Current Events > Did Trump outright lie about any of his claims during the state of the union?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Seems like America doing pretty well under his leadership if not, lot of great present and future potential for the economy
---

Everything about caring about people of color and how he has reduced their unemployment rates. The numbers he was referrring to were because of Obama era policies.
---

Since he said it all while being a rich white male, everything he said was a lie.

According to liberals.

Politifact suggest some of what he said was false (though not "pants on fire" level false), but most of it was at least "half-true".

And that's without going into Politifact being biased. When even a biased site admits that most of what he's saying has "at least some truth to it"...
---

DarkTransient posted...

Politifact suggest some of what he said was false (though not "pants on fire" level false), but most of it was at least "half-true".

And that's without going into Politifact being biased. When even a biased site admits that most of what he's saying has "at least some truth to it"...

Yea thats what I was thinking, but I guess for the people that hate him and wont credit him even if he cures cancer, you can always find something to be bitch about
---

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?
---

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".
---

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"
---

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Yeah, for sure. But that's still more than can be said about what most liberals tend to say.
---

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

You mean like people in politics do? Oh no, how dare Trump do something nobody in his position ever did, hes horrible!
---

Kazi1212 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

You mean like people in politics do? Oh no, how dare Trump do something nobody in his position ever did, hes horrible!

you're not wrong but most politicians don't skirt as close to outright lies as much as Trump does
---

gunplagirl posted...

Everything about caring about people of color and how he has reduced their unemployment rates. The numbers he was referrring to were because of Obama era policies.

Which policies
---

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.

So, Trump says false thing and Politifact calls him on it and that somehow discredits them?
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.

You need a Trump to English dictionary before trying to gauge whether or not he's lying.

For example, if he says something was the biggest and greatest ever, and that it broke all records and that there's never been anything like it, that's his way of saying, "It was pretty good!"
---

cobain27 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.

So, Trump says false thing and Politifact calls him on it and that somehow discredits them?

Is feigning obtuseness a popular liberal deflection technique? Im genuinely curious
---

cobain27 posted...

So, Trump says ""false"" thing and Politifact calls him on it and that somehow discredits them?

Yes, unless you think a rational response to "there is a ton of paper here!" is "Wrong!!! There is MUCH LESS than a metric ton of paper here! The actual mass is around 0.2 kg"

And then that person makes a mental note to never invite you out with his friends.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

cobain27 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.

So, Trump says false thing and Politifact calls him on it and that somehow discredits them?

Is obtuseness a popular liberal deflection technique? Im genuinely curious

There's nothing obtuse. He said there were no Chevy's sold in Japan. They pointed out there are. As long as the number of Chevy's sold in Japan is 1 or more, what he said is false. I don't buy people interpreting Trump for me. He said none sold. Some were sold. That is false.
---

cobain27 posted...

There's nothing obtuse. He said there were no Chevy's sold in Japan. They pointed out there are. As long as the number of Chevy's sold in Japan is 1 or more, what he said is false. I don't buy people interpreting Trump for me. He said none sold. Some were sold. That is false.

Sephiroth1288 posted...

you think a rational response to "there is a ton of paper here!" is "Wrong!!! There is MUCH LESS than a metric ton of paper here! The actual mass is around 0.2 kg"

And then that person makes a mental note to never invite you out with his friends.

---

cobain27 posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

cobain27 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Let's not forget that politifact has a really shoddy history of bias, especially when it comes to Trump...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/donald-trump/donald-trump-chevrolet-tokyo-japan-doesnt-exist/

tl;dr: lolitifact rates Trump's statement as "mostly false" because Chevrolets do actually exist in Japan, in incredibly small numbers. Even though Trump is correct in his assessment that Chevy's are so rarely sold in Japan that their number is negligible, they rated it false because, if you're a crazy person and take his statement literally, it's incorrect.

So if PolitiFact rates anything Donald Trump says as a half truth, that probably means it's true.

So, Trump says false thing and Politifact calls him on it and that somehow discredits them?

