I’m with Maddow on this. If you wish to show the “relative accuracy of a political claim” don’t use such devices as a “meter,” which implies high precision.  Provide some context. I don’t see how 2 false claims somehow add up to mostly true unless you are providing some interpretation. 

The country has for the most part  been a “center-right” nation for a long time. Slightly more moderates lean Democrat than Republican, but this Zogby poll has been ongoing for 20 years now, and the results have stayed the same. Not all conservatives are the rabid tea-bagging racist homophobis 1%ers liberals think they are; the vast majority are reasonable middle-class people who are socially moderate and just think the government is out of control.

P.S. Before you start ranting about how Bush made the government bigger, we know. Not many conservatives agree with Bush’s economic decisions, they just think that he was a good man who did the best he could under horrible times (which yes, in hindsight, meant overreacting on many points). Conservatives just get defensive at the liberal narrative that Bush was somehow the dumbest person ever yet was sinisterly clever enough to trick most of the country and the world into going along with his evil genocidal warmongering revenge-seeking schemes.

In other words they used Jon Kyl “This is not intended to be a factual statement” politifacts fact thingy… ?

56% of Americans identify themselves as moderate or liberal. Now THIS is the real majority. Politifact, shame on you. 

They used the ‘its closer to truth than it is to untruth’ standard.  MSNBC uses the standard of what does the DNC or White House tell us to say?

Baloney.   Politifact isn’t  making an empirical analysis.   If it did, it would have acknowledged its errors and admitted that less than 50 is not a majority.  I thank Rachael for alerting the public to the fraudulent Politifact analyses.

The karate kid just can’t handle the fact that she is part of a small minority. 

Horrible times created by him and the GOP.  Let’s not forget that over 21 elected or appointed GOP officials were criminally convicted under Bush’s watch, and he tanked the economy due to his administration’s policy of lax oversight. 

MSNBC doesn’t deal with facts. 

It’s so good to know that Politico is staying on top of today’s most important news stories.

What a moronic statement!  By that standard 75% of Americans are conservative or moderate – now see how stupid your statement sounds?

I’d like to see Fox News run corrections like Rachel Maddow does. If she is wrong about something, she makes it a point to say so on the air.  The first thing she asks her guests is “Did I get anything wrong in my intro?” and lets them respond.  She has a standing invitation to all Republicans to come on her show. Yeah, a real piece of work there.

I used to value Politifacts truthometer, but ever since their last lie of the year crap and constant onslaught from Maddow, it’s starting to leave a negative taste.

Neither does Politifact, it seems. That is the entire point.

Politico? 

Butch Maddow put up this phoney outrage over some picky semantics, to give cover for the real outrage of whats going on at mediamatters.

So does this mean Maddow gets to do a follow-up post for Andrew Breitbart after his Big Journalism site did a takedown of PolitiFact a month ago? While it’s interesting to see Rachel and John Nolte on the same side of the argument, it’s also worth noting the outrage by Maddow didn’t arrive until her own digital ox was being gored.

The point is that a majority of people can be called Moderate or Liberal, and a majority of people can be called Conservative to Moderate. But saying that a majority of Americans are Conservative is Mostly True is absurd. 40% is NOT a majority.

 What’s Maddow’s sexuality got anything to do anything? You Reich-wing Republican bigots can go straight to hell.

*** 
‘We Don’t Expect Our Readers To Agree With Every Ruling’***

That’s not a matter of agreeing with every ruling!  It’s a matter of TWO WRONGS  don’t make a “MOSTLY  RIGHT”!!!! 

I call them PolitiFAKE, because they truly don’t need the word ‘FACT’ anywhere in their name!

Neither does it take 60 votes to pass a budget in the Senate.  Care to explain that to Harry Reid and the White House?  They are so clueless on budgeting they don’t even know how to pass a budget.

On the facts issue, I would say that MSNBC has had more factual statements than FOX (the unbiased network) ever did or will ever admit.     Anything Maddow states can be immediately checked.    Many things heard on FOX News has been subjective statements and pushed by FOX and Friends as fact.     For instance, FOX and Friends will say something like, “I heard that the POTUS has been lying about the budget”(for example)…then someone else will say, “Yes, I heard the same thing.”   then they’ll leave it there…..knowing full well that it was the opinion of a rabid conservative like Rush Limbaugh or Hannity.   They will leave the audience thinking, “I heard that the POTUS lied about the budget.”     That’s how they do it on FOX…especially on FOX and Friends.    I’ve heard this tactic used many times on the network on many issues.

Fair enough. Same goes for Obama somehow being an America hating Muslim AND a MarxistSocialistNazi at the same time. Now, lets’ get ole’ George to endorse one of these “conservatives” that’s running for POTUS. No? Why not?

Including Breitbart and Maddow in the same sentence is an insult to Maddow and other real journalists everywhere in the country.

You may not expect everyone to agree with your ruling, but to say that 40% is most Americans is alittle over-the-top.    Besides, why bother with a clown like Marco (Tea Party) Rubio who is thankful that medicare saved his mother, but then says that medicare makes Americans weak.     Or, the same Rubio who has signed onto the Blunt bill which says employers have a say so whether women can receive contraceptive care.

Sometimes they are correct in their facts, but when they are wrong, they should just admit it and not defend the mistake….as when Maddow plainly, and logically  pointed out on the Rubio comment.

Actually the Politifact flare up started after they gored Jon Stewart first.  Then they gored Rachel and then all hell has broken loose.  Politifact should get out of the business of fact checking since that is not what they do any longer.  If you take two things that are false, how does that make it mostly true and if you take two things that are factually true, how does that make something false.  Politifacts should close shop.

How do you figure that moderates + liberals equals a majority?

Gallup has 40% Conservative, 35% Moderate and 21% Liberal. And from that you conclude that there’s a liberal majority?  Silly progressive.

So, 75% of Americans identify themselves as moderate or conservative. Now THIS is the real majority! Or something. That’s how it works, right?

Apparently Politifact uses the old axiom, two negatives make a positive.

 Split the moderates into leaners, and there you have it.

Oh, for God’s sake! If you are ‘factual’, everyone has to agree with you. If it is in an area with geniune disagreement, then it is not a settled fact and you shouldn’t go there. If you say 40% is ‘most’, that is factually wrong. 

1 ) what is worse, using a meter, or having segments called “World’s Worst Person,” and “PsychoTalk”?

2) Every PolitiFact “meter” is accompanied by an entire article explaining how it arrived at their conclusion.  So yes – they provide context, and a ton of interpreation. 

