4 ms·

Only Trump statements, not including his staff [1]: Of 26 checked statements, 20 were mostly false or worse. [1] http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donal

by croon 10y ago

Only Trump statements, not including his staff [1]: Of 26 checked statements, 20 were mostly false or worse. [1] http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/ http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/stateme...

leereeves 10y ago
I did a little fact checking of Politifact: Discussing his speech in Florida, they claim he referred to a terrorist attack in Sweden. He never mentioned a terrorist attack. They said Trump's approval rating is 41% [1], cherry picking one of the lowest polls. Lower, in fact, than any recent poll listed on RCP [2]. 1: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/18/fact-checking-president-donald-trumps-florida-rall/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/18/... 2: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trum... ("Recent" not including one poll from 19 days ago, 17 days before the Politifact article, that reported 40% approval.)
- PJDK 10y ago
  Do they say he said that? All the articles I read talked about confusion about what he said and mentioned the former Prime Minister of Sweden's inference he was talking about a terrorist attack. e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/world/europe/last-night-in-sweden-trumps-remark-baffles-a-nation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/world/europe/last-night-i...
  - leereeves 10y ago
    Their entire fact check is about terrorist attacks, omitting crime or other "problems" (the word Trump used). http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/feb/19/donald-trump/donald-trump-florida-rally-laments-attack-last-nig/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/feb/... And the Fox News report (which is mentioned by Politifact) Trump later referred to is about crime. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI
- croon 10y ago
  His approval rating ranges between 40-50 in your second link, and is at 42% on both Gallup and Pew Research (which he himself has used when it fit him). And regarding Florida: "Look around you... Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy... look at leereeves last night, would you believe it?" Am I referring to you as a serial killer?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - leereeves 10y ago
    The only 40 in my second link is from 17 days before the article. Recent? I don't know where 41 came from exactly but I know that at that same time, Rasmussen was reporting 53% approval. How did Politifact choose? As for Florida: > They’re having problems like they never thought possible. He said problems, not attacks. And the Politifact article was written after (and even mentioned) Trump said he was referring to a Fox News report [1] about problems in Sweden, which isn't about terrorism. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI
    - croon 10y ago
      > The only 40 in my second link is from 17 days before the article. Recent? Sure, and tomorrow it might be 20, or 60. You can only use previously existing data. > I don't know where 41 came from exactly but I know that at that same time, Rasmussen was reporting 53% approval. How did Politifact choose? I'm assuming the Gallup poll they link to stated 41 at the time of publication. That's the beauty of sourcing. You can always verify it. Step two is knowing if Gallup is trustworthy, that's where your RCP comes in, which puts it against other sources, most of which we recognize. Further steps would be sourcing their respective data, etc. > He said problems, not attacks. In the same breath as specifically cities with attacks in recent years. But even ignoring that, let's say he wasn't inferring attacks, then: * What problems? * What specifically about last night? "Problems" in the area he was talking about (unrest) usually means attack, so it's not an unreasonable assumption about what he meant. He of course later stated he was referring to a Fox News segment. How that makes it better is beyond me though, seeing as: * The segment was blatantly lying. [1] * He can get briefings from 11 intelligence agencies. * Sweden has crime statistics and is generally considered one of the least corrupt states in the west. [2] [1] http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/swedish-police-featured-in-fox-news-segment-filmmaker-is-a-madman/ http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/swedish-police-featured... [2] http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016 http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_percepti...

by croon 10y ago

leereeves 10y ago

I did a little fact checking of Politifact: Discussing his speech in Florida, they claim he referred to a terrorist attack in Sweden. He never mentioned a terrorist attack. They said Trump's approval rating is 41% [1], cherry picking one of the lowest polls. Lower, in fact, than any recent poll listed on RCP [2]. 1: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/18/fact-checking-president-donald-trumps-florida-rall/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/feb/18/... 2: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trum... ("Recent" not including one poll from 19 days ago, 17 days before the Politifact article, that reported 40% approval.)

PJDK 10y ago
Do they say he said that? All the articles I read talked about confusion about what he said and mentioned the former Prime Minister of Sweden's inference he was talking about a terrorist attack. e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/world/europe/last-night-in-sweden-trumps-remark-baffles-a-nation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/world/europe/last-night-i...
- leereeves 10y ago
  Their entire fact check is about terrorist attacks, omitting crime or other "problems" (the word Trump used). http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/feb/19/donald-trump/donald-trump-florida-rally-laments-attack-last-nig/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/feb/... And the Fox News report (which is mentioned by Politifact) Trump later referred to is about crime. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI
croon 10y ago
His approval rating ranges between 40-50 in your second link, and is at 42% on both Gallup and Pew Research (which he himself has used when it fit him). And regarding Florida: "Look around you... Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy... look at leereeves last night, would you believe it?" Am I referring to you as a serial killer?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- leereeves 10y ago
  The only 40 in my second link is from 17 days before the article. Recent? I don't know where 41 came from exactly but I know that at that same time, Rasmussen was reporting 53% approval. How did Politifact choose? As for Florida: > They’re having problems like they never thought possible. He said problems, not attacks. And the Politifact article was written after (and even mentioned) Trump said he was referring to a Fox News report [1] about problems in Sweden, which isn't about terrorism. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSzjfAMk-RI
  - croon 10y ago
    > The only 40 in my second link is from 17 days before the article. Recent? Sure, and tomorrow it might be 20, or 60. You can only use previously existing data. > I don't know where 41 came from exactly but I know that at that same time, Rasmussen was reporting 53% approval. How did Politifact choose? I'm assuming the Gallup poll they link to stated 41 at the time of publication. That's the beauty of sourcing. You can always verify it. Step two is knowing if Gallup is trustworthy, that's where your RCP comes in, which puts it against other sources, most of which we recognize. Further steps would be sourcing their respective data, etc. > He said problems, not attacks. In the same breath as specifically cities with attacks in recent years. But even ignoring that, let's say he wasn't inferring attacks, then: * What problems? * What specifically about last night? "Problems" in the area he was talking about (unrest) usually means attack, so it's not an unreasonable assumption about what he meant. He of course later stated he was referring to a Fox News segment. How that makes it better is beyond me though, seeing as: * The segment was blatantly lying. [1] * He can get briefings from 11 intelligence agencies. * Sweden has crime statistics and is generally considered one of the least corrupt states in the west. [2] [1] http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/swedish-police-featured-in-fox-news-segment-filmmaker-is-a-madman/ http://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/nyheter/swedish-police-featured... [2] http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016 http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_percepti...