I have addressed this issue in my previous posts the last few weeks, but I find myself, still, seeing it all over the internet and social media. Let’s begin with a nice graph:
The graph comes directly from an August 5 article, which credits Robert Mann of Politifact from this August 1 article at motherjones.com. I shouldn’t need to break it any of it down, but behavior on the internet begs to differ. I just want to point out a few particularly important things. First, take a look at the top. By far, the least trustworthy presidential candidate of the last nine years is Drumpf. In fact, nearly 80% of the Drumpf statements checked are at least “mostly false.” Approximately one percent register as simply “true.” Contrast that with Hillary Clinton, the second most trustworthy presidential candidate of the past nine years (number one being the current Commander in Chief). Clinton’s at least “mostly false” and worse registers at approximately 27%. In fact, more than half of her statements registered as at least “mostly true,” the only candidate for whom that is the case, and she is roughly tied with the best percentage for the candidate whose statements were simply “true.” To be fair to Drumpf, at least he didn’t have the worst “pants on fire” score, though he was the second worst at nearly 20%. Only one candidate can boast not registering any “pants on fire” fibs, and that candidate is Bernie Sanders. However, at a very close second, Clinton’s “pants on fire” statements register about one percent.
Why take all this time to break down a straight-forward graph of presidential candidates and their trustworthiness? Because I want the world to understand that I know Hillary Clinton is a liar . . . just like every other recent presidential candidate and politician. I am not saying that is OK. Sadly, it is part of the game these people play. Sometimes politicians purposefully mislead us for political gain or general strategy. And sometimes, no doubt, a politician doesn’t realize when he or she is lying or not telling the whole truth; after all, people seem to hold politicians to impossible standards. How dare they misrepresent, misunderstand, or even misinterpret the tens of thousands of pages of public policy and legislature that is under consideration in the US Congress at any given time. So I am happy to concede all that to the Clinton-hating world. But facts, believe it or not, don’t lie. Hillary Clinton is a rare candidate, far more prepared for the most important office in the land than anyone has probably ever been, and certainly far more prepared, qualified, and truthful (considering “mostly true” and “true” statements) than any other candidate that has run for president in the last three presidential races. Like any politician, Hillary Clinton will get caught in a lie here and there, but her record shows an attempt to be as truthful as possible. Drumpf’s record, on the other hand, proves that he lies almost every time he opens his mouth. He even denies things that he has been recorded saying. Also, while Clinton may tell the occasional falsehood, she has proven, at the very least, that she is a thoughtful and effective diplomat.