From the article itself:

“For 2011, Gallup found that the largest group of Americans identify as conservative, at 40 percent. Another 35 percent identify as moderate, while 21 percent identify as liberal.

* * *

We have two nits to pick with Rubio’s statement, though. First, he said a majority of Americans are conservatives. In Gallup’s poll, the number has never crossed the 50 percent threshold. Technically, he would be more accurate if he said a plurality of Americans are conservative.
* * *

Rubio said that the majority of Americans are conservative. A respected ongoing poll from Gallup shows that conservatives are the largest ideological group, but they don’t cross the 50 percent threshold. So we rate his statement Mostly True.”

What error should it have admitted?  I bet you didn’t actually read the article – did you?  You just mindleslly make up your mind about things based on what Rachael Maddow says?   

You forgot the chalk board, teabagger!

Those are all opinion based shows that are not scripted. The hosts will say what they want and sometimes will misstate facts. Happens on all the networks. The news reports though should be accurate and unbiased with no opinion. Everyday MSNBC runs 3 hours of news reports. Fox runs 7 hours of news reports throughout the day. To me, this shows msnbc is more concerned with spreading their opinions to viewers rather than telling straight news. 

I’m not counting Andrea Mitchell’s 1 hour show and Megyn Kelly’s 2 hour show in the news reports. These two tend to let their opinion slip in. Their programs could have some bias. 

Please educate them!  Politifact—- Please refrain from the use of word “FACT” in your title.

http://3chicspolitico.com/2012/02/15/politifact-pushes-half-truths-are-they-on-the-gop-dole-2/

Rightwing PolitiHACK

I did read the article.  And my point is still accurate.  “Rubio said that the majority of Americans are conservative.  “. . . . but they don’t cross the 50 percent threshold,” which would necessary to be a majority.  Hence the statement is false, not “mostly true.”  You watch too much Palin and Fox TV.  It’s affected your brain, if you have one. 

Everyday MSNBC runs 3 hours of news reports. Fox runs 7 hours of news reports throughout the day. To me, this shows msnbc is more concerned with spreading their opinions to viewers rather than telling straight news.

I hope you didn’t choke from the rank of bullsh#& as you wrote this comment.

Except that it’s accurate — Rachel had no problem with PolitFact until it started going after targets she backed. Then she discovered the same problem with it that the Breitbart sites had been pointing out — you can’t claim to be the ultimate arbiter of truth, because anyone who does on the left or right bring their own biases into the judgment.

Kudos for Maddow for seeing the light. But do note that Nolte still thinks PolitFact is crap even after it’s gone after targets on the left. Hopefully, Rachel will be as ethically consistent and not go back to citing PolitFact as some sort of Absolute Moral Authority the next time it targets a conservative story and/or position.

It’s not “picky semantics”, it’s objective fact. 40% is not a majority. It’s not even “almost a majority”. 40% of Americans being conservative means 60% are not.

The error that they should have admitted is that they rated an objectively false statement as “Mostly True”, when it was in fact entirely false. The “Mostly True” rating is supposed to be for statements that are correct, but leave out some context. Not for statements that are false, but 10 percentage points away from being true.

Split the moderate into leaners, and you still don’t get a conservative majority. You get about 45% conservatives and conservative-leaning. PolitiFarce even acknowledge that. Yet they still rated Rubio’s false statement “Mostly True”.

Yes, it does take 60 votes. Because every attempt to pass a budget has been filibustered, and it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster.

No, MSNBC uses the standard “is it true?” PolitiFarce used the standard “it’s not actually true, but it’s almost close enough to pretend.”

“Center-right country” is just a Republican refrain to claim they have majority support regardless of whether it’s true at any given time or for any given issue. It’s a talking point, not a fact.

Adair’s “defense” just proves Maddow’s point. PolitiFarce is wrong, they know they’re wrong, but they refuse to admit it and move on.

That context and interpretation often betrays a startling level of subjectivity and shoulder-shrugging, however. That’s fine if they wanted to be seen as a political opinion blog (no shame in that, I write political opinion all the time), but they strenuously declare themselves arbiters of fact in the world of politics. Maddow is absolutely right about this, and there’s dozens of other examples she could draw on if she wanted to.

Also, I agree that Psycho Talk and World’s Worst are stupid names, even if such segments might be useful independent of the heightened intensity.

In response to you P.S. — almost everything you said in defense of conservative fondness for Bush I think would reflect an honest, if grudging analysis of Obama from a conservative. It does bother me that things like the Tea Party didn’t really exist while Bush was President, but I’ll take you word for it that you disagreed with his economic policy.

Glad you mentioned this, even though it’s wholly irrelevant to this argument, because PolitiFact gave Jack Lew a straight “false” rating for saying it took 60 votes. Now, I think a reasonable case could be made that Lew meant to comment on Senate gridlock (the 60 vote supermajority needed to beat the filibuster threat). However, PolitiFact gave him the false rating saying that his “language was precise,” and he was wrong. This is a shocking double standard when compared to Rubio’s remarks. I’m not saying they have a partisan bias, to be clear. I’m saying they’re inept in this area.

Funny it was alright when a “majority” of voters voted for Bill clinton his first time.

majority, plurality. the substance of the piece was to report that there are more conservatives than libs. So politifact reporting that it was “mostly true” is accurate.

So Butch makes a big deal out of nothing by trying to change the premise of the whole report…Which the left wing is famous for and is another Alinsky diversionary move to have some sort of equivlency to what MM has been doing for years.

He’s sorta right. The only news programs that MS runs are:
9am Daily Rundown
10am Jansing & Co
11am MSNBC Live
1pm *Andrea Mitchell**
2pm News Nation

5 hours

Fox:
9-11am America’s Newsroom
11-1pm Happening Now
1pm-3pm *America Live*
3-4pm Studio B
6-6:30 Bret Baier (not counting panel from 6:407)
7-8p FOX Report.

 8.5

Hey come on now, lets find some common ground. What’s your beef?

I like your website. I’m from TX. 

Presidents aren’t elected by popular vote. Even you’re smart enough to know that.

And the substance of the piece was that Rubio claimed the majority are conservatives. That’s a lie. The majority of Americans are not conservatives.

Given that the facts are so firmly against the right-wingers, they have to change the subject in any way possible.

No, it’s PolitiFarce that doesn’t deal with facts. Nor do you, apparently.

Facts are facts, so I don’t understand this “we don’t expect all of our readers to agree with us” crap. I think they’re more interested in “saving face” than admitting a mistake when they’re called out for it.  
They’ve consistently misrepresented the “facts” and they hold ZERO credibility with me.

