State of the Union tonight

[mooby]

G1, context only matters if it supports your argument. If it doesn't, you ignore it and just focus on the "true" portion.

Also, as everybody knows the day a President wins the election is the day you start giving him credit for all changes in the economy.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by mooby

G1, context only matters if it supports your argument. If it doesn't, you ignore it and just focus on the "true" portion.

Also, as everybody knows the day a President wins the election is the day you start giving him credit for all changes in the economy.

This is what kills me. So many things take years upon years to develop. I get annoyed when ANY sitting president starts taking credit. Trump constantly has his own wang in his mouth over any and all positive changes in the country.

Anything negative? Obama's fault!

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So ,knowing you are a trump supporter where or how is the NYT wrong with any or all of their evaluations?

Without going into the article point by point, when the fact checker says true but needs context that is the pure definition of media bias. Is the statement true, yes. You then want to write opeds on why the true statement doesnt jive with your world view that is also fine. But saying the economy gained x jobs doesnt need media spin in a "fact check" article, it's either true or false.

[MTK]

Hey I thought unemployment was more like 30 or 40%?? What happened to that? Oh now that it's on his watch the numbers are legit. Right.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mooby

G1, context only matters if it supports your argument. If it doesn't, you ignore it and just focus on the "true" portion.

Also, as everybody knows the day a President wins the election is the day you start giving him credit for all changes in the economy.

Context is important, and there are these things called opeds or opinion articles where context and opinion can and should be written.

I don't have a problem with saying a statement is true, or false, or mostly true or mostly false, or even saying it's an exaggeration or a lie. Those all are evaluated statements of objective truths. But when you say it's true but let me explain why it isn't, then you are adding opinion and point of view thoughts that are better off in other articles, in my opinion. I would say the same when fact checking Pres. Obama's speeches

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Without going into the article point by point, when the fact checker says true but needs context that is the pure definition of media bias. Is the statement true, yes. You then want to write opeds on why the true statement doesnt jive with your world view that is also fine. But saying the economy gained x jobs doesnt need media spin in a "fact check" article, it's either true or false.

So the explanation of each answer with facts that are either true or not is not good for you,you just want yes or no answers.Saying the economy gained x jobs could be a yes or no answer if credit for said gain was given to whom ever earned it,it should be explained for those whom might not understand the system being used to come up with that "Yes or No' answer.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by mooby

G1, context only matters if it supports your argument. If it doesn't, you ignore it and just focus on the "true" portion.

Also, as everybody knows the day a President wins the election is the day you start giving him credit for all changes in the economy.

My Bad I apologize.I was wondering becuase it wasn't done like that when President Obama was in Office.

[Chico23231]

Lotta winning last night

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

He should have Stormy Daniels sitting in his lap as he wolfs down a happy meal in his tighty whities

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...065018686.html

Stormy Daniels Won’t Confirm Denying Trump Affair in Confusing Talk With Kimmel

whole lotta nothing.

But she is still smoking...I just might hit it. maybe

[Chico23231]

Hey why is my paycheck higher today? #TrumpTrumpTrump

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So the explanation of each answer with facts that are either true or not is not good for you,you just want yes or no answers.Saying the economy gained x jobs could be a yes or no answer if credit for said gain was given to whom ever earned it,it should be explained for those whom might not understand the system being used to come up with that "Yes or No' answer.

I am saying the fact check should be just that "just the facts, ma'am "

But we have a dumb electorate who craves being fed information in a fact check that belongs in the opinion portion. Are we going to fact check the fact checkers?

And yes on the economy for example a lot of the cause for the growth is opinion based. No Trump doesn't get all the credit and Obama deserves credit leaving office with a stable economy, but there is a whole lot more to it then 1 or two paragraphs in a fact check article.

[MTK]

A fact check is just about bringing a little reality to the situation, because we certainly have a President who lives in his own reality. And yes I know all Presidents tend to stretch the truth and bend figures to suit their agenda. I honestly don't see the big deal about offering context. There are rarely black and white answers to complex issues.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Hey why is my paycheck higher today? #TrumpTrumpTrump

I'll ride that wave and hopefully it'll get restructured again before we start paying in. We take zero deductions and our tax person said that while we'll get more in our monthly take-home, we'll maybe start having to pay in. Like WTF?! We used to get $3500 per return (and yes, I know you're not supposed to give the government a tax-free loan).

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by MTK

2018 State of the Union - Fact Check

one other comment on this, I didn't even see that there was only one fact check of the democratic response, I'm assuming that means from the NYTimes viewpoint, Mr Kennedy didn't say anything that would warrant serious consideration. Nice.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

one other comment on this, I didn't even see that there was only one fact check of the democratic response, I'm assuming that means from the NYTimes viewpoint, Mr Kennedy didn't say anything that would warrant serious consideration. Nice.

or.....Mr Kennedy was more truthful with his statements.