Shouldn't this have been rated "Mostly True"?

It has nothing to do with anything he did wrong

Exactly.

Well...Ford wasn't actually elected President - so with one word it becomes 100% true.

"Have Democrats Tried to Impeach Every ELECTED GOP President Since Ike?"

Yes, they have.

Ford was a Democrat stooge

It's unreal how many trolls still use it as a source!

The same folks that quote Wikipedia. And the worst part, teachers in schools recommend it to kids for "facts".

Looks to me like Democrats are in denial about their own addiction

You missed the word EVERY. 5 out of 6 is not EVERY.

So, the statement as it stands "Have Democrats tried to impeach EVERY GOP President since Ike?" is demonstrably false.

Wholly and completely false.

If Snopes wants to call it "mostly false" instead of just False, then I can call it "mostly true", because it is true that they tried to impeach most of the GOP presidents since Ike. But yes, from a logical stand-point, the statement is false and Snopes should have explained themselves better. This just proves that they suck at what they do.

Except they do, again, you have to keep reading.

democrats are frauds at least and less than human at worse. When they do not get their way, they cause civil unrest and one civil war.

3evvok.jpg (click to show) Always irrational

eyyy an entire political party can be generalized in a star trek meme

My meme from a little while ago highlights their bias and partial representation of fact.
imgflip.com/i/3cc4if

Okay, I'll defend Snopes.

You have to keep reading the article. Articles of impeachment were introduced by all Republican Presidents except Ford BUT...

The Democratic Party, as a whole, did NOT take any of them seriously with the exception of Nixon and Trump.

Richard Nixon ---------X
Gerald Ford
Ronald Reagan
George H. W. Bush
George W. Bush
Donald Trump----------X

Your defense is "Mostly False".

"Take seriously" is not the sort of terminology you want to be using when expressing the factual accuracy of a statement.

Did democrats attempt to do it to every GOP president? The absolute best case is "False" followed closely by "Mostly True" with the exception of Ford. 5 out of 6 is definitely not "Mostly False"

I would find their clear bias less offensive if they just said "false" then elaborated that it was only 5 out of 6.

Of course, I suppose it is possible that they have psychic powers and were able to ascertain the true thoughts of every congressperson. I just find that unlikely.

yippee. we're arguing over the legitimacy of a source based on the words "mostly false"

Very well, I'll link the actual article which goes into greater detail.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/dems-impeach-gop-presidents/

Here is the snippet:

Here’s a simplified version of this process:

1. Representative introduces articles of impeachment.
2. Committee investigates matter and votes to send articles to full House.
3. House votes to impeach and sends the case to the Senate.
4. Senate votes to convict and the president is removed from office.

The impeachment efforts against Reagan, Bush Jr., and Bush Sr. only reached the first step of this process. These efforts didn’t receive much support from the Democratic party as a whole, and they never made their way out of committee for a vote in front of the full House. When Rep. Henry B. Gonzalez, D-Texas, introduced articles of impeachment against Reagan in 1987, the Associated Press reported that the effort had “virtually no chance of being approved”

Because only 2 out of the 6 Presidents actually took a vote to the House, the Impeachment process never truly started with Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.

Yes. They failed horribly.

But the "fact-check" isn't if they successfully impeached every president.

Did they TRY to do it?

Yes.

End of story. Again, it should still be just a flat out "false", rather than "mostly false". When you hit orders of degree, it is "mostly true" but still factually inaccurate.

Not necessarily. "Tried" is the key word here. In legal terms, that means there was an actual trial. So in this case, you can make the argument that only one President has been tried.

Are you sure it wasn't a simple past tense and past participle of 'try'?

Very well. Would you say Republicans tried to impeach Obama?

I can't honestly comment on that. I lived abroad from '05-'13, and I did not follow politics one bit.

Yes, but we have a lovely thing called the internet making you capable of finding multiple sources to determine if there is factual evidence of historical events, including political ones.

By your erroneous definition, Republicans also tried to impeach Barack H. Obama.

Though like all those Republican Presidents before him, it never made it past the committee.

With the exception of two Presidents, the entire House of Representatives have never voted on Impeachment proceedings since Ike. And only one was a Republican.

Therefor, it is Mostly False to say otherwise.

Changing the subject. Classic troll behavior.
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5wslia/internet_troll_tactics/

Wow, you've got the whole manifesto! lol

Actually, the subject was never changed. At all. Tangents are allowed if they follow the same theme. I did not ever veer off the course of Impeachment. Now, claiming I have changed the subject when I clearly did not, that is trolling.

My counter is simple; you claim submitting articles of impeachment as trying to impeach; you erroneously claim that impeachment has begun against the President. Impeachment is a process. Even many Trump supporters have fervently claimed on IMGFlip that Trump has not yet been impeached because “it has not gone to vote (by the whole House)”. And they are correct. You cannot “try” to impeach someone if the articles of impeachment do not pass the House committee inquiry.

Yes, I know about the interwebs, thanks. I ran a tech startup 7000 miles away. I worked 18 hours a day developing our IPs, securing funding, meetings, conferences, presentations, pitching to investors and running a team of artists and engineers. In short, I had no time or interest in US politics.

"By (my) erroneous definition" of what??

The point is, they still tried!