The thing is, Fox’s “straight news” shows are just as biased and inaccurate as their opinion shows.

It takes a Senate leader to put something up for a vote in the first place, which is the ultimate filibuster.

go back to kinder math, it may make some sense to you

Well that just like…your opinion man

As a conservative, I would argue we are a center-left country. I’d also argue thatamy that self identify as conservative are themselves more liberal than they’d like you to believe. Proof? Ron Paul hasn’t won a single primary and too many “conservatives” consider him a loon. A loon? He’s the only true conservative candidate for president. Most Americans, even so-called conservatives support some sort of government welfare or overreach; whether it’s in the form ofoney and services provided by the goverment or the imperialistic nature of our foreign policy. There are very few real conservatives out there. Just a large percentage that call themselves conservative.

Is anyone else getting tired of the phrase “epic takedown”?  If you call everything an epic takedown doesn’t that kinda dilute the whole meaning of the phrase??

This seems a little silly.  Rachel has her panties (or is she more of a boxers girl?) all in a wad over this because she just can’t stand that more people don’t self-identify as liberal.  Despite the fact that  there isn’t a simple majority (meaning > 50%), there is a plurality.  And in the looseness of today’s English language (remember coincidence vs ironic?).  People understand the term majority.  Plurality?  Not quite as much.  This is just a case of sour lemons for our little liberal friend, Rachel.

That’s the thing about these self-identifications. There’s no consensus about what it actually means to be a conservative, a liberal, or a moderate. 40% consider themselves conservatives in those polls, but you ask any two of them what the definition of a conservative is, I guarantee you wouldn’t get the same answer.

I mostly agree w you. I think from person to the other there would be some differences in opinion. But I would also say that the 40% that say conservative know what they mean. They only think that conservative means conservative like Bush or McCain; Hannity or Rush. None of these are real conservatives. They all believe in government largesse and imperialism.

Cal, in case your head is till stuck up in your a_s, just yesterday, a Media Matters employee reported that they write most of the content for the MSNBC talking heads.  The basis of the article is how their sole purpose is to:  “Liberal media watchdog group Media Matters once contemplated harassing Fox News employees with yard signs in their neighborhoods, hiring private investigators to dig into their personal lives and retaining a “major law firm” to study legal action against the network.”Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/14/media-matters-memo-reportedly-detailed-plan-to-target-fox-news-staff/#ixzz1mVGWGosq 

The story originated at Teh Daily Caller.  Yeah, Cal, that really sounds like a legitimate news organization.  Why are they afraid of Fox News?  Too much of the truth hurts, don’t it?

I’m not fan of Bush but having said that during the 8 years of the Bush administration the nation debt increased by just under $4.5 trillion to $10.24 trillion. Not good, but in just 3 years and 1 month of the Obama administration the national debt has increased by over $5.3 trillion to $15.35 trillion. And it is the first time in our history, I believe, that for 3 years this country has been without a budget. And the first  time ever as a country that our yearly deficit has been over a trillion dollars and it has been well over a trillion for 3 years in a row with no end in sight.  I’m no Bush fan but give me a break. The only real difference between a RINO progressive and Democrat/Socialist is that we get to the abyss faster with Obama verse Bush.

Even the 2008 crisis and TURP and stimulus spending, to be 5 trillion over budget in 3 years is inexcusable.  Bailing out Union pensions and loaning questionable “green companies” our tax payer dollar is not the responsibility of the federal government.

Now, personally I consider Bill Clinton more of a conservative democrat vs the current socialist/marxist president. At at a minimum Clinton was more fiscally responsible then our last couple of presidents. The more liberal side of Clinton was his wife.

The fiscal crisis of 2008 was 30 years in the making with Government helping to create a housing bobble to Wall Street greed not being regulated properly with the existing regulations for fear of disrupting the housing bubble they thought would never end. There is blame all around for that crisis. No one party is only responsible. And if you don’t think Obama doesn’t have his share of Wall Street cronies think again. I wonder so many Goldman Sachs executives has had Obama’s ears. Just Google “Goldman Sachs and Obama”.

Goldman Sachs was one of the big players on the Mortgage Back Securities market that took down Wall Street. Heck, they were a major player in creating them. They were also one of the first to realize they had a worthless produce once Sub-prime mortgages were being mixed in. They alerted no one. They had billions of Securities insured through AIG and what they didn’t have insured they started dumping them to any hedge fund and Securities broker that didn’t have a clue.

But, my point is this.  If you compare Bush to smelling like a big fart in a small enclosed  room with his unfunded programs, getting into one wrong war and he crony capitalism then I say Obama smells like his just crapped in his pant in that same room with his obscene crony capitalism, his unwillingness to come up or agree on real spending cuts, his wiliness to treat the constitution like it’s toilet paper. His willingness to spend our money like it can be printed from a giant printing press has no equal.

Even if the Government took or confiscated all the money from those making over $10 million a year they would only take in $240 billion additional dollars. Enough to ran the government for around 16 days. So even if you stick it to the richwe still have to cut way more than the $38 Billion Obama was willing to cut during last years budget talks.

The unemployment numbers for January looked better last weeks after reporting 243,000 jobs were added making the unemployment rate go from 8.9 to 8.3. Which looks good for Obama and those that support him. But those numbers don’t support a .6% drop in unemployment. But with another look we find in the numbers that the American workforce declined by a recorded 1.2 million workers in one month. A huge unprecedented decline. Some say the workforce numbers were fudged downward to make the unemployment rate look smaller thinking most would not look at the raw numbers and certainly not the MSM so the “drop” in unemployment rate can be exploited. But even if the number were not fudged losing 1.2 million from our workforce in one month is really, really bad and with our mounting debt a bigger disaster than what happened in 2008 is coming. Just look at Europe now!

Not only has Obama already surpassed Bush in the deficit spending he already played many more rounds of golf in 3 years then Bush did in 8. I don’t really care about that but it just goes to show how Bush could be criticized by the MSM  for simply playing “too much” golf and hardly a boo from the them when Obama already has him beat on that issue as well. Not really equal treatment.

Of course I have once again been long winded and could go on and on. I apologize for any grammar or spelling errors. 

Really, it doesn’t matter what she says, anyway.  Nobody watches her show.

Ms/Mr Maddow the Mickey Mouse Club of Journalism.  What a waste of time for someone who supposedly has a PHd in Political Science.   I think it stands for Piled Higher and Deeper in Liberal Left Land.

That’s right, the story originated at the Daily Caller. The Daily Caller apparently made up the story, since they provided no actual sources for any of their claims. You don’t actually think the Daily Caller is credible, do you?

