When Donald Trump supporters or undecideds call Hillary Clinton a liar...

Whenever I discuss the 2016 election with a person and he or she states matter-of-factly, "Hillary Clinton is a liar," I'm, for lack of a better word, floored. Now, is it true that Hillary Clinton has uttered falsehoods during her political career, including this current campaign? Yes, of course. But, unless we want to be naive, what politician hasn't? Saying a politician lies is like saying a dog barks, a cat meows, or wind storms tend to be quite windy. So, if a person were to tell me, "Like all other politicians, Hillary Clinton lies," that would be an accurate statement. However, that's not what most people are implying when they utter such a line. What they're saying is, "Hillary Clinton lies more than Donald Trump," which is more ridiculous than if I were to say, "Casper is more orange than an Oompa Loompa."

The Pulitzer-Prize winning fact-checking site Politifact.com has graded 266 claims made by Hillary Clinton and 285 made by Donald Trump. Here's how those numbers currently break down:

Hillary Clinton
Total: 266
True: 62 (23%)
Mostly True: 73 (27%)
Half True/Half False: 58 (22%)
Mostly False: 40 (15%)
False: 27 (10%)
Pants on Fire: 6 (2%)

Donald Trump
Total: 285
True: 12 (4%)
Mostly True: 33 (12%)
Half True/Half False: 40 (14%)
Mostly False: 51 (18%)
False: 100 (35%)
Pants on Fire: 49 (17%)

So, if we exclude the Half True/Half False grades (because which way we'd see them leaning would likely indicate some kind of bias), here's how the candidates' numbers would read:

Clinton
True/Mostly True: 50%
False/Mostly False/Pants on Fire: 27%
Net: +23%

Trump
True/Mostly True: 16%
False/Mostly False/Pants on Fire: 70%
Net: -54%

Difference: Clinton +77%/Trump -77%

Even if we were to rule all of Clinton's Half True/Half False statements as false and all of Trump's such rulings as true, Trump would still be the bigger liar between the two (Clinton: 50/50 vs. Trump 30/70) - by an astounding 20%!

Here are some other "wow" numbers when comparing the two candidates' levels of honesty:

- Donald Trump has more Pants on Fire grades (49) than True and Mostly True grades (45)

- Donald Trump has 27 more False grades (100) than Hillary Clinton has False, Mostly False, and Pants on Fire grades (73)

- If he were to make 100 claims, on average, Donald Trump would be telling the full truth just 4 times

If that weren't enough, renowned Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler, when fact-checking last night's debate, provided 25 fact-checks, 22 for Donald Trump and just 3 for Hillary Clinton. Why? Because Donald Trump lies more than Jack Nicholson washes his hands in As Good As It Gets, and to call Hillary Clinton a liar when comparing her to Trump would be like me calling Jimmy Carter a man-whore when comparing him to Charlie Sheen.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

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

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"

The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

Search This Blog