Fact-Checkers Slam Romney for Upcoming Debate Performance
Denver, CO (AP) – As the first presidential debate approaches, Politifact.com and WashingtonPost.com have given Mitt Romney ratings of “Pants-on-Fire” and “4 Pinocchios” respectively for his forthcoming performance.
“We give Romney’s upcoming debate performance a Pants-on-Fire rating” said Bill Adair of the fact-checking website Politifact.com. “Romney’s comments at the debate will definitely be an exaggeration and there will simply be no evidence to support the claims he will make. Not since our fact check of SNL have we seen someone about to play as fast and loose with the facts.”
Glenn Kessler, fact-checker at WashingtonPost.com, who himself was recently awarded 4 Pinnochios by Marc Thiessen, a columnist at his own paper, notes that “What he [Romney] is going to say about the President’s economic record is just simply not true, and what’s worse is that he’ll take the President’s words out of context.”
Other fact-check organizations have come to similar conclusions about Romney’s performance at the Domestic Policy Presidential Debate which is scheduled for this coming Wednesday.
FactCheck.org’s Lori Robertson reviews this coming Wednesday’s debate by noting that: “Romney greatly exaggerates the President’s economic record to make it look as if the President has failed. This simply cannot be ascertained from the unemployment numbers or credit rating appraisals” She continues, “In an attempt to convince the American people that Obama has failed, Romney is just citing numbers without asking the White House for clarification.”
Andrea Saul, Romney Campaign Press Secretary, questioned the conclusions: “Its ridiculous that these organizations which purport to be non-partisan would fact-check Mitt Romney before he even engages in the debates. It’s as though they’re an extension of the Obama Truth Team.” However, when asked about the accuracy of the prediction metrics, Kessler, Adair and Robertson defended their methodology as sound and non-partisan. “Fact-check organizations routinely check the statements of politicians and high-profile media personalities in an objective attempt to give the United States electorate a better and clearer understanding of the issues of the day, allowing them to make more informed decisions,” said Kessler. “Much like pollsters.”