No, the thing she has a problem with is that Politi”Fact” claimed that a lie was true. It doesn’t matter if the average American knows what “plurality” means. The fact remains that a plurality is not a majority. Conservatives are a minority. Yet PolitiFarce says it’s “Mostly True” to call conservatives a majority.

Liberal Mantra……..
 If I can’t win
I don’t want to play

Well what does mostly true mean, anyway? It’s either true or false. In the context that PolitiFact judges the truth/falsehood of a claim, I think under the umbrella of “mostly true” you have to give them the benefit of the doubt that plurality equals majority with the informal use of the word.
But just to remind you, my point was really that this whole thing is silly. Not that PolitiFact is right or wrong. Maddow is just a sore loser.

Your a PUTZ.. Go suck your mothers tit !!!

Hi,

Fox News’ opinion shows and their news shows are coordinated to reflect and reinforce whatever  their producers  want to reflect and reinforce, which is usually what  Ailes and Rove want people to believe.  The stories the “news” side chooses to cover, and those they choose not to cover, is their method of helping propel the more overt right-wing talking points voiced over and over during the opinion shows.

Naive viewers recognize only the most overt demagoguery in the opinion shows.  The more subtle methods employed by the news shows are too covert for the less astute to notice.

However, that doesn’t mean that those methods are really subtle or very covert.  It’s just that those who are blinded by ignorance, ideology or lack or intellect can’t, or choose not to, see them.

Why do think they are not credible?  I’m betting that you just don’t like them, and that’s enough for you to discredit them. 

Why do you say they “apparently” made up the story?  I guess you know that because you don’t like the story…  Am I correct?  I hate to inform you, Cal, but just because your head is up your a_s doesn’t mean that The Daily Caller is not credible.  On the MM website, THEY are not even defending themselves from this story. Perhaps it’s becasue they can’t.  Most every story on their site is something about Fox News.They do seem to be obsessed with Fox News.

C’mon, Cal, surely you can do better than this. 

FYI, Cal, they are not naming their sources to protect confidentiality.  This is a very common practice in the news media, and MSNBC does it, too–as well as most other news agencies.  Cal, YOU are the only one in this discussion who is not providing factual information.  Your opinion is not enough, Cal. 

You are mistaken; Ph.D stands for ‘philosophiae doctor’.

“HIV/AIDS and health care reform in British and American prisons” is the title of her thesis for which she was conferred a Doctor of Philosophy in politics from Oxford University in 2001.

Media Matters “isn’t defending themselves against” this story because it’s not even worth responding to. And you can say they’re not naming their sources to “protect” those sources, but the reality is that extraordinary claims require extraordinarily credible sources.

According to PolitiFact’s own definitions of their ratings, a rating of “Mostly True” means “The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.”

That very clearly is not the case for Marco Rubio’s statement that the majority of Americans identify as conservatives. Rubio simply got that wrong. Perhaps I went too far in saying before that Rubio lied. He may have simply been mistaken. But the fact remains, his statement was untrue.

According to PolitiFact’s own definitions of their ratings, a rating of “Mostly True” means “The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.”

That very clearly is not the case for Marco Rubio’s statement that the majority of Americans identify as conservatives. Rubio simply got that wrong. Perhaps I went too far in saying before that Rubio lied. He may have simply been mistaken. But the fact remains, his statement was untrue.

Politifact investigates the statement…”The majority of Americans are Conservative”.  Politifact’s Investigation reveals that …”40% of Americans consider themselves Conservative”.  Politifact Concludes the statement is…”mostly True”.

Politifact investigates the statement …”2+2=6″. Politifact’s investigation reveals that …”2+2=4″. Politifact’s concludes the statement is…”mostly True”.

Politifact investigates the statement…”The majority of Conservatives support Mitt Romney for President” Politifact’s investigation reveals that “38% of Conservatives support Romney for President”. Politifact concludes statement is…”mostly True”.

Politifact investigates the statement…”4+8=15″ PolitIfact’s investigation reveals…”4+8=12″. Politifact concludes the statement is…”mostly True”.

Politifact investigate’s the statement that a “majority equals 38% or higher”. Politifact’s investigation reveals that a…”50+ or higher constitutes a majority”. Politifact concludes the statement is…”mostly True”.

However, in this day and age with Home schooling and the sheer rejection of science by Conservatives it is no wonder we get results like Politifact puts out. Many Conservatives have a hard time wrapping their minds around the fact that planes can fly. Want to scare the bejesus out of a Conservative, the next time we experience a solar eclipse tell him/her you are going to make the sun disappear.

Whats the typical error rate on these things? 4-5%?  So maybe the 40 is really 45% according to the poll.  What are the chances that another 6% are conservative but not indicating as such…. or that 6% of the ”moderates” actually lean conservative???
Face it Butch…. there is a high probability that Rubio is absolutely correct.  Furthermore it’s his opinion anyway so stop getting your jock strap in a wad.

So Rubio states an opinion that the country is mostly conservative …. and he’s a “liar”??    Allowing for statistical error, suppression of true belief and conservative leaning moderates….. he could very well be correct.
You however are wrong anyway you look at it. What’s more is your a sore losing liberal phucknut

agree

lol

Scroll down, moron. I already acknowledged that I went too far in calling him a liar. It’s possible that he was just mistaken instead. But he is wrong either way.

No, statistical error would not make him potentially right. 40% is well outside the margin of error for making conservatives a majority. Also, given that Gallup has polled this question numerous times over the years and never gets a majority for conservatives, that’s a good sign conservatives are not, in fact, the majority. Likewise, when you split moderates into conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning, you get about 45% for each side, with 10% who don’t identify as leaning either way. Still not a majority. And “suppression of true belief”? If you mean identifying as something other than what you actually are, if anything that boosts conservative numbers. Given that liberal policy ideas tend to poll at majority support.

And how an I be a “sore loser” when I’m not losing? Look at the polls right now. Obama would have a hard time losing this election if he tried. And when he wins reelection easily, that’s probably going to mean a wipeout of Republicans in down-ticket elections. As in, say goodbye to that House majority you’ve been using to cause so much damage to America.

