2024 VP debate: Fact-checking JD Vance and Tim Walz
politifact.com
Tallies:
Vance: * 7 False / mostly false. * 1 half true * 0 true/mostly true
Walz: * 2 False * 5 true
You are viewing a single comment
Tallies:
Vance: * 7 False / mostly false. * 1 half true * 0 true/mostly true
Walz: * 2 False * 5 true
Here's one of Walz's Falses
That's some hair-splitting bullshit if I ever heard it. How is the federal government going to collect information on abortions, miscarriages, and stillbirths if they aren't tracking pregnancies? Walz did not mention "a new federal agency" at all. Just that they want to collect the information about pregnancies and how they end.
The other lie was that Trump paid no federal income tax, which is mostly true except for when he paid back taxes in 2016 because he was running for President, and then while he was President, his taxes were paid for him.
Meanwhile, Vance is like "Walz passed a law allowing doctors to murder babies." These false statements are not at all the same.
you're totally right on this. I'm surprised walz didn't say more than "that was fact checked and found to be false". explain that abortions don't happen after live birth! call out the lies.
vance did a total 180 on many things while looking directly at the camera. he's a sociopath. he scares me... he's smart and doesn't care about anything other than personal gain.
Welcome to what Republicans really wanted instead of Trump. Trump is a buffoon, he says the quiet part out loud, and is more of a millstone around the party's neck. But if they could get a Vance - someone who has zero ethics like Trump, likes like Trump, and (most importantly) can rile up the base like Trump - all while maintaining a superficial glaze of acceptability on CNN? They just have to do that once, and then in Trump's words, you'll never have to do an election again.
I smell a conspiracy of a luxury couch corporation wanting to get a contract furnishing the white house.
Of course they're not, but the media has to find something to call out or they'll be accused of BiAs by idiots who think anything not full throatedly supporting them is a direct attack.
Yeah, seems like the fact checkers are trying to look neutral while still mentioning that fucked up things Republicans are doing. Which might help if the Republican voters actually read it.
Every time they do this fact-checking they're like "The democrat said republicans want to ban abortions? Well abortion bans have been made by many parties over the past 300 years. Full false. The republican said that democrats want to feed babies to immigrants? Half true, they didn't say they didn't want to do that!"