View Full Version : 2024 Lie of the Year
Apparently, Politifact users select a lie of the year. The 2024 vote selected the Haitian Pet Cuisine story. That seemed pretty odd to me, considering the list of possible candidates. How about “only God Almighty can make me step down”, or “I respect the rule of law too much to pardon my son”? Or the myriad conspiracy theories covering everything from the Trump assassination attempts to the New Jersey Mystery Drones?
Has fact checking degenerated to the point of mere bias confirmation?
iris lilies
1-8-25, 6:36pm
The lie about eating pets in Ohio was ridiculous but a flash in the pan. It was a news story for what, 5 days?
Fir me, and the one i will never forget, is the conspiracy to cover up the competency of Joe Biden as President of the United States. It was huge, as measured by impact on the world and by the number of supporters, White
house personnel, and news media who participated.It was lengthy, going back before 2024. It is unforgivable. It is The Big Lie.
All of the times the Hunter pardon lie was told by Joe Biden and his sycophants just irritate me but they don’t have serious impact.
The lie about eating pets in Ohio was ridiculous but a flash in the pan. It was a news story for what, 5 days?
Fir me, and the one i will never forget, is the conspiracy to cover up the competency of Joe Biden as President of the United States. It was huge, as measured by impact on the world and by the number of supporters, White
house personnel, and news media who participated.It was lengthy, going back before 2024. It is unforgivable. It is The Big Lie.
All of the times the Hunter pardon lie was told by Joe Biden and his sycophants just irritates me but doesn't have serious impact.
I liked that interview Chuck Schumer did the other day where he glared over the top of his glasses like an angry vice principal and denied everything.
I would vote for the Haitian pet story every time.
frugal-one
1-10-25, 11:36am
That everyone is treated equally under the law. Felon trump will not get jail time for any of his transgressions. Anyone else would be put away.
early morning
1-10-25, 11:48am
Declining physical and mental health coverups are not anything new at the presidential level, so to me, that's a big yawn. Presidents have plenty of advisors and people to keep things humming along. ELECTING someone of diminished mental and/or moral capacity is much more of an issue, but we just did that, so hey, another precedent. I'm voting for the Haitian pet story. Nationally it may have been more of a flash-in-the-pan, but more locally, it's still causing problems.
And I agree with frugal-one, but that's not just a lie for this year, it's a lie for all time...
Hard to pick, there are so many. The big lie about election results tops my list and the routine gop lies about climate change is a close runner up. The. Haitian pet story is the most entertaining.
i think we were deceived about the mental fitness to hold office and it was about the same for both candidates.
I'd have to agree with Iris Lilies that the Biden competency campaign was by far the biggest lie of the year. Not just in the brazenness of the lies coming out of every Democratic politicians mouth, but also the sheer scope of the campaign to convince us that our lying eyes didn't actually see what we all certainly did see over the past several years. The administration, the Democratic Party and the vast majority of media all colluded to advance the lie right up till the moment it all fell apart during Biden's only debate appearance.
Shoot, I'd actually declare it the lie of the decade!
Speaking of cover ups of the decade.
‘Trump is now the most powerful head of state in the world, and one of the most impulsive, arrogant, ignorant, disorganised, chaotic, nihilistic, self-contradictory, self-important, and self-serving. He has his finger on the triggers of a thousand or more of the most powerful thermonuclear weapons in the world. That means he could kill more people in a few seconds than any dictator in past history has been able to kill during his entire years in power.’
6177
frugal-one
1-11-25, 10:24am
‘Trump is now the most powerful head of state in the world, and one of the most impulsive, arrogant, ignorant, disorganised, chaotic, nihilistic, self-contradictory, self-important, and self-serving. He has his finger on the triggers of a thousand or more of the most powerful thermonuclear weapons in the world. That means he could kill more people in a few seconds than any dictator in past history has been able to kill during his entire years in power.’
6177
Totally frightening!
Totally boring. The long distance psychoanalysis thing has become a tiresome trope in American political polemics.
Totally boring. The long distance psychoanalysis thing has become a tiresome trope in American political polemics.
I suppose if professional opinions are bogus, I could add that they match my personal expert observations. I believe Trump is mentally unstable, possibly related to age or greed, to match or exceed the extent of Joe's memory issues. Personal observation seems to be the most common opinion on Joe's state of mind, too. A direct fitness to serve objective evaluation is unlikely to happen for either and we just go with what we have.
Rogar, am I following you correctly in that you believe Trump will use nuclear weapons against real or imagined foes during his term? If so, what leads you to that conclusion?
Rogar, am I following you correctly in that you believe Trump will use nuclear weapons against real or imagined foes during his term? If so, what leads you to that conclusion?