Yo Cal…. both yourself and Mr Maddcow need to get a dictionary and a life.

a·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.Rubio is 100% accurate according to Websters dictionary.Now submit your apology and do 50 push-ups you sry phuck

Someone needs to run a survey on how many PolitiFact cases target conservatives and liberals and how often it finds conservatives to be liars and liberals to be truth tellers. I certainly can’t say with any documented accuracy, but my guess would be that the organization actually targets conservatives as liars and then runs just enough liberal criticism to keep from looking obviously biased. Why is this an assumption? PolitiFact is owned and operated by the extreme liberal Tampa Bay Times, a newspaper that takes a dogmatic view of liberal politics. This means that it favors the liberal point of view on every issue, regardless of the facts. And that’s fine. It’s a private enterprise and is entitled to take whatever position it cares to. And until someone runs a full survey of PolitiFact, one cannot say with 100% certainty that the job of its employes is to fellate American liberals. But there is enough circumstance here to warrant an investigation, and one should be done. I’m sure the folks at PolitiFact would protest that they’re completely independent of the Times’ editorial policies, but as long as you’re picking up your paycheck from those people your integrity is in question.

Now try and be objective, which I know may be difficult. If you ask the question what if the percentage is actually 45%? Then you must ask the question what if the actual number is 35%, according to your margin of error? It’s very generous of you to adjust the numbers in your favor. But even in doing so you still don’t come up with a majority. And Rubio’s ststement was that a majority of American’s are Conservative. I know how you pray that it were so, but the facts remain that is just not the case. And realizing that this data is fluid it could change and a majority of Americans could become Conservative, but conversely the opposite could come true as well.

Dictionary says you and Mr Maddcow are wrong 

a·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)
n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.Please issue your apology and stop drinking his cool-aid

Rubio is 100% correct according to Websters dictionary:

ma·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.***    put down the coolaid my man

By that definition, Rubio certainly is not right. 40% is not a majority by any definition.

No, the dictionary says I’m right. Unless you’re just so bad at math that you think 40% is “more than half of the total”.

sure but Mr Maddcow and MSNBC will say things like “Rubio is wrong to say conservatives are a majority….. even thou everyone agrees he was 100% correct.
eerrrrrrr …well after reading the definiton of Majority anyway…….

ma·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.

But once we educate ourselves and realize that Rubio was 100% correct:

ma·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.***** do we really expect Mr Maddcow to admit she was wrong??? yet again??Never happen.

You’re spamming the same idiocy, and you’re still wrong. Go back to school and take a math class. 40% is not a majority. It is not “more than half”. It is a minority. Less than half.

he didn’t say “most”….. he said conservatives are the majority. He’s 100% correct according to the dictionary:

a·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.

I was clearly adjusting the possibilities in the conservative direction…. simply to suggest that he could very well be correct even w/in Maddcow’s definition.

Bottom line: Rubio is 100% correct according to Webster’s dictionary:

ma·jor·i·ty

(m-jôr-t, -jr-)

n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half
of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes
cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the
most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal
age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a
major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater;
superiority.Eat that objectivity Bruce!

suggest you look at:

3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength

You and your boyfriend are clearly wrong and Rubio was clearly right according to Websters dictionary.

suggest you look at:

3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength

You and your boyfriend are clearly wrong and Rubio was clearly right according to Websters dictionary.

suggest you look at:

3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength

You and your boyfriend are clearly wrong and Rubio was clearly right according to Websters dictionary.

This is an outrage!!!!!!
If PolictiFact, Mr Maddcow and everyone else would simply look up the definition of Majority, they would see that Rubio’s statement should have been rated 100% true…. Note #3

ma·jor·i·ty
(m-jôr-t, -jr-)n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties 1. The greater number or part; a number more than half of the total.2. The amount by which the greater number of votes cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.4. Law The status of having reached full legal age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.5. The military rank, commission, or office of a major.6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater; superiority

*** I wonder when Mr Maddcow will be apologizing?? bwhahahahahaha

Well according to Mr.Webster the majority of Americans are not Conservative. Of the whole of Americans the majority are anything but Conservative. See your inability to be objective has led you down this erroneous path. Rubio sets the test group as the American people. And with 56% of them claiming to be something other than Conservative it proves that the “Majority” of Americans are NOT Conservatives. Try reading the first and most accepted definition of the word “Majority”. Try not to get too excited it isn’t good for your blood pressure. And btw the actual percentage of Americans, who are considered Conservative, could still be closer to 35% than 45%, according to your margin of error.. 

Why should anyone be required ”try reading”  your preferred “first” definition when the “third” definition clearly indicates that Rubio was 100% factually accurate??

***Listen smartass ….. I know it’s tough to admit your wrong after all the ill-advised comments…. but you and Maddcow need to man-up and apologize.

Mr Webster has spoken…… and he spoke out against ya

Sounds like you’d be favoring a simple Q&A requirement for voting eligibility……… lol, yeah, didn’t think so bwhahahahahaah

Glad you like the site. Texas? You’re forgiven! :)

You prove once again that you can not argue with ignorance. What about your ignorant assertion that some how magically the number of Conservatives goes from 40%,(a minority), to your assertion of 45%, but you fail to aknowledge that according to your assertion it could very well be 35%. Look you’re an over zealous jerk and can’t accept the fact that you’ve created a fictitious scenario and then ignore all other plausible possibilities. So once again you’re wrong.

You say epic takedown by Maddow; I say epic fail by Maddow and mediaite.

Using epic and anything connected with msnbc is just plain ludicrous.

Cal, once again, you give absolutley no proof, other than your opinion.  You liberals think you know everything.  Do you have “inside info”, or something?  I know the answer:  NO.  As far as it not being “worth responding to,” MM is about to be investigated by the law because of their tax exempt status as a charity.  They’re about to get busted for fraud.  But, I guess you know better than everyone else involved, huh? Cal, you represent the liberals so well. Keep up the good work!

Style Memo to Politifact contributors: “The word plurality is forbidden in all postings. As you know, the electorate is not able to make such fine distinctions. If you must refer to a pluralistic result, acceptable substitutes are ‘most of,’ ‘all but a few,’ and ‘majority.’ Copyeditors have been instructed to enforce these rules.”

The truth’s a bitch, no? As Politifact has discovered and resdiscovered over the last several weeks.

If you must review, how about taking a representative sample of their stories and determining how many of them are actually true (as opposed to the health care lie and the conservative majority lie).

Their credibility, which has been declining, has now plummeted. I’d think if you consider them biased against the right, you’d welcome a verifiable assessment.

And maybe pigs come with JATO units and shit Cartier diamonds.

I mean, it could be, couldn’t it? And it wouldn’t be irresponsible at all for an outfit supposedly devoted to factual reporting to kinda-sorta hope that was true.

I mean, it wouldn’t have any impact on their credibility if that turned out to be, I don’t know, completely wrong?

I didn’t know Rubio was even in the military.

Well, the first definition is, ya know, the first definition. It takes precedence.

Also “most Americans” do not belong to a “party, group or faction having the most power.”

