Tomorrow is election day. At this point, the probability is vanishingly small that any single fact checked statement from any of the 2012 presidential or vice presidential candidates could sway anyone's decision. It's similarly unlikely that an analysis of the aggregate truthfulness of the candidates will influence votes. Since everyone's already decided, now is a good time to reflect. On the malarkey scale, how do the presidential candidates this election year compare to the candidates in 2008? Specifically, did the candidates spew more malarkey or less? I'll use Malark-O-Meter's factuality scale and statistical analysis tools to address this question. The question is an important one because it gives us some insight into how the shifts in political climate since Obama entered office have influenced campaign politics.
The analysis is at Malark-O-Meter.