| spaceguy said:
|
It is clear that you're not even trying to look at this from an objective viewpoint, and have decided that "Obama is going to win" and are looking for an argument to support that ... MSNBC (a hard left news organization) may be publishing the "lies" Romney told 24/7, but CNN (a center-left news organization) isn't; and most centerist and conservative news organization have been reporting that both Obama and Romney were similar in how honest/misleading they were.
Most people who are not blinded by bias realize that the "misleading" statements made by both candidates are usually a matter of interpretation; and in the case of Mitt Romney it is based on interpretations of how he will implement something he stated he intends on doing even though the stated intentions are vague to give him room to negotiate implementation details with both parties if elected. It is sort of like being critical of someone who is applying to be the new head of the Playstation division within Sony because they stated that they wanted to improve the division's profits in the next generation by releasing the PS4 at a price that doesn't lose money, giving it the performance people expect from a Playstation system, selling it at a mass market price, and improving first party game sales through increased quality of games; some people will claim that he is lying because "How do you produce a system as advanced as the PS3, sell it for $300, and not take a loss on the hardware?" but in reality they're picking the specifics to fill in the vagueness and using those specifics to claim that it is not possible.
It is fair to call out politicians to suggest specifics about their plan, and in places where they're flexible to list alternatives, but claiming that they're lying for being vague is moronic