Apparently you haven’t figured out that no party can reasonably claim “the most power” given the hugely complex demographics of America. (Although wingnut power is unquestionably on the wane.)

Also, from context, that’s clearly not what Rubio meant.

This bushwah about how many rightwingers can dance on the head of a pin was old before it was reborn.

On the other hand, this makes it easier for my children, raised in a liberal household, to compete in the job market.

You aimed too high. For this poster you want something like “yo momma’s ugly!”

Yeah, in lcd-land “facts” are just too tedious to mention.

And of course, if you consider that the electorate is made up of idiots (which ‘Lican politicians clearly do), how could you possibly expect them to figure out the difference?

No, only fools and liars would maintain with a straight face that majority and plurality are indistinguishable. Which are you?

Also, since you seem to have missed this part, Politifact’s reputation has been run up on the rocks by exactly this kind of sloppy pandering.

Maddow has earned her glee at their discomfort.

If they don’t expect their readers to agree with every ruling, they shouldn’t call themselves “PolitiFACT”, they should call themselves “PolitiOPINION”.

Bottom line:
Websters definition of “majority” makes it perfectly clear that Rubio’s statement was 100% accurate and should have been rated as such by Politifact…. (see #3) ma·jor·i·ty (m-jôr-t, -jr-)n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties
1. The greater number or part; a number more than half of the total.
2. The amount by which the greater number of votes cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes.
3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.
4. Law The status of having reached full legal age, with attendant rights and responsibilities.
5. The military rank, commission, or office of a major.
6. Obsolete The fact or state of being greater; superiority
*** It is stunning that we are talking about Rhodes Scholars and Journalists here, arguing over a trival topic….. yet get it wrong anyway
*** I wonder when Mr Maddcow will be apologizing??      

That’s absurd.  You can’t agree or disagree with fact.  Facts just are.

If you kept a “truth-o-meter” on MSNBC, it would point to “pravda” most of the time.

Then what would happen if it was kept on FOX?  It would probably explode with pointing to “Pants on Fire”. 

Fact: Websters defines “majority” as: 

3. The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.

Fact: everyone agrees this is the case with conservatives
Fact: Rubio was 100% correct
Fact: Mr Maddow is once again WRONG

 Fact: You just selectively chose a definition that fits your narrative best but chose one that does not match the definition of ‘majority’ in this context.  In this context, the accurate definition would be “a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total”.  Hence Adair’s explanation: “In this case, we rated it Mostly True because we felt that
while the number was short of a majority, it was still a plurality.
Forty percent of Americans consider themselves conservative, 35 percent
moderate and 21 percent liberal. It wasn’t quite a majority, but was
close.”

“Fact: everyone agrees this is the case with conservatives”

False.  It appears that Mr. Adair at politifact does not agree that this is the case with conservatives, as he himself states that it “wasn’t quite a majority.”

“Fact: Mr Maddow is once again WRONG”

Fact: Your reference to Maddow as ‘Mr. Maddow’ reveals you as an intolerant individual with the maturity of a 14 year old. 

But I digress.  My point was that you cannot disagree with established fact.  To do so is delusion.

errrr…. yeah but the 3rd definition is ya know, the 3rd definition. “precedence”?  lololol
“context” ??? lolol

The 3rd defintion is clearly the most applicable as it refers to exactly what is being discussed….. ie political party, group, or faction.

Nice arguing w/ you. You’ve been dismissed.

in reply to expatpatriot

 Fact: The way that you’re swinging around a definition from a dictionary up and down this comment board is indicative of the fact that you clearly have not given this much thought at all.

Fact: doesn’t matter that you believe I was “selective”. Rubio’s statement simply needs to conform to one of the 6 definitions in order for his remarks to be accurate.

Fact: everyone agrees that conservatives were the group with the larger representation (thought I’d help u w/ ur reading comprehension) thus satisfying the 3rd clause of the definition of “majority”

Fact: many have suggested that Maddow actually has a dick…. referring to him as “mr” is not a stretch.

yeah, why should we let something as trivial as Rubio’s comment being  factually accurate get in the way of a good story…..lol

According to your comment on the definition of “majority” according to Webster, Webster first definition states that a majority constitutes “a number more than half of the total”.  Forty percent being the number of conservatives does not exceed or equal 51% with the total being 100%.  This is the correct definition of how Rubio used the word “majority”.  As you noted, Rubio did not use the word to describe which party holds the majority in Congress, or for any of the other uses “majority” used in the English language as defined by Webster.  

Therefor, your statement that Rubio’s statement was “100%” accurate, is 100% false.  Maybe you should apologize to Maddow.

 Definitions do not have ‘clauses’.  Words have multiple definitions because they tend to mean different things depending on the context.

Yeah, juvenile and intolerant people like you suggest that she has a penis, a suggestion entirely rooted in a desire to childishly mock her for her masculinity.

Rubio’s statement simply needs to conform to one of the 6
definitions in order for his remarks to be accurate….. but regardless,

it is the 3rd definition which is most relevant
here. Rubio was referring to a “group” or “faction”.
Everyone agrees that the “group” or “faction” he was
referring to has the “larger representation”. Rubio was 100%
accurate.

3. The political
party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger
representation or electoral strength.

According to your comment on the definition of “majority” according to Webster, Webster first definition states that a majority constitutes “a number more than half of the total”.  Forty percent being the number of conservatives does not exceed or equal 51% with the total being 100%.  This is the correct definition of how Rubio used the word “majority”.  As you noted, Rubio did not use the word to describe which party holds the majority in Congress, or for any of the other uses “majority” used in the English language as defined by Webster.  Therefor, your statement that Rubio’s statement was “100%” accurate, is 100% false.

again,

Rubio’s statement simply needs to conform to one of the 6 definitions in order for his remarks to be accurate….. but regardless,

it is the 3rd definition which is most relevant
here. Rubio was referring to a “group” or “faction”.
Everyone agrees that the “group” or “faction” he was
referring to has the “larger representation”. Rubio was 100% accurate.

3. The political
party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoikNVzesGc, your turn, but you better hurry mediate seems to hate this video.

Will someone tell me why Politifact is so wrong all the time?? Even when they stare at their own proven facts in their face, they still avoid the truth like a plague.
“More Americans than ever identify as political independents, at 40 percent. Republicans don’t even come in at second — that would be the Democratic Party, claiming the allegiance of 31 percent of Americans. Republicans get third place, with 27 percent claiming the GOP label.

Let me just help them by puttin gthe correction out there:
Politifact was wrong: TRUTH
“A respected ongoing poll from Gallup shows that conservatives are the largest ideological group, but they don’t cross the 50 percent threshold. So we rate his statement Mostly False.”

