While 23% doesn't look great by much of any metric, I think one thing you have to keep in mind is that any politician is going to make large sweeping statements that are almost always going to have an exception or some nuance that chips into it in some way. Saying "X country's taxes are higher because President Lucifer raised them" may be true. But if the statement is said to suggest that President Lucifer's decision was to blame for the dire finances of a country, it may neglect the important back story that the only reason for the dire finances in the first place is because his predecessor President Beelzebub spent the country's money on coke and hookers. That's why the majority of a politician's statements tend end up getting thrown into the "mostly true" than the "true" category. Most people, even Republicans of all people, think of Bernie Sanders as a generally principled and honest guy, and the latter hate his policies. His "true" statements on Politifact? 14%.
So when you add up the true and mostly true statements, which is actually what I usually do, you get Trump with 9%, Clinton with 51% and Bernie with 52%, which all start to look a little more believable.
I think what's really interesting is the Pants on Fire rulings, the lies are so lie-y, that you can't even rebrand them as "mistaken." They're obviously made-up bull****. So then you've got Trump with 19%, Clinton with 1%, and Sanders with 0%.
