Our View: Voters can become informed with fact-checking
Fact checking has exposed erroneous facts in statements made by both candidates during the presidential debate.
The first of three debates leading up to the presidential nomination took place in Denver last Thursday. In the aftermath of the debate, both President Barack Obama and Republican hopeful Mitt Romney have been targets of fact checking with journalists and pundits trying to determine just how factual Obama and Romney’s facts were.
The debate was already a heated event. Many viewers were appeased by Romney’s sudden bravado, calling his offensive performance a victory. Others thought Obama was in control, despite his laid back approach. Regardless of who performed better during the debate, the fact checking that happened after the debate has exposed erroneous statements presented as facts by both Romney and Obama.
Two key websites that contributed to the first wave of fact checks were PolitiFact and FactCheck. These sites unearthed the truth behind the facts and statistics presented to the nation by both candidates.
For example, in the presidential debate, Romney claimed that Obama had actually doubled the U.S. deficit. According to PolitiFact.com, Romney’s claim was false. Their evidence shows that Obama has actually reduced the deficit by 8 percent.
Similarly, PolitiFact disproves Obama’s claim that Romney’s definition of a small business includes Donald Trump. In fact, under Romney’s proposed tax plan, Trump would get a tax cut simply because he was a taxpayer, not a small business.
Although both candidates fabricated or altered certain facts, Romney presented inaccurate information more often than Obama.
Because of websites like PolitiFact and FactCheck, it has become harder for politicians to get away with untruthful claims. Anyone can easily Google a statistic or further investigate a topic on the Internet. This may be bad news for some politicians, but it makes comprehending a political issue a simpler task for the voting public.
This first round of fact checking has proven that both Romney and Obama are capable of bending the truth in their favor. Regardless of political affiliation, voters should not blindly trust their candidate. Instead, voters should construct their own viewpoint on an issue, not based on a candidate’s performance in a debate, but on studied facts.
The presidential debates are just that–performances. Like actors on stage, candidates must persuade an audience to believe that they’re telling the truth, and that they are worthy of votes. Thus, the debates are, more often than not, more about rhetorical skill than factual information. Even in the age of the Internet and easy fact-checking, the so-called winner of the debate is usually the candidate who performs best.
Romney’s sense of urgency and determination certainly painted him in a better light than Obama visually, but his false claims do not help his chance at the presidency. That being said, many voters are not going to change their minds this late in the game, even if their chosen candidate is caught fabricating information.
Throughout our nation’s history, voters have essentially been forced to blindly accept what candidates present as fact. Before the age of the Internet, the general public had to rely on the candidates’ performance skills.
Now, voters have an important opportunity to understand what’s going on behind the scenes of the candidates’ performances. In the past, fact checking required ample time and effort. The first presidential debate this year was almost immediately fact-checked. The quick and easy availability of the facts means that every voter can be informed.