Got any actual evidence that “MM is about to be investigated by the law”? A Faily Caller article doesn’t mean a legal investigation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvBQDHqdCck This one is even better, you will NEVER see reporters eat more crow than this on the air.

Your turn still, can wwe see the FOX lies now?

You are aggressively, ignorantly wrong. Conservatives do not “have the most power”. They do not have “larger representation or electoral strength”. Even when you try to use a definition that doesn’t actually fit with what Rubio was saying, he’d still be wrong.

Poor Republicans: Denial is the first stage of grief. Here are the facts…

21% liberal
35% moderates
=
56% not conservative
40% conservatives

Truth-o-meter: “The Majority are not conservatives”

Also, of those 40% conservatives.

(quote from Politifact)
“Second, we should note that while more Americans identify as conservative, that has not redounded to the good fortune of the Republican Party.”"More Americans than ever identify as political independents, at 40 percent. Republicans don’t even come in at second — that would be the Democratic Party, claiming the allegiance of 31 percent of Americans. Republicans get third place, with 27 percent claiming the GOP label.”

Truth-o-meter: Actually only 10.8% are Republican conservatives

Mediate is much the same in my opinion, the occasional liberal gets blasted but Oreilly is here almost every day.

You are aggressively, ignorantly wrong. Conservatives do not “have the most power”. They do not have “larger representation or electoral strength”. Even when you try to use a definition that doesn’t actually fit with what Rubio was saying, he’d still be wrong.

You are aggressively, ignorantly wrong. Conservatives do not “have the most power”. They do not have “larger representation or electoral strength”. Even when you try to use a definition that doesn’t actually fit with what Rubio was saying, he’d still be wrong.

“Got any actual evidence that ‘MM is about to be investigated by the law’? A Faily Caller article doesn’t mean a legal investigation.”  (by Cal)

Cal, Google it–it’s on most of the news networks now.  They are supposed to be a charity, with tax-exempt status.  They if they are doing what is being reported, that means they are committing fraud.  Again, just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it ain’t so, Cal.  You see, what I keep providing for you is backed up by INFORMATION.  What you keep doing is ignoring the facts and you have yet to offer anything other than your opinion, which seems to be very misguided.  And, I never said that the Daily Caller article equate to a legal investigation–only a dumba_s would insinuate that.  It is because of their article that the investigationwill be done.  Cal, you seem to think that the articel provided by the Daily Caller is wrong, and you apparently think that proof is required for a legittmate argument, yet, you STILL have not offered one shred of proff/evidence of anything you’ve said–not ONE SINGLE THING.  That says something about you, Cal.  You should look up the word “delusional” in the dictionary–it seems to fit what you’re doing here well.

Whether that’s true or not…. no one ever said they “have the most power”.
Everyone, including Mr Maddow, acknowledges conservatives have the “largest representation” both in the context of Rubio’s statement as well as the 3 groups defined by PolitiFact.
Rubio’s statement conforms to the definition of “majority”, and is thus 100% accurate.

Your dismissed

Cal, I’ve gon back and read your posts just to make sure I was correct in my comments about your lack of evidence provided–and, yes, I was correct.  You say a lot, but have not backed up any of it with proof or evidence, or even anycommon sense!  C’mon, Cal, are you one of those occupy bowel movement nuisances?  They don’t make much sense either.

No, you’re an idiot. Rubio’s statement does not conform to that definition, and thus is 100% inaccurate.

Why are you so sure that an investigation will be done? Random unsourced accusations happen all the time. They generally don’t lead to legal investigations.

You don’t get it, conservatives are not a majority even when you breakdown the #.  Rubio was NOT correct in his statement.

“Why are you so sure that an investigation will be done? Random unsourced accusations happen all the time. They generally don’t lead to legal investigations.” (by Cal)

Cal, I guess we should all not believe Obama’s job number claims either, since he can’t prove them, huh?  Or any other of the crap that comes out of his mouth, because he can’t prove any of it. This seems to be your logic.  I bet that you buy into everything that he says, though. 

Cal, I keep on asking you to provide proof, and you do not.  I guess it never occurs to you that Media Matter may actually be doing what they’re accused of.  I think that if they do get busted and the facts come out, you will probably still deny it.     

Thx
for that concise analysis!

 Conservatives are “not a majority”
only if you choose to ignore the facts.

“majority”as defined by Websters: The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue
of its larger representation or electoral strength

Conservatives are a “group” or “faction”.
Conservatives have the “larger representation” according to Rubio,
Maddow, Politifact and everyone else w/ half a brain.

End of story.

another well thought out and detailed thesis…..lolol

No, it doesn’t occur to me that the Faily Caller might actually be telling the truth. They’ve never done it before, so why would they start now?

Which seems to be the crux of this story, you are expected to agree with Ms Maddow.

Watched her on wisconsin politics last night and without politifact to help me, shes an  outright liar with no shame at all. But thats what I would expect from MSNBC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvBQDHqdCck

She was lying her ass off last night…

I realize now that I’m dealing with true delusioinal idiot.  I cannot believe that I’ve wasted so much time on you. 

That’s not correct.  If you read my whole comment you’ll find I also specifically addressed definition number 3.  His statement makes it very clear he is talking about the number of conservatives voters in the country, and not who is in the majority that controls the House.

That’s not correct.  If you read my whole comment you’ll find I also specifically addressed definition number 3.  His statement makes it very clear he is talking about the number of conservatives voters in the country, and not who is in the majority that controls the House.

You are attempting to compare apples and oranges. Your 1) are examples of talking-head opinion show topics and 2) purports to be factual truth. I think they should be held to slightly different standards, don’t you?

And even with an “entire article [of] context, and a ton of interpreation” their conclusion seems illogical and baseless.

This is pretty old-school propaganda on Rachel’s part.  She’s been taken apart by Politifact on more then one occasion, and never seems to admit that she was wrong.  So are we really surprised that she’s going after them now?  What else can she do?  Admit she was wrong?

Yeah… that’s not gonna happen…

jefwel: “Why do think they are not credible?”

Er… um… maybe because it was founded by Tucker Carlson (senior fellow at Cato Institute) and and Neil Patel (Dick Cheney’s former adviser). Maybe because its right-wing leanings are well-known, despite their claim to be “not enforcing any kind of ideological orthodoxy on anyone.” (The Guardian referred to The Daily Caller as “the conservative answer to The Huffington Post.”) Maybe because… oh, never mind… I’m sure this all sounds completely credible to you.

