Hilary "mis-remembers" again, Spence

[Jim in CT]

"I don't know where he was when I was trying to get health care in '93 and '94." -Hillary Clinton on the campaign trail, accusing Bernie Sanders of being AWOL when she was pushing for health care reform during her husband's presidency.

The answer, as this picture illustrates, is: "About six inches away from you."



http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...on-healthcare/

Spence, he really has an issue with "mis-remembering" things, doesn't she?

[Nebe]

LOL
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

GOP debate fact check shows just about every statement wrong and you want to hype a little political jab. You and Trump have one thing in common, you'll both hype ANYTHING...

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by spence

GOP debate fact check shows just about every statement wrong and you want to hype a little political jab. You and Trump have one thing in common, you'll both hype ANYTHING...

Hilarious how the right ignores that every independant fact checker states ALL of the Repub. candidates where more dishonest than ALL of the Dem. candidates.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Hilarious how the right ignores that every independant fact checker states ALL of the Repub. candidates where more dishonest than ALL of the Dem. candidates.

that's quite a statement

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

that's quite a statement

Yeah, but come on, you can't argue with math! Especially when it's that convenient for bashing those with whom you disagree.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Hilarious how the right ignores that every independant fact checker states ALL of the Repub. candidates where more dishonest than ALL of the Dem. candidates.

I asked you before, how is that measured? I mean, in every Hilary speech, she says that republicans don't like women's health, we don't like poor people, we don't like honmosexuals, we don't like Muslims, we don't like blacks of course...unless every one of those is counted as a lie, every single time she says it, then that study you keep reciting, is worthless. And your beloved honesty study cannot be counting all of those as lies, because no computer built can count that high.

Paul, that's not something that's really quanitfiable. I'm not saying the candidates on my side don't lie.

Hilary is showing a real willingness to distort Bernie's record.

[Nebe]

So true
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Jim, Do a search for indep. org. that rate the candidates. Try polifact, politico or factcheck. Nothing I have read says that any candidate does not lie, just some more than others. The math says the Dem. statements are more truthfull then the Repubs.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Jim, Do a search for indep. org. that rate the candidates. Try polifact, politico or factcheck. Nothing I have read says that any candidate does not lie, just some more than others. The math says the Dem. statements are more truthfull then the Repubs.

that's hilarious

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Jim, Do a search for indep. org. that rate the candidates. Try polifact, politico or factcheck. Nothing I have read says that any candidate does not lie, just some more than others. The math says the Dem. statements are more truthfull then the Repubs.

Paul, it's possible that conservative slie more, our politicians aren't automatically more honest.

But unless "the math" counts it as a lie every single time Hilary lies about what I believe (and she does it several times in every speech), than "the math" is flawed, correct?

[PaulS]

Not exactly sure what you are getting at but if someone repeats the same lie over and over the statement is still a lie. However, I think the way they rate the lies is on the truthfullness of the statement so some statements are rated as fully a lie, partially, pants on fire, etc. I don't think they say "so and so lied again about statement X".

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Not exactly sure what you are getting at but if someone repeats the same lie over and over the statement is still a lie. However, I think the way they rate the lies is on the truthfullness of the statement so some statements are rated as fully a lie, partially, pants on fire, etc. I don't think they say "so and so lied again about statement X".

doesn't sound very mathematical

that's ....."pantsuit on fire"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Not exactly sure what you are getting at but if someone repeats the same lie over and over the statement is still a lie. However, I think the way they rate the lies is on the truthfullness of the statement so some statements are rated as fully a lie, partially, pants on fire, etc. I don't think they say "so and so lied again about statement X".

OK, So what you call "the math", is actually someone's interpretation of what is a lie and what is not. That's not "math". That's "opinion". I'm not saying the opinions are politically biased. But it's not "math".

In any event, we need better fromn out presidential candidates on all sides.

[Nebe]

Was trump steaks a lie ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Don't know what "math" your talking about. The fact is every independant fact checker states ALL of the Repub. candidates where more dishonest than ALL of the Dem. candidates. You can ignore it or not.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Don't know what "math" your talking about. .

