Skip to main content

The fact is that the Romney/Ryan ticket is far less honest than the Obama/Biden one

Courtesy of fact-checker Politifact.com and some nerds with time on their hands, a study was just released which showcases that of the two tickets in this year's presidential election, the Republican one is far less honest than the Democratic one. Unlike many I know, I won't just stand by my talking point. I will back it up with evidence. I know - there's a shocker, right?

If one isn't familiar with Politifact.com, they separate their honesty grades in the following six categories: 1) True (completely true), 2) Mostly True, 3) Half True, 4) Mostly False, 5) False and 6 ) Pants On Fire (a statement that went above and beyond even just calling it completely false).

Since President Obama has been in office for going on four years, he and Biden have a much greater number of overall grades - 505 at this point, whereas Romney and Ryan have a collected 223 such grades.

To this point, of all 505 Obama and Biden statements that have been graded by the site, 227 of them are either mostly or completely true, which is equal to 43.0%. Of all the comments they had graded, 145 were labeled as mostly false, false or pants on fire, which is equal to 28.7%. So, for the time being, the Obama/Biden ticket is at +14.3% when comparing their honest to their dishonest statements.

For the Republican ticket, one can pretty much reverse those percentages. Of their 223 graded statements, only 65 have been labeled as either true or mostly true (29.1%) and 98 have been categorized as mostly false, false or pants on fire (43.9%). So, the ticket is currently at -14.8% when comparing their honest to dishonest statements, for an overall difference of 29.1% in favor of the Democratic ticket on the honesty front. What may be the most jarring number of them all is that of the 505 graded statements made by President Obama and Vice President Biden, only 10 have been labeled as "pants on fire," which is equal to 2.0%. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have only had 223 statements graded - that's 282 fewer than Obama and Biden. Yet, the Republican ticket has made 19 statements that have been labeled as "pants on fire" (8.5%), almost twice the number of the Obama/Biden ticket and with 282 fewer statements that have been graded. At this rate, if and when Romney/Ryan amass 505 graded statements, they will have to their credit 43 that are labeled "pants on fire" - over four times that of Obama and Biden. Here's a breakdown of the numbers below:

True/Mostly True
1. Obama/Biden (227 of 505): 43.0%
2. Romney/Ryan (65 of 223): 29.1% (-13.9%)

Mostly False/False/Pants On Fire
1. Romney/Ryan (98 of 223): 43.9% (+15.2%)
2. Obama/Biden (145 of 505): 28.7%

Net Difference
1. Obama/Biden: 43.0% (honest)/28.7% (dishonest) = +14.3%
2. Romney/Ryan: 29.1% (honest)/43.9% (dishonest) = -14.8%

Difference of 29.1%

http://www.eclectablog.com/2012/10/politifact-tells-the-tale-obamabiden-lead-in-truth-department-romneyryan-tell-more-lies-chart.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html