Is obtuseness a popular liberal deflection technique? Im genuinely curious

There's nothing obtuse. He said there were no Chevy's sold in Japan. They pointed out there are. As long as the number of Chevy's sold in Japan is 1 or more, what he said is false. I don't buy people interpreting Trump for me. He said none sold. Some were sold. That is false.

So thats a yes, got it
---

If this were an isolated incident, I'd give it to you, but this is, "biggest inauguration crowd of all time", "biggest tax cut of all time", etc. Donald Trump. He literally means what he says, even if it's not true. All the ambiguity just comes from damage control.
---

The thing about politifact is that for a large percentage of the quotes they're labeling 'false' or 'mostly false', the quotes are subjective. Both sides have their own story on it.

Trump says something, and then politifact marks it mostly false with a rebuttal. But then there's plenty of rebuttals against what politifact is saying as well. The fact is, a lot of the things being marked 'false' are complex arguments, and you can't just stamp a false on it because someone says a one sentence version of that argument.

Also a strategy for politifact, is that they'll take a small part of Trump's sentence, and use that as a basis to rate the whole fact. For example, if Trump says, "Because of me, X happened." Now, we all know that X happened, but the 'because of me' part is highly subjective. Politifact will just stamp a false on it, even though X actually did happen.
---

cobain27 posted...

If this were an isolated incident, I'd give it to you, but this is, "biggest inauguration crowd of all time", "biggest tax cut of all time", etc. Donald Trump. He literally means what he says, even if it's not true. All the ambiguity just comes from damage control.

It's not ambiguity. It's called hyperbole.

Anyone who's not socially stunted would understand Trump didn't literally mean that not a single Chevrolet exists in Japan.
---

I really don't get how my social skills play into this, but okay. How about you show me Trump pointing this out or clarifying rather than some random guy on the internet assuming he knows what he meant? I'm just going by what he said.
---

It seems pretty obvious that politifact is biased and trying to drag Trump down by stamping falses on him.

In one speech, Trump said something about how some state had had a republican in the senate seat for 30 years. Politifact chooses that sentence to put on their site, stamps a false on it and goes, "Nope, 21 years!"

That's just tedious and annoying. Trump isn't sitting there with wikipedia open. Saying that something has been around for 30 years...and it's actually been there 21 years, that's a pretty basic approximation, and there's no real point to correcting it.
---

cobain27 posted...

I really don't get how my social skills play into this, but okay. How about you show me Trump pointing this out or clarifying rather than some random guy on the internet assuming he knows what he meant? I'm just going by what he said.

If everybody just went by what everyone else said, the world would be in chaos. Exaggeration and hyperbole are a part of everyday normal speech, some just do it more than others, dont blame Trump for not grasping the simple elements of conversational language. Trump talks more conversationally than he does formally, once you realize that then you wont have a tough time figuring out what he means anymore. That and getting rid of your hate tinted glasses for Trump if you have them, that colors your agenda oriented interpretation of his speech as well.
---

Btw, here's a good laugh. I've given a couple of examples of how they rate Trump on politifact. Let's see how they rate Obama...

Obama says, ""Eight in 10 people this year can find plans for $75 a month or less.""

Politifact responds by saying, "Under 4 percent of Americans"

Obama says 80%. Politifact says <4%

I wonder what it's rated. False, right? That's how they'd rate Trump. Nah, they gave Obama a half-truth rating.
---

Steve Nick posted...

Btw, here's a good laugh. I've given a couple of examples of how they rate Trump on politifact. Let's see how they rate Obama...

Obama says, ""Eight in 10 people this year can find plans for $75 a month or less.""

Politifact responds by saying, "Under 4 percent of Americans"

Obama says 80%. Politifact says <4%

I wonder what it's rated. False, right? That's how they'd rate Trump. Nah, they gave Obama a half-truth rating.

Lol the bias is so palpable I can almost touch it
---

Just remember, 30 years vs 21 years = false

80% vs 4% = half-truth
---

Wow, they do the same shit to Pence.

Mike Pence:
"Says Donald Trump, in his campaign announcement speech, "also said, And many of them (Mexicans) are good people. You keep leaving that out of your quote.""

I read that and I'm thinking, well, that's true, Pence is just stating fact here. I mean we've all seen the audio clips.

