Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,182 posts)
Fri Aug 5, 2016, 12:42 PM Aug 2016

Politifact has to resort to scientific evidence to point out the obvious to dumb Trump fans.

That Hillary Clinton never actually said, "We are going to raise taxes on the middle class" in a stump speech to what we assume we would assume to be predominantly middle class audience, who promptly cheered her statement.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/aug/05/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrongly-says-hillary-clinton-wants-ra/



Alan Yu, a linguistics professor at the University of Chicago who specializes in phonology, ran the audio through a computer program called Praat, which analyzes phonetics.

By analyzing the sound waves, we can see that Clinton was saying "aren’t," because she definitely pronounced the "n," though she didn’t really hit the "t."

*****
As you can see, the phoneme (unit of sound) highlighted in pink is an "n," though there’s not a "t." That still suggests she was trying for the word "aren’t."

"It is pretty common for people to not release the final ‘t in word-final -nt clusters and is definitely not likely for someone to release the ‘t’in a three-consonant sequence like ‘ntg’ in ‘aren't going,’" Yu told us. "In any case, since she did pronounce the ‘n’ in ‘aren't’, it is clear that she produced the negated form of the copula ‘are.’"

Edward Flemming, a linguistics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also ran the audio through Praat and came up with the same results. But even if we didn’t have Praat, he said, context alone sways the argument in the Clinton camp’s favor.

"Also if she was going to say ‘we are going to’, wouldn’t she contract it to ‘we’re’, as she does a few words earlier?" Flemming pointed out. "To my ears, it is clear that she is saying ‘aren’t’."



Meanwhile, I still had someone on my Facebook page today reacting "OMG! Hillary says she's going to raise taxes on the middle class. Gaaaaah!!!!!"
3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Politifact has to resort to scientific evidence to point out the obvious to dumb Trump fans. (Original Post) Tommy_Carcetti Aug 2016 OP
Trump resorting to transparent lies in his attack ads against Hillary is really .... Jim__ Aug 2016 #1
Saw it on FB and Fox News this morning underpants Aug 2016 #2
The RW doesn't accept science. This won't help. kestrel91316 Aug 2016 #3

Jim__

(14,077 posts)
1. Trump resorting to transparent lies in his attack ads against Hillary is really ....
Fri Aug 5, 2016, 12:57 PM
Aug 2016

... an unintentional compliment to Hillary's campaign. Trump can't find anything to attack in her actual positions.

underpants

(182,818 posts)
2. Saw it on FB and Fox News this morning
Fri Aug 5, 2016, 01:04 PM
Aug 2016

As my wife pointed out by their highlighting it the actual message (which is painfully clear to anyone) will get told to the nth degree.

They think they have a winner with this but they are really grasping at straws.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Politifact has to resort ...