
1 Mostly true (5%)
3 Half True (16%)
4 Mostly False (21%)
8 False (42%)
3 Pants on Fire (16%)
By comparison, you could look at Hillary, whom you have gone on and on about distrusting. Politifact has fact checked (over a much longer period of time) 133 statements by Clinton.
The breakdown on those is:
39 True (29%)
29 Mostly True (22%)
26 Half True (20%)
22 Mostly False (17%)
15 False (11%)
2 Pants on Fire (2%)
I suspect that's not the comparison you want to see, as a party, if you're planning on running on the trustworthiness issue. Of course, I'm sure the fact checkers are just biased.
EDIT: Hillary's "pants on fire" includes the hilarious "I landed under sniper fire" claim. Still embarrassing 7-8 years later.
Her statements re: Benghazi, which you have brought up multiple times, were given the same grade as Carson's claims about West Point: "Mostly True"
your country is ****ed if one of these morons gets elected.
You give the POTUS too much credit. We got through 8 years of Bush. After that I think we can get by with any prez.
Our greatest ally int he world is Isreal Kasich? I disagree.
I'd place at least England, France, Poland, Japan, Australia and Canada above them.
Those probes you point to totally skirt the matter. She makes a claim of the number of Benghazi probes or the length of the probe. Who cares. What matters is whether her story about the video causing the riots was true or not. Rubio flat out called her a liar in the last Republican debate and again in an interview with Charlie Rose. Rose was stunned, as if he had no clue what Rubio was talking about. It seems beyond obvious to me that they should Politifact check what he said. Was Clinton caught in a lie or was Rubio lying about that? How come Politifact is checking these statements about Benghazi that don't matter and not paying an ounce of attention to the elephant in the room?Um, they have checked a variety of Hillary's statements on Benghazi and about the e-mail server. In my post above, I mentioned a claim about the Benghazi hearings. You seem to have just asserted that they've never checked any, which is kind of bizarre.
Here's a few statements on those topics that they've evaluated.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...n-says-john-kerry-was-first-secretary-state-/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...ton-there-have-been-7-benghazi-probes-so-far/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...y-clinton-emails-wouldnt-be-public-if-i-hadn/
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...n-campaign-benghazi-probe-congress-longest-i/