Nope, Politifact gives Pence a half-truth for this, because he substituted the word "many" for "some".

If they wanted to be critical of him for getting a word wrong, they could rank it "Mostly true", but ranking it as half-truth is clear bias. What Pence said isn't half-truth. It is truth, and to say otherwise is just splitting hairs over tedium.
---

I remember him saying "thousands and thousands and thousands of MS13" members had been deported so far.

That cannot be true.
---

Didn't he lie about chain migration? Seen a lot of immigration lawyers on Twitter saying that.
---

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Welcome to politics.
---

Dat_Cracka_Jax posted...

YOUHAVENOHOPE posted...

DarkTransient posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Ah, so you're ignoring that a half truth is still half a lie?

It's more like "true, but not the full story".

more like "true, but worded and geared in such a way to serve an agenda"

Welcome to politics.

Pretty much every politician does this.

For example, in one of the Obama quotes, politifact responds with, "This is the most generous possible interpretation of facts". And then gives him a mostly true.
---

MacDaMurderer posted...

Didn't he lie about chain migration? Seen a lot of immigration lawyers on Twitter saying that.

link?

Immigration lawyers have a bit of a conflict of interest there, eh
---

I know that during the speech, in the topic, Twitterfriends was just posting "liar!" over and over again. I don't know how he didn't get modded for that. oh wait, yes I do.

of course, it wouldn't be a trump speech without lies
---

MacDaMurderer posted...

Didn't he lie about chain migration? Seen a lot of immigration lawyers on Twitter saying that.

He, like his base, has no understanding of what chain migration is. He also grossly lied about how his immigration plan would have The most people ever be able to have a path to citizenship at like 1.8 million, but previous legislation from the previous administration included a plan for about 8 million, soooo
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Everything about caring about people of color and how he has reduced their unemployment rates. The numbers he was referrring to were because of Obama era policies.

Which policies

---

Heineken14 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Everything about caring about people of color and how he has reduced their unemployment rates. The numbers he was referrring to were because of Obama era policies.

Which policies

So which policies

Also





Unemployment tends to go down when the economy does well. Who knew?
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Unemployment tends to go down when the economy does well. Who knew?

one of the more interesting trends during the end of the obama presidency was that unemployment dropped from ~7 to 5.5 while stocks were essentially flat

that would suggest it's not a very good idea to try to extrapolate stock returns as a metric for how well the average person is doing. the S&P is up 40% since trump's win, but wages are up ~5%. unemployment is down, from 5.5% to 4.1%, reflecting far fewer jobs created than stocks gained in valuation. mainly because the principal driver of stock valuation has been expectation (and acquisition) of the tax cut. a secondary driver was the dip in 2015 in earnings that reversed itself around early-mid 2016. visible here:

https://insight.factset.com/hubfs/Resources%20Section/Research%20Desk/Earnings%20Insight/EarningsInsight_012518.pdf

that said, krugman has never been more wrong than nov 9. i can't tell you how many people contacted me for financial advice after trump's win. i told them all to maintain their positions. i'm glad they did.
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Unemployment tends to go down when the economy does well. Who knew?

So which is it? Was the economy shit under Obama or was it good enough to show an obvious downward trend of unemployment that Donnie is now taking credit for? Or, which Donnie policies were implemented that went back in time to create said downward trend that he can now brag about having the lowest ever recorded unemployment percentage?
---

Darkman124 posted...

one of the more interesting trends during the end of the obama presidency was that unemployment dropped from ~7 to 5.5 while stocks were essentially flat

that would suggest it's not a very good idea to try to extrapolate stock returns as a metric for how well the average person is doing. the S&P is up 40% since trump's win, but wages are up ~5%. unemployment is down, from 5.5% to 4.1%, reflecting far fewer jobs created than stocks gained in valuation. mainly because the principal driver of stock valuation has been expectation (and acquisition) of the tax cut. a secondary driver was the dip in 2015 in earnings that reversed itself around early-mid 2016. visible here:

https://insight.factset.com/hubfs/Resources%20Section/Research%20Desk/Earnings%20Insight/EarningsInsight_012518.pdf

that said, krugman has never been more wrong than nov 9. i can't tell you how many people contacted me for financial advice after trump's win. i told them all to maintain their positions. i'm glad they did.