The "President has his finger on the triggers of thousands of thermonuclear weapons" narrative does not conform with how the weapons are actually used.
It's just fear-mongering.
No, I don't think he would use a nuclear weapon, although he might talk about it or coerce others. But that's rather the extreme. I don't have confidence in his mental capacity to manage international affairs, our health, or our economy at the presidential level due to his instabilities and mental incompetence. It is curious though that he seems to have plans to bolster our nuclear arsenal, as I understand it. Just a deterrent?
Of course I looked it up. Does not sound like a stable individual.
"Behind closed doors in 2017, President Donald Trump discussed the idea of using a nuclear weapon against North Korea and suggested he could blame a U.S. strike against the communist regime on another country, according to a new section of a book that details key events of his administration."
"Trump t (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/948355557022420992)weeted in early January 2018: "North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the 'Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.' Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!"
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-discussed-using-nuclear-weapon-north-korea-2017-blaming-someone-rcna65120
I suppose if professional opinions are bogus, I could add that they match my personal expert observations. I believe Trump is mentally unstable, possibly related to age or greed, to match or exceed the extent of Joe's memory issues. Personal observation seems to be the most common opinion on Joe's state of mind, too. A direct fitness to serve objective evaluation is unlikely to happen for either and we just go with what we have.
It’s an expert opinion if it’s informed. It’s just another hack spouting off when it’s based on sound bites and cocktail chatter.
Some things can boil down to Occum's razor as having a simple easy explanation. As Steve Martin once said, "May I mombo dogface to the banana patch". I've heard nonsensical babble from both Trump and Biden's mouths. Trump just says it with more confidence. Trump scares me more because he's on a power trip.
People too often invoke Occam’s Razor to justify oversimplifying a problem. I think that is one way Trump’s enemies play into his hands. If one uncritically accepts the “Orange Man Bad” paradigm, it opens the door to all kinds of unproductive behaviors that ultimately harm the anti-Trump cause: the resort to anti democratic measures to “save democracy”; lies and coverups for the greater good; incessant race-baiting; frenzied rhetoric and juvenile name-calling; lawfare; mental diagnoses absent due diligence. The voters took this in and reacted accordingly.
The Trump problem is more complicated than good vs evil or competence vs fecklessness. He’s an opportunist pursuing a weird mix of left and right ideology, who only benefits from shrill attacks based on luxury beliefs. I think in the long run it will be more effective to laugh at him than to pretend we’re terrified of all the things we imagine he will do.
I hope your are right. For me as the casual observer it doesn't take much to realize Trump is significantly unhinged and Biden has some age issues. Thus a simple analysis. What Trump actually does with his tenure is up for grabs and no easy answer to that. I think he's about two thirds talk, but the other third is less predictable.
People too often invoke Occam’s Razor to justify oversimplifying a problem. I think that is one way Trump’s enemies play into his hands. If one uncritically accepts the “Orange Man Bad” paradigm, it opens the door to all kinds of unproductive behaviors that ultimately harm the anti-Trump cause: the resort to anti democratic measures to “save democracy”; lies and coverups for the greater good; incessant race-baiting; frenzied rhetoric and juvenile name-calling; lawfare; mental diagnoses absent due diligence. The voters took this in and reacted accordingly.
The Trump problem is more complicated than good vs evil or competence vs fecklessness. He’s an opportunist pursuing a weird mix of left and right ideology, who only benefits from shrill attacks based on luxury beliefs. I think in the long run it will be more effective to laugh at him than to pretend we’re terrified of all the things we imagine he will do.
I agree. God knows I'm not a fan, but I've seen all kinds of stuff on social media from people angry that Obama was smiling at something Trump said. I mean, really??? Let's see what real problems we have to face as a country once the new administration is in.
I agree. God knows I'm not a fan, but I've seen all kinds of stuff on social media from people angry that Obama was smiling at something Trump said. I mean, really??? Let's see what real problems we have to face as a country once the new administration is in.
Yeah. Biden’s running all over the place with “cement his legacy” speeches, interviews and op-eds, but it almost feels like Trump’s already been President for a month based on all the outraged coverage he’s been getting. And you can bet he’s loving it.
Yeah. Biden’s running all over the place with “cement his legacy” speeches, interviews and op-eds, but it almost feels like Trump’s already been President for a month based on all the outraged coverage he’s been getting. And you can bet he’s loving it.
Today, David Brooks in "We Deserve Pete Hegseth":
"The lesson for Democrats over the next four years is clear: Don’t fly into moral outrage every day. Focus on Trumpian incompetence."
iris lilies
1-15-25, 10:22pm
Today, David Brooks in "We Deserve Pete Hegseth":
"The lesson for Democrats over the next four years is clear: Don’t fly into moral outrage every day. Focus on Trumpian incompetence."
