Did Fox News Call Arizona for Biden With ‘Less Than 1 Percent’ of the Vote In?

No.

By
26

Last week, Robert O’Neill—a former Fox News contributor and Navy SEAL known for his role in the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011— tweeted the false claim that during its coverage of the 2020 presidential election, Fox News prematurely called Arizona for President Joe Biden with “less than 1% in.”

In response to O’Neill’s false statement, Fox News anchor Bret Baier tweeted that O’Neill’s claim is “not true,” and that “Our decision desk called AZ w/ almost 80% of the vote in AFTER polls had closed. Associated Press called AZ that night too. No matter what you think of the call or the audit -this tweet is wrong.”

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
26
By
Comments (26)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Pzimm7778

    This whole decision desk bs from last year shows the level of partisan stupidity our country is in. First, what does it matter what a network calls? The great thing about election results are a network can “project” what it wants, but if you choose not to believe it, the count will prove if you or they are right. It isn’t like Fox called Arizona and the counters looked up and saw that, immediately shut all the counting down, and said “Ok, we’re done! See you in 2 years!”

    Point 2, every time one of these people or groups disputes these calls who ends up right? Has Fox ever been wrong on a call since Florida in 2000 when everyone was wrong on it? For that matter, and I know they don’t all call all states at the same time, but has any network really been wrong in their on air projections since then?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Bill Nelson

      Networks used to call states based exit polling and there was some evidence that this discouraged people from going to vote late. That is why networks are more careful to make these calls.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      wj

      Trump really wanted to be perceived as winning on election night. The plan was to declare himself the winner with a lead in the EC, while Stop-the-Steal groups mobilized to disrupt vote counting in the swing states where he was ahead on election day (but would experience a "blue shift" as all the mail-in ballots were counted).

      They were really rolling with steam - then Chris Stirewalt and the Fox News Decision Desk threw a stick in their spokes. Calling AZ for Biden put Biden in the narrow lead on election night, on the most important network for Trump.

      Collapse
      1. DJ

        They had ginned up a bogus idea that the election had to be decided on election night, and Brett Kavanaugh helped that narrative along in a SCOTUS opinion where he cited Bush v Gore even though the opinion he cited explicitly said it should not be treated as precedent!

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Aylene Wright

        Yes, it wasn't just about ego. It was part of an actual plan to create a "red mirage" that gave the impression that Trump won, and put the burden of proof on Biden that he was the true winner. Trump wanted to proclaim a definite landslide victory that night. Instead he was stuck giving a speech filled with caveats such as "we WERE winning".

        https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/11/04/trump-tries-to-claim-victory-even-as-ballots-are-being-counted-in-several-states-nbc-has-not-made-a-call.html

        It's very similar to Eastman's strategy of having Pence actually gavel in Trump as re-elected (although he's backing away from that now).

        Collapse
  2. linda

    Everytime I read this stuff and everytime I read it by Der Strumpsters I laugh and I think of Chris. Vindication must feel real good. A lesson in standing tall and taking the scheez.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Adam Bridge

    I’m sort of boggled that Fox News calling AZ has any meaning at all! What they PROJECTED would happen based on preliminary information had NO EFFECT AT ALL on the outcome of the election. The votes had already been cast and were in the process of being counted. That the lying sack of sheep dip then in the White House didn’t like it and had his poor deluded feelings hurt is more to the point. Seems like keeping an ex-President happy is what the GOP is all about. That and feeding the lies so they can control elections.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Matt A

      Good point. But you’re forgetting the axioms of Trump’s worldview: image is the only truth and loyalty is the only virtue. His only goal was to look like he was winning- and Fox betrayed him.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Michael Darwin

      Didn't you know that the election results are based on the projections of cable news anchors?

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Kevin C. Smith

      "lying sack of sheep dip" - haven't heard this before, but I plan to include this in my lexicon moving forward.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Adam Bridge

        "The Good Place" taught me much about innovative almost swearing. And about philosophy as well.

        Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    The Stray Goose

    Stirewalt got fired - FOR TELLING THE TRUTH! Well, Fox's loss is our gain. He's worth every penny.

    Collapse
    1. Frank Pepp

      He called it too early. Not saying he deserved to be fired, but it was clearly a bad call based on what I presume was a faulty model in this case. I'm guessing he'd acknowledge that. The real decision for Fox should have simply been what will help get the best model next time, and Stirewalt was probably the man for that.