I didn't claim that unemployment can't go down when the economy isn't doing well; I said it tends to be that way.

Also, the claim was that Obama's policies are responsible for the low unemployment numbers now. I asked for which policies were being referred to, and that question has not been answered.
---

Sephiroth1288 posted...

I didn't claim that unemployment can't go down when the economy isn't doing well; I said it tends to be that way.

and i'm saying your claim doesn't really match up very well with the data presented in this topic. it does match up okay with the period 2010-2014 though.

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Also, the claim was that Obama's policies are responsible for the low unemployment numbers now. I asked for which policies were being referred to, and that question has not been answered.

sure, i'll answer it:

the stimulus package

had it been larger, the economic recovery would've been much faster. it combined two excellent policies: middle-class focused tax cuts that drove spending upward, and a direct keynesian prime-the-pump cash influx.

but it was enough to reverse the downtrend in march, and led to year after year of growth in earnings and reductions in unemployment.

there ya go.
---

Heineken14 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Unemployment tends to go down when the economy does well. Who knew?

So which is it? Was the economy shit under Obama or was it good enough to show an obvious downward trend of unemployment that Donnie is now taking credit for? Or, which Donnie policies were implemented that went back in time to create said downward trend that he can now brag about having the lowest ever recorded unemployment percentage?

Which Obama policies created that trend?
---

darkjedilink posted...

Which Obama policies created that trend?

this is awkward.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Also, the claim was that Obama's policies are responsible for the low unemployment numbers now. I asked for which policies were being referred to, and that question has not been answered.

sure, i'll answer it:

the stimulus package

had it been larger, the economic recovery would've been much faster. it combined two excellent policies: middle-class focused tax cuts that drove spending upward, and a direct keynesian prime-the-pump cash influx.

but it was enough to reverse the downtrend in march, and led to year after year of growth in earnings and reductions in unemployment.

there ya go.

Lol, in your dreams.

None of that spending actually amounted to anything. Remember the 'shovel-ready products' meme?
---

Darkman124 posted...

sure, i'll answer it:

the stimulus package

had it been larger, the economic recovery would've been much faster. it combined two excellent policies: middle-class focused tax cuts that drove spending upward, and a direct keynesian prime-the-pump cash influx.

but it was enough to reverse the downtrend in march, and led to year after year of growth in earnings and reductions in unemployment.

there ya go.

So the stimulus package in 2009...

is responsible for the unemployment rate a decade later?
---

darkjedilink posted...

Heineken14 posted...

Sephiroth1288 posted...

Unemployment tends to go down when the economy does well. Who knew?

So which is it? Was the economy shit under Obama or was it good enough to show an obvious downward trend of unemployment that Donnie is now taking credit for? Or, which Donnie policies were implemented that went back in time to create said downward trend that he can now brag about having the lowest ever recorded unemployment percentage?

Which Obama policies created that trend?

Which of Donnie's have contributed to it? This topic was asking about lies from the state of the union address, someone brought up him taking credit for the record unemployment number. I showed a graph that he is taking credit for something that was already happening. Someone will have to explain to me how Donnie contributed to that to be able to take credit for it.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Lol, in your dreams.

None of that spending actually amounted to anything. Remember the 'shovel-ready products' meme?

as always: you are extremely uninformed.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w16759.pdf
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/chodorow-reich/files/does_state_fiscal_relief_during_recessions_increase_employment.pdf
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress-2011-2012/reports/05-25-arra.pdf

Sephiroth1288 posted...

So the stimulus package in 2009...

is responsible for the unemployment rate a decade later?

yes. that's the basis of how 'priming the pump' works. a plethora of academic papers support the assertion. i posted three. there are others, which are more critical, generally positing that it needed to be bigger (but still giving some credit where credit's due). i tend to agree more with those, and will share them if you are interested.

certainly, it makes more sense to a regular person that a policy has long-term effects than that a policy has effects before it even becomes law.
---