PolitiFact unable to detect obvious David Jolly lie

 Oh, my.

Let us stipulate from the outset that if Byron Donalds suggested there were good parts to Jim Crow then the "Half True" rating might well stands.

We likewise stipulate that if Donalds did not suggest there were good parts of Jim Crow then the appropriate rating is "False" or worse.

What has PolitiFact got?

Well, there's this from PolitiFact's summary points (red rectangle provided for emphasis):

Think twice about saying "During World War II Paul Müller discovered DDT, leading the many lives saved." I'm pretty sure that means you're finding good parts to World War II, you sicko.

Hey, maybe there's more to Jolly's claim and PolitiFact's argument than that, right? Let's keep looking.

Uh-oh. That didn't take long.

Speaking at Koinonia Worship Center on Oct. 20, a historically Black, non-denominational church in Hollywood, Florida, Jolly said his Republican opponent, U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds, once spoke positively about the Jim Crow era — a period from the late 1800s to the mid-1960s when Black people in the South were subject to state-sponsored discrimination.

“If the test is our goodness, we are failing right now. We are failing right now…When we’re a state that actually suggested years ago that we might want to teach our kids the ‘good parts’ of slavery,” Jolly said. “Or, when my opponent suggests there were good parts of Jim Crow.” 

Zebra Fact Check addressed the Florida school standards issue when Kamala Harris made the parallel false claim and PolitiFact preposterously rated it "Mostly True."

How do the liberal bloggers at PolitiFact deal with this one? Behold:

Jolly’s statement, that Donalds’ suggested there were good parts of Jim Crow, is missing context. Donalds didn’t praise the era’s discriminatory policies; his 2024 remarks centered on Black people’s conservative leanings and Black families staying together.

Ahem. The "missing context" shows Donalds did not at all say what Jolly claimed he said. PolitiFact appeals to "missing context" to pave the way toward its "Half True" rating, defined as "The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context." But what's the partial accuracy? What's one thing or even half a thing Donalds said was good about Jim Crow?

Leaving out the detail that Donalds didn't say what was claimed makes the claim false, not "Half True."

“During Jim Crow, the Black family was together,” Donalds said at the event. “During Jim Crow, more Black people were not just conservative — Black people have always been conservative-minded — but more Black people voted conservatively.” 

Donalds pointed to President Lyndon Johnson’s efforts to fight poverty after Jim Crow, which some conservatives say incentivized family separations.

 The second paragraph is the one that absolutely puts the lie to Jolly's claims and PolitiFact's.

Donalds built a contrast between government that didn't try to help Blacks and government that (supposedly) tried to help Blacks.

Government welfare programs contributed to the weakening of the Black family. PolitiFact discovers this in the story but just can't seem to put the pieces together and find Jolly "False" or "Pants on Fire."

See:

When PolitiFact reported on Donalds’ comments in 2024, we cited research showing that from 1940 to 1980, both white and Black women divorced from their partners more than they previously did, but it happened sooner and more steeply for Black women. The percentage of Black women ages 40 to 44 who said they have ever been married fell from 94% in 1930 to 63% in 2012.

Some conservative commentators argue that government policies, including safety net programs that help women parent alone, are responsible for family separations. But researchers say it’s difficult to point to a single cause.

We wonder which conservatives argued that the government policies were the sole cause of the weakening family. Is there a straw man lurking here?

Well, we found nothing in the source list, so perhaps it was pulled out of their PolitiAss.

The study PolitiFact seems to have relied on to explain to us that features of the Great Society were not the sole cause of the weakening of Black family structure does not seem to mention any features of Great Society programs at all.

This was a great candidate for a "Pants on Fire" rating for a Democrat in 2026. It would have been the second such, down from a high of 31 back in 2010. PolitiFact's always-weak ability to hold Democrats accountable for falsehoods has atrophied to nearly nothing.

PolitiFact puts its nose right up close to the truth but can't sniff it out:

Jolly said Donalds “suggested there were good parts of Jim Crow.” 

In 2024, Donalds spoke favorably about some aspects of Black families during that era, saying “during Jim Crow, the Black family was together” and that Black Americans voted more conservatively then. He wasn’t praising the racist policies of the era, as Jolly’s statement implies. 

Jolly’s statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. We rate it Half True.

It was false, rated "Half True." PolitiFact identified nothing true in Jolly's claim.

Afters 1: I don't often use the term "lie" to refer to intentional deceit, because knowing what people are thinking is a dicey prospect. But skills learned while a slave are not slavery and the strength of the Black family during the times of Jim Crow doesn't count as any kind of endorsement of Jim Crow laws. It ought to be obvious to anybody.

If I credit David Jolly with intelligence as high as significantly below average, he cannot think he was telling the truth. I don't think Jolly's completely stupid, therefore I conclude he was very likely deliberately lying.

Afters 2: While researching I stumbled across a book review in The New York Times discussing the Middle East slave trade. It touches on the typical fate of the Black male slave headed toward Arabic lands: castration, which he might survive, followed by service as guards or the like--with a possibility of high service in government (eunuchs, mostly). The women were more highly valued, serving as concubines, cooks, housekeepers, etc. Their children by their masters were free and mixed in society, apparently.

I also looked into the range and extent of Jim Crow laws after PolitiFact suggested they were a Southern phenomenon. Their range will probably surprise you. Worth a visit.