I think that it's a worthwhile exercise in politics to both a) not assume that the guy you like is always telling the truth, and b) not assume that the guy yo

I think that it's a worthwhile exercise in politics to both a) not assume that the guy you like is always telling the truth, and b) not assume that the guy you don't like is always lying My favorite (recent) reference to how to evaluate a politician's claims is this article[1] from Popehat. As a politically aware member of neither party, I've found the in many cases, diligence has been the only thing that enabled me to understand the point a political adversary was trying to make, instead of simply parroting whatever clichéd soundbite I read from whichever website that broke the news. I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't be skeptical of a politician's claims. Indeed, I would prefer that more people were more skeptical of the claims of every politician, but that means not giving a free pass to the politicians they like, and being perfectly willing to call bullshit on your favorite political agents, even if you agree with them in other areas, and even if you agree with them on the claim they're making now. Allowing our politicians the luxury of getting away unchecked with lies is dangerous, but it seems that most Americans are happy to do so if they're okay with the agenda the lie is made in support of. I really hope that changes. [1] - https://www.popehat.com/2017/01/19/how-to-read-news-like-a-search-warrant-application/ https://www.popehat.com/2017/01/19/how-to-read-news-like-a-s...