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
Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forum
Congratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
Washington Post Fact-Checker Gets Dragged for Attacking Bernie Sanders Over Extremely True Fact
Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler was roundly criticized for attacking Independent Vermont Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders over a statement that was 100 percent true, but according to Kessler was not especially meaningful because of how very true it was.
At last Thursdays Democratic Presidential Debate Part Two: Electoral Boogaloo, Sanders told moderators, We have a new vision for America. And at a time when we have three people in this country owning more wealth than the bottom half of America, while 500,000 people are sleeping out on the streets today, we think it is time for change, real change.
Kessler included that statement in his post-debate fact-check, and found that while the statement was based on numbers that add up, the comparison was not especially meaningful because people in the bottom half have essentially no wealth, as debts cancel out whatever assets they might have.
Some people disagreed with that assessment and seemed to think the fact that the bottom half of Americans have essentially no wealth made Sanders statement more meaningful, not less. Those people included senior Bernie Sanders campaign adviser David Sirota, who filed Kesslers assertion under THINGS YOU CANT MAKE UP:
(snip)
https://www.mediaite.com/news/washington-post-fact-checker-gets-dragged-for-attacking-bernie-sanders-over-extremely-true-fact/
There are some nice tweet responses on the link.
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 683 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (11)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Washington Post Fact-Checker Gets Dragged for Attacking Bernie Sanders Over Extremely True Fact (Original Post)
Uncle Joe
Jul 2019
OP
Indeed - That's The Bottom Line - The Status Quo Works Just Fine For Them
corbettkroehler
Jul 2019
#3
aidbo
(2,328 posts)1. I bet it is "especially meaningful" to the people in that cohort.
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Uncle Joe
(58,362 posts)2. Apparently those Americans don't count according to Kessler
because they don't have wealth and thus while true it's not especially meaningful.
This is no surprise to me as it's coming from a Bezos paper underling.
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
corbettkroehler
(1,898 posts)3. Indeed - That's The Bottom Line - The Status Quo Works Just Fine For Them
but no millions of Americans who are uninsured or underinsured (such as this author).
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided