Monday, October 27, 2014

"Sincere" Walker gets 41st false or fiery pants finding

Though called "sincere" and further lauded by the Journal Sentinel editorial board in its campaign summation - - link and commentary, here - -   Wrong-Way Walker's statements (full record) have been rated by the newspaper's fact-checking service  Politifact as "False" or "Pants on Fire" more than three times as often than "True."

41-to-12, the record shows. and the pants on fire, false or mostly false ratings exceed the true and mostly true ratings by a substantial margin, too.

So be careful of sincerity, as that could false, too.

And Walker racked up yet another "False" rating - - his 33rd - - on Politifact today - - exceeding the number in all other PolitiFact's categories separately:

"My opponent supported policies that increased tuition by 18 percent."
— Scott Walker on Monday, October 20th, 2014 in a campaign TV ad



Anonymous said...

A tuition freeze isn't always good. Unless money comes from somewhere to make up for lost revenues, universities may need to cut back their professors, classes, and programs. That means their students' education won't be as good as it would have been.

I do have complete sympathy for students who are facing high tuition fees. I just think Walker's simplistic promise to freeze tuition (without a plan to protect universities) is a ploy to win votes from students.

Anonymous said...


But milwaukee journel sentinel has just endorsed him!

Do you think any of the politicrap stuff really matters?

Jake formerly of the LP said...

Given how Politi-crap has gone out of its way to try to downgrade Dems (often putting words into their mouths to change meaning) and give lenient grades to GOPs, Walker's bad grades are noteworthy.

But yes, Politi-crap has little credibility to begin with, so you could argue it doesn't matter that much.

Anonymous said...

In this caustic political environment, I suspect major newspapers make a big picture judgement on whether they will lose more subscribers by endorsing candidate A or candidate B in a signature election. (Think "I saw your endorsement and I'm canceling my subscription.")

Then they lean heavily toward a decision to endorse the one that is likely to lead to a lower number of lost subscribers. Add that to the overall leaning of the management and it takes a lot to tip the MJS toward a Democrat.

If I'm right it's simply a matter of survival, and the need for objectivity is secondary.

Anonymous said...

I think this is how the logic goes. Walker is so sincere about his extremist ideology that he is willing to lie about it in order to protect it.

In otherwords, his dishonesty is really just a sincere expression of his sincerity.

IDK, the JS editorial board confuses me.

Anony too said...

'. . . yet another "False" rating - - his 33rd - - on Politifact today . . . . '

another day, another pile of fresh bullshit from the Bullshitter-in-Chief.