No one suggested this debate has anything to do w/ the “House” or any other body politic.
Rubio was in fact speaking of the general make-up of the country and gave his opinion that the “majority” were conservatives who “believed in things like the constitution”.Now you can go on and suggest that Rubio was insisting conservatives were more than 50% of the country…. but that would of course be your opinion and not based on facts.

Rubio’s statement is accurate based on the FACTS

She had no problem with PolitiFact until it stopped being accurate.

The only time you deal with a true delusional idiot is when you look a mirror. I suggest you check in for therapy.

“The only time you deal with a true delusional idiot is when you look a mirror. I suggest you check in for therapy.”  (from Cal)

Cal, this is what I’d expect from you.  This is all you can come up with, huh?  Are going to resort to the oldie but goodie:  “I know you are, but what am I” next? 
 

Politico PANTS ON FIRE!! lol.  I would call myself a moderate – but I bet you the right-wing nuzis would say I’m liberal.  Go figure.  I bet there are many other Americans that fit that billing as well.  The so called “Conservatives” are not whom they say they are.  They are nuzis.

Did you get this information from Jesus Camp?

You think you’re conservative but you’re not.  You’re nuzi.  Like ALL media that isn’t Fox isn’t LIBERAL – in fact, there is no such thing.  There is propaganda – Fox – that is not conservative – it’s just lies masquarading as “Conservatism” and there is everyone else whom doesn’t agree with them – Fox calls them – Liberal Media – which they are not.  Using “Lunt-Wording” to get the outcome to a poll to support your idiocy doesn’t make the poll accurate or true – it’s distortion, misleading and once again, false.  Most people are not “your brand of conservatist – Hate, fear and smear campaigning for the Koch Brothers and the  Corporate Citizen” – there are moderate people with multiple opinons whom consider themselves ‘conservative or moderate conservative; the conservatives you speak of are one goose stepping Fox lead corrale of sheep. You’re welcome.

PolitiFarce has been taken apart by a variety of sources for many wrong “fact-checks”, like this one. And unlike Maddow, who does admit when she gets something wrong, PolitiFake never does.

 Let me see:
No fewer then two name-calling incidents on the same group, and not one case of you actually backing up what claim?

DingDingDing!  We have a liberal!

You seem to have a hard time realizing that 40% is not the majority of 100%.  You again incorrect and seem to have a hard time understanding that 40% is not over 50% which would be the majority of 100%  You might want to talk to someone who you believe is good in math to explain to you why 40% is not the majority of 100%.  

not familar w/ “Websters”?

wow….. u figured me out from my statement indicating that the dictionary supported Rubio!

Pretty impressive!

Yo Baker…. your problem appears to be your insistance on using math to solve a language problem.

a 40% segment IS a “majority” of 100% when there exists 2 other segments of 35% and 21% according to Websters definition#3 of the term “majority”

Again, and I will write this very slow for you…….

a definition of MAJORITY is: “The political party, group, or faction having the most power by virtue of its larger representation or electoral strength”.

The “group” or “faction” known as “conseratives”, according to the Gallup poll, have the largest representation and thus, according to Websters, is considered a “MAJORITY”, regardless of whether or not they have greater than 50% of the total (another definition of majority).

Now Baker, clearly you can play word games by concentrating on some of the other 5 definitions of “majority”…… but no one really gives a shit because all Rubio is required to do is satisfy one of the definitions.
This he has done and thus his statement is deemed to be accurate and Mr Maddow is clearly wrong and has barked up the wrong tree.

Thanks for playing!

For all you Fox haters, media matters?  Really.  At least Fox does not try to hide from what they really are.  Media matters is a liberal whore in the worst sense.

The debt going up is as more a result in the economy Obama inherited.  There is far less tax dollars coming in.  It isn’t that he just increased spending that much.  

Unemployment went from 8.5 in December to 8.3 in January.  Not sure where you are getting your numbers from.

Gross Public debt $5.6285 trillion at the end of 2000 

The Bush years
2001 Total income $1.9911(t) and $141.4(b)added to Debt 2.1325(t) total spent
2002 Total income $1.8531(t) and $428.5(b)added to Debt 2.2816(t) total spent
2003 Total income $1.7832(t) and $561.5(b)added to Debt 2.3447(t) total spent
2004 Total income $1.8801(t)and $594.7(b)added to Debt  2.4741(t) total spent
2005 Total income $2.1536(t)and $550.6(b)added to Debt  2.4741(t) total spent
2006 Total income $2.4069(t) and $546.1(b)added to Debt 2.9530(t) total spent
2007 Total income $2.5680(t) and $499.4(b)added to Debt 3.0674(t) total spent
2008 Total income $2.524(t) and $1.0353(b)added to Debt 3.5593(t) total spent

note:2008 700 billion of the 1.0353 trillion was the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 
     Also know as the “Trouble Asset Relief Program” TARP signed by Bush in October 2008

From the beginning of 2000 to the end of 2008 $4.3576 trillion was added to the Federal Debt
for a total of $9.9861 trillion.

The Obama Years so far and 2012 projected
2009 Total income $2.1050(t) and $1.8898(t) added to Debt 3.9948(t) total spent 
2010 Total income $2.1627(t) and $1.6529(t) added to Debt 3.8156(t) total spent 
2011 Total income $2.3035(t) and $1.2354(t) added to Debt 3.5389(t) total spent   

projected
2012 Total income $2.4686(t) and $1.5867(t) added to Debt 4.0553(t) total spent

Between the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2012 $6.3648 trillion will has been added to the Federal Debt
for a total of $16.3509 trillion

Bush 8 years 4.35 Trillion
Obama 4 years 6.36 Trillion

Numbers differ slightly from different sources by not by much.
 

you are right.. The drop wasn’t 8.9 to 8.3, it was 8.5 to 8.3. But the main issue was the reduction in total work force.

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2012/02/unemploment-drops-to-83-as-12-million.html

Although this site is partisan, the numbers come from Gallup and I’ve seen the same number in other sights. Google “1.2 million leave workforce”.  Even though a .2 % drop on the unemployment numbers would normally be something to celebrate the 1.2 million leaving or not counted in the working should over shadow the .2% drop in employment rate. We normally don’t talk much about this number because generally it doesn’t change that much. And there was nothing on this in the state run media on this. On the chart “Persons Not In Labor Force”  since 2007 you see this number go little downward or upward over time but this time it was a upward spike in one month of 1.2 million.

Yes, Fox does, routinely, hide from what it really is, including by naming itself Fox NEWS Channel. If it were anything close to truthful, it would rename itself Fox Far-Right Talking Points Propaganda Channel.