Posted on 10/04/2012 8:02:34 AM PDT by justlurking
If Barack Obama or Mitt Romney weren’t telling the truth at any point in last night’s debate, it appears they believed their own lies.
The group that got buzz on Wednesday by paying a security firm to use new truth detecting technology to give both candidates a lie-detector test during the debate said the preliminary results do not indicate any major lies from Obama or Romney.
“The lie detector voice analysis tests of the presidential debate were found to be inconclusive by Voice Analysis Technology,” a spokesman for the group, Americans for Limited Government, said Thursday.
“The technology can detect a deception if the person knows they are deceiving, but if they believe what they are saying is true, even if it is not, it is not picked up,” the group said.
The results are apparently a let down for the group, who had suggested that the test could help voters understand when the candidates weren’t being truthful during the debate.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
So it was either:
Romney lied
or
They both lied and believed their own lies.
Got it.
FU Big Media, as always!
So, if you’re truly delusional (and not just faking it), anything goes!
That's actually pretty close to correct.
I posted about this yesterday: a "lie detector" doesn't detect lies. It detects whether a person is stressed. It doesn't tell you why they are stressed.
Scrupulously honest people have the most difficulty. Just being asked if they are honest is enough to induce a lot of stress.
On the other hand, sociopaths can lie more easily than they can tell the truth. I think Obama could stand up there and claim the sky is red, and the needle wouldn't even budge.
What a joke. Obama looked like my dog when I catch him
getting into something he shouldn’t and yell at him.
In my opinion, that is the real reason Obama lost. He wasn’t bad, he didn’t have gaffes. But he also minimized his lying, because Romney pounced on him right off when he lied.
But if Obama isn’t lying, he doesn’t have much to say. Whereas Romney has plenty to say, because he is talking about what he wants to do, and he clearly wants to do it.
Uh, Obama was not bad, he was awful. His body language, his talking points were LIES. Most of the time, He couldn’t answer a question and just danced on every subject but what he was asked. Just because someone’s technology says he didnt lie...does not mean he didn’t lie.
Because. Obama lied and was busted on those lies like a kid getting caught.
[ But if Obama isn’t lying, he doesn’t have much to say. Whereas Romney has plenty to say, because he is talking about what he wants to do, and he clearly wants to do it. ]
What IF they were both lying with no intention of doing anything they said?..
You know.. because other people are actually in charge of Washington D.C..
Like Kabuki Theatre, all masks makeup and strange noises.. AND an infantile PLOT..
like John Roberts wearing a huge collar and VAmpire teeth in the Supreme Court.. Oh! and makeup..
Americans have become like little girls watching a horror movie..
Last night was no different..
OTOH, vocal stress gets interesting, and I have come to the conclusion that certain types of people are fundamentally lying all the time, which makes the baseline stressed, which makes it harder to detect when they tell a real whopper...
Like locks only keep honest people out (criminals will break them), I think lie detectors will only catch those who care about truth (or getting caught). I'm not sure Duh-1 necessarily knows the truth (with the crowd around him, he may not, really), and I'm not sure he cares about getting caught (because the MSM cover for him so well). With no downside, why worry?
Exactly.
An additional factor - I would give odds that Zippy was drugged up. I’m pretty sure that would make a difference to a lie detector test.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.