      Also Trumpian rage was nonsensical in regards to the actual facts, just to be clear.

      Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Mink

    These fact check pieces are getting repetitive. The targets don't care about the misinformation they are spreading and frequently use them to highlight the "unfair" treatment applied to them by "news orgs". Stop humoring these idiots as if their statements were at all connected to reality. Disappointing that you continue to trot out meaningless and farfetched things like this.

    How about an actual Dispatch editorial about it? or calling out national review for all their falsehoods? or doing anything other than nutpicking largely impotent people among the alt-right and making yourself feel good about it because "we factchecked" .

    But no, instead of doing anything productive, keep writing meaningless nonsense on a topic that has been written about extensively for the last year and collecting those FB checks.

    Collapse
    1. Icarus213

      I couldn't disagree with you more. I will read these debunking articles on The Dispatch, and then a few days later hear one of my family members repeat the debunked "fact" as if it is true. And I can be ready with the truth so I don't have to just think to myself "I'm sure that's not true, but I would have to look into it," which I would probably never do, and the moment will pass with a person I care about not hearing any push back. This isn't just the alt-right indulging in this misinformation.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      rlritt

      I think they want to respond to bogus statements made currently by Trump minions for the sole purpose of egging on his brainwashed followers.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      wj

      Their fact checks (along with many other media institutions) are a part of the Facebook fact-checker program (and maybe something similar for other platforms, but not sure), and can end up being a factor posts/memes getting labeled as false information on the platform.

      Whether that labeling actually meaningfully helps or not I don't know, but the fact checking work can have reach well beyond The Dispatch's regular audience, all the way to the folks sharing and believing this stuff on social media.

      Collapse
    4. Avatar photo
      Pat Riot

      78% of Republicans believe these lies. There is no more urgent issue in our country right now.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kevin C. Smith

        Pat - Mark the date... We agree on something. :P

        Collapse
    5. Avatar photo
      Klw.Howard

      I have friends who believe this stuff, so I appreciate the fact checks.

      Collapse
    6. David Shannon

      I think you are aiming your fire at the wrong target. TD is focusing on the lies of those who should know better, and telling the truth about those claims. And David French had thoroughly debunked the lies being told especially before January 6.
      The job is on us. If you have friends or family who believe this nonsense, tell them (with love and gentleness) why they are being misled.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        The Stray Goose

        "(with love and gentleness)" - Perhaps I should stop the mocking and derision.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          The Stray Goose

          Naaaaahh

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Kevin C. Smith

        Agreed.

        And some of those folks need pure fact checks, not editorials/opinion pieces that can come off as biased to the reader based on the author's politics.

        Collapse
    7. Avatar photo
      Kevin C. Smith

      I think by saying "targets" you're missing the point. Khaya's fact checks are helping to establish a record. A record that is daily (such as, on Twitter) under attack.

      Here, the "disclosure" provided actually reveals the credibility behind the fact check (such as, 2 current FNC contributors and 1 former FNC analyst/member of the Decision Desk that is the subject of the fact check).

      This isn't meaningless or farfetched. O'Neill's Tweet (at the time of the screen grab) had over 15k likes and over 1,000 retweets. This FC will have nothing close to the same--but will exist in 2022/2024 when people are checking on these same claims as they're rehashed to justify more nonsense claims that the 2020 Election was fraudulent. Sheesh, Bret Bair responded--and this guy isn't an alt-right "nut," at least not to many who follow him.

      These continued false claims need continued fact checks--especially from center-right media organizations. Khaya's extensive reporting at this point (both in the Fact Check section and on her own, specifically debunking "Pillow Guy" and the "Fraudit," show a level of consistency coupled with the depth of knowledge that should ultimately lend her (and The Dispatch) credibility when new/different allegations arise in the future.

      Thanks for continuing your work, Khaya. I'm sure more people think you're doing great work than complaining that you're not off attacking NRO (or something).

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kevin C. Smith

        "and this guy isn't an alt-right "nut," at least not to many who follow him." - By "this guy," I was referring to O'Neill. (Of course Baier isn't an alt-right nut.)

        Collapse
Worth Your Time

Meddling Toward Justice

House Republicans Leap to Trump’s Defense

More Monkey Business

Video: Will Trump be Arrested?

Deplorable

Avatar photo

About Khaya Himmelman

Khaya Himmelman is a fact checker for The Dispatch. She is a graduate of Columbia Journalism School and Barnard College.
More from Khaya Himmelman