It's too bad my Russian handlers don't pay me (nor do they tell me what to do or communicate with me in any discernible fashion), or I'd have time to point out more of these PolitiFact train wrecks.
What's wrong with the fact check? Let us count the ways.
Right out of the box, PolitiFact's analysis follows the ridiculous precedent of a WTVG fact check segment PolitiFact links in its source list. The text of PolitiFact's fact check does not credit WTVG for beating them on the (flubbed) verification scoop. And PolitiFact calls WTVG "WVTG" in its story. That's a typo, sure. Maybe one of the many editors involved in the review of the story should have noticed that.
WTVG, like PolitiFact, emphasized that the detransitioned speaker in the ad wasn't from Ohio, and had not herself received surgery as a minor. Both fact checkers likewise emphasized that Ohio already has a law restricting sex-change treatments for minors.
So what? If Soren Aldaco's experiences happened in Texas and Ohio law already prohibits such treatments on minors, how does that make the ad's claim false?
The reasoning is apparently based on a colossal nitpick of extremely dubious legitimacy: Aldaco says "Like me."
The PolitiFact deck trumpets its course off the rails:
One would think PolitiFact would put its deck emphasis on how the ad falsely portrays Sherrod Brown as unwilling to permit transitioning treatments on minors. But no. The fact check throughout tries to shoot the messenger for supposedly blaming Brown for her troubles. She said nothing of the kind, but that's no impediment for PolitiFact:
The ads make it seem as though Brown’s position on gender-affirming care for minors played a role in Aldaco’s experience.Do the ads make it seem as though Brown's position on gender-affirming care played a role in Aldaco's experience?
It's really a shame the best PolitiFact can do is assert the claim without support.
In simple terms, there should be nothing wrong with a person possessing firsthand knowledge of transitioning from sharing their personal experience and applying that experience to the political position of a national office politician from another state.
Here's PolitiFact's account of the ad:
In a Senate Leadership Fund ad published Sept. 28, a woman said, “Sherrod Brown supports sex changes for minors. Irreversible surgery on kids. Like me.”
She continues, “At 11, I was groomed by strangers online. At 15, a doctor told my family I was transgender. Hormone injections, then surgery, without my parents’ consent. I was a kid. I was confused. Sherrod Brown isn’t. He knows the consequences. Ohio’s kids deserve better. So did I.”
Contrary to PolitiFact's logical leap, "Like me" isn't blaming Brown for Aldaco's personal experiences. She's just introducing the audience to the fact that her testimony comes from personal experience. Perhaps only a professional fact checker could fail to see that.
As for the Ohio law restricting transitioning treatment for minors, it simply cannot be that PolitiFact (and WTVG) aren't aware that a Senator Brown has a say in the legality of transitioning care for minors in the other 49 states?
The Ohio law, which Sherrod Brown apparently did nothing to pass, has nothing to do with whether Brown meaningfully opposes applying transitioning care to minors.
Near the end of the story we get PolitiFact's summary dismissal of the evidence against Brown:
Brown’s public comments about gender-affirming care for minors have been limited. The Senate Leadership Fund has pointed to a 2023 news interview when Brown said, “A child’s health care decisions are between them, their parents, their families, their doctors — not politicians. I will never agree with anybody that wants to bring politics into the family situation with health care, period.”
He did not say in that interview that he supports sex-change surgery for minors.
"He did not say in that interview that he supports sex-change surgery for minors." He didn't? On the contrary, he did. Brown was commenting on his vote against a bill that would have prohibited medical treatment on minors aimed at changing the sex of the patient. The reasoning he offered is consistent with wanting to preserve a parental right to seek such treatment for their children. This isn't a difficult problem to figure out. It's 2+2=4 territory.
PolitiFact could legitimately fault the ad for leaving out the potential context of parental consent. But Brown's opposition to the law J. P. Vance sponsored conclusively shows Brown wanted to leave a window (if not a hangar door) open for minors to receive drugs and surgery intended to change their sex.
Train wreck.