Originally Posted by PaulS

The math says the Dem. statements are more truthfull then the Repubs.

your math

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Don't know what "math" your talking about. The fact is every independant fact checker states ALL of the Repub. candidates where more dishonest than ALL of the Dem. candidates. You can ignore it or not.

You are the one talking about "math". You said, and I quote "the math". Your words, not mine. But it's not "math", if what is being measured, is someon'es interpretation of which statements are false, and how blatantly false they are.

I'm not going to take that as irrefutable proof that the GOP candidates are less truthful. They can all learn a lesson about honesty to be sure.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You are the one talking about "math". You said, and I quote "the math". Your words, not mine. But it's not "math", if what is being measured, is someon'es interpretation of which statements are false, and how blatantly false they are.

I'm not going to take that as irrefutable proof that the GOP candidates are less truthful. They can all learn a lesson about honesty to be sure.

You're the one who used "Math" in post #8.

Your words, not mine.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You're the one who used "Math" in post #8.

Your words, not mine.

I was being sarcastic. In post #9, you rerred to your study, as the math. I presumed you were serious. If that was wrong, I apologize.

Here's the problem with that kind of study. Spence (who is a smart and decent guy, I believe) will adamantly deny that Hilary has ever intentionally told a lie, for the purpose of deception. He thinks she "mis-remembers" innocently, but has never, not once, told a lie.

So if he was doing this study of yours, it would show her with a perfect honesty record, one that would make George Washington look like George Costanza.

They all lie, we need to decide which ones matter, and at what point (if ever) it erodes their qualifications.

My point in this thread, was to point out that, fortunately for me, Hilary likes to lie about things, which are then proven as lies with photo/video evidence, and pepole like Spence still cannot say out loud that she attempted to deceive anyone.

Here, she wanted Democrats to believe that Bernie was not part of teh push for universal healthcare. I refer you to the photo evidence. Now Paul, I wonder if your study will count that as a whopper of a lie? Because that's what it is.

The other point of this thread, is that if she does have this much of a problem with remembering the facts, maybe she has some kind of dimentia. Either that, or she's lying. I know which it is. Paul, I think you know which it is.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

But it's not "math", if what is being measured, is someon'es interpretation of which statements are false, and how blatantly false they are.

it's all very scientific...you probably wouldn't understand

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

it's all very scientific...you probably wouldn't understand

There are pieces of this I don't understand, you're right about that!

Rubio is going to get killed in his home state, looks like Kasich is in for a fight in Ohio. If Trump wins both, my hope that he gos to the covention with less than 50% of the delegates, will be greatly diminished.

[PaulS]

I get it, when you use something that you later get called on you were being sarcastic but when someone uses the same exact term in the very next post, you assume they were being serious.

Look at any of the groups I gave you, I bet they rated her statement.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I get it, when you use something that you later get called on you were being sarcastic but when someone uses the same exact term in the very next post, you assume they were being serious.

Look at any of the groups I gave you, I bet they rated her statement.

"I get it, when you use something that you later get called on you were being sarcastic but when someone uses the same exact term in the very next post, you assume they were being serious."

I don't think anyone would read my post and not conclude I was being sarcastic when I referred to it as math. But, it is a fair criticism of how I handled it. You got me there.

"Look at any of the groups I gave you, I bet they rated her statement"

I really don't care how someone who likely either loves her or hates her, rated that statement. I know what it was, so do you, heck, so do you.

[buckman]

At last nights town hall she stated that we haven't lost a single American in Lybia .... Why would she even go there ? And you say Trump says stupid things
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

At last nights town hall she stated that we haven't lost a single American in Lybia .... Why would she even go there ? And you say Trump says stupid things
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

She was referring to the NATO operation. i.e. we didn't have to invade to depose the dictator.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

She was referring to the NATO operation. i.e. we didn't have to invade to depose the dictator.

She was taking about the time frame it takes to build a democracy in an area formally run by vicious dictator . Nice try cover boy 😁
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device