Brooke has been watching Bill Maher then, because that’s what Maher said weeks ago. This time around in this Trump presidency he’s not gonna get all heated up about every little Trumpism, it’s the big stuff we need to pay attention to.
rosarugosa
1-16-25, 6:57am
Today, David Brooks in "We Deserve Pete Hegseth":
"The lesson for Democrats over the next four years is clear: Don’t fly into moral outrage every day. Focus on Trumpian incompetence."
I do not want to see Hegseth confirmed, not so much because he seems like a loathsome human being, but because he seems to be totally unqualified for this really important position.
I do not want to see Hegseth confirmed, not so much because he seems like a loathsome human being, but because he seems to be totally unqualified for this really important position.
That should be the new bumper sticker for the Republican Party:
Loathsome, Unqualified, Republican!
I watched Pam Bondi being grilled by Durban and Chuck Shumer. Both pressed her on the 2020 election out come and election interference. She would go as far as saying Biden was the legitimate president, but was pressed for a direct answer on whether Trump lost in the election and would not answer. She was vague about charging Liz Cheney with unknown crimes and pardoning the 1/6 rioters. I hardly expect impartiality. Why these folks continue to espouse the big election lie is at the very least curious.
Brooke has been watching Bill Maher then, because that’s what Maher said weeks ago. This time around in this Trump presidency he’s not gonna get all heated up about every little Trumpism, it’s the big stuff we need to pay attention to.
James Carville has talked about the need to “rub off the stench” of “NPR language”, and I think he has a point. I heard a joke that every time someone says “Latinx” or “Community of Color” a new Republican is born.
It also seems to me that the people who gave us the Russia hoax and the Biden coverup lack a certain minimal level of credibility in lecturing the country on ethical compromise. And all the hysterical “end of democracy” stuff will not serve them well if the promised detention camps don’t appear.
In practice, I’ve no doubt at all Trump will be vulnerable on any number of governance issues. That will hurt his cause with the electorate much more than indulging in absurd morality plays.
early morning
1-16-25, 12:44pm
I seem to remember a time not so long ago when the *ahem* conservative element derided liberals of being such lily-livered pansies that they could be upset by language that did not agree with their "delicate sensibilities". My, how the tables have turned. . .
I seem to remember a time not so long ago when the *ahem* conservative element derided liberals of being such lily-livered pansies that they could be upset by language that did not agree with their "delicate sensibilities". My, how the tables have turned. . .
I don’t think Maher and Carville could be fairly characterized as overly sensitive conservatives. I think they are concerned about a party elite and designated chatterers pursuing luxury beliefs and boutique policies that trigger the gag reflexes of the people they purport to represent.
Conservatives are still the same lovable fascist racist misogynist deplorables who learned to discount such language long ago.
early morning
1-16-25, 2:12pm
Conservatives are still the same lovable fascist racist misogynist deplorables who learned to discount such language long ago. I'm with ya up until the part about learning to discount such language, lol
luxury beliefs? boutique policies? That's some funny stuff, lol.
luxury beliefs? boutique policies? That's some funny stuff, lol.
A plurality of the voters didn’t seem to think so. I think that was Maher’s and Carville’s point.
frugal-one
1-16-25, 9:45pm
James Carville has talked about the need to “rub off the stench” of “NPR language”, and I think he has a point. I heard a joke that every time someone says “Latinx” or “Community of Color” a new Republican is born.
It also seems to me that the people who gave us the Russia hoax and the Biden coverup lack a certain minimal level of credibility in lecturing the country on ethical compromise. And all the hysterical “end of democracy” stuff will not serve them well if the promised detention camps don’t appear.
In practice, I’ve no doubt at all Trump will be vulnerable on any number of governance issues. That will hurt his cause with the electorate much more than indulging in absurd morality plays.
Sounds like the epitome of a white supremist IMO. Upsets their sensibilities?
iris lilies
1-16-25, 10:19pm
Sounds like the epitome of a white supremist IMO. Upsets their sensibilities?
Are you familiar with the surveys that show people of actual Latin descent dislike the term “Latinx?” Are you calling them white supremacists?
James Carville has talked about the need to “rub off the stench” of “NPR language”, and I think he has a point. I heard a joke that every time someone says “Latinx” or “Community of Color” a new Republican is born.
Sounds like the epitome of a white supremist IMO. Upsets their sensibilities?
I think it's interesting that the term "Latinx" was coined by mostly white liberals in order to show other white liberals that it was more important to not differentiate between genders than to respect hundreds of years of cultural norms.
It's been a while but I remember reading somewhere a year or two ago that while the term was very popular among white liberals, only about 3% of Latinos and Latinas approved of the term while the remainder found it offensive to their culture.
So, I guess you're right, it does seem to be the epitome of white supremacism.
I think it's interesting that the term "Latinx" was coined by mostly white liberals ...
I believe the specific etymological history of the word is a bit unclear and disputed.
That said:
- I think prescriptivism in language is a bit silly to get hung up on, especially if you have any familiarity with diachronic linguistics.
- In my personal experience, most people who use "latinx" have little familiarity with the Spanish language.
- I have more than passing familiarity with Spanish and several other Romance languages. Latinx does not "feel" right, it does not conform to the language's historical or current structure.
- "Real"(*) Spanish is a prescriptive language. It has a formal gatekeeping organization, much like French does. The Real Academia Española. The academy in its style manual rejects the use of "x" as a gender-neutral marker. With some vehemence. (**)
- Languages do change over time, don't get wrapped around the axle about it. Fæder ure, þu þe eart on heofonum, and so on.
(*) There are a *lot of Spanish dialects out there, many do not follow the "real" Spanish as dictated by the Real Academia Española.
(**) Bunnytrail - the selection of "x" for these grammatical changes (see also "Xicano" compared to "Chicano" may have something to do with the Nahuatl language, and its region of use. I have some modest knowledge of Nahuatl myself, but my daughter is rather fluent in it from her "Lara Croft, Tomb Raider" period.
frugal-one
1-17-25, 9:31am
Are you familiar with the surveys that show people of actual Latin descent dislike the term “Latinx?” Are you calling them white supremacists?
Reference to the person making the joke … republican … too big a deal out of “labels”.
I have done a lot of multicultural market research and I've learned that the Latin community does not prefer Latinx, but when we were creating the test materials, there was no definitive agreement on that so we just went with what our community leaders were telling us.
I have done a lot of multicultural market research and I've learned that the Latin community does not prefer Latinx, but when we were creating the test materials, there was no definitive agreement on that so we just went with what our community leaders were telling us.
If you think about it, even the "Latin" bit is problematic.
https://sixthsunridaz.com/not-hispanic-not-latinx-not-mestizo/
iris lilies
1-18-25, 12:43pm
Declining physical and mental health coverups are not anything new at the presidential level, so to me, that's a big yawn. Presidents have plenty of advisors and people to keep things humming along. ELECTING someone of diminished mental and/or moral capacity is much more of an issue, but we just did that, so hey, another precedent. I'm voting for the Haitian pet story. Nationally it may have been more of a flash-in-the-pan, but more locally, it's still causing problems.
And I agree with frugal-one, but that's not just a lie for this year, it's a lie for all time...
to the bold:
Yes, exactly. Electing old feeble Joe, pretending he was up to it for 4 more years, would be delusional.
People (well, me anyway) would be far more accepting of a plan that had him going softly into that good night after 4 years, anointing the youngster who would take over.
But the Dems had to get down and dirty to boot him out, and those stories are now coming out about the enormous pressures exerted upon the power hungry ancient pol who wouldn’t let go. He is an embarrassment. How many more days do we have again, 2?
early morning
1-18-25, 2:00pm
Electing old feeble Joe, pretending he was up to it for 4 more years, would be delusional Ah, but when he was elected, he was NOT of diminished capacity, or at minimum, LESS SO than his opponent. In 2024, we (well, not ME!) elected someone of reprehensible moral character who rants like a mad-man and is proud to be a misogynist and bigot. And you think Biden is an embarrassment? You cast Biden as power-hungry, as opposed to the man who refused to acknowledge his own defeat, who believes that if he says it's so, it really is? A person who has be the center of all attention at all times, or throwing a pathetic toddler tantrum if not? Really?
iris lilies
1-18-25, 3:28pm
Ah, but when he was elected, he was NOT of diminished capacity, or at minimum, LESS SO than his opponent. In 2024, we (well, not ME!) elected someone of reprehensible moral character who rants like a mad-man and is proud to be a misogynist and bigot. And you think Biden is an embarrassment? You cast Biden as power-hungry, as opposed to the man who refused to acknowledge his own defeat, who believes that if he says it's so, it really is? A person who has be the center of all attention at all times, or throwing a pathetic toddler tantrum if not? Really?
I agree that Trump is more “power hungry” (this really is not a good term and I am sorry I used it) than Joe
Biden but I can’t think of any term better at the moment.Both are embarrassments, Trump continually and constitutionally, and Biden in this last year. Well, we only know about the Biden last year. As the books come out from White House staffers we will learn moreabout how long his dementia went on.
I wonder which staffers are rushing to their publishers to be first about detailing the chaos of working with an impaired President.
They don’t sign Non disclosure statements, right? Not like working in the British Royal family where NDA’s are required.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.