You asked for a source, and he provided one. And now that he did, you're trying to discredit his claim by implying that the blog is biased, which is of course based on no facts or reading, which you asked /u/deezus to do himself when he claimed Politifact is biased. Why don't you hold yourself to you own standard as you to do others?

Furthermore by saying "always seek out more than one source of information," you're also implying that /u/dieezus is biased by basing his information on a single source, while you yourself are trying to defend a site that is pretty much, "one source."

Even more, you don't even have to point to a different source that this article is most likely biased. Just read the article. There are a number of hidden mechanisms they use to "prove his quote." Not to even mention that Sanders' quote itself is misleading.

(1) The article points out that "Because the two financial crises are inseparable, we won’t quibble with Sanders’ timeline. We rate his claim True." The Bernie quote is that the "African-American community lost half of their wealth as a result of the Wall Street collapse." What in the article says this quote is true? The only thing that the article shows is that the wealth of African Americans has decreased since 2007. It shows a correlation with the collapse, but it doesn't show causation.

(2) Furthermore, Article also quotes Pew, which says that African Americans were particularly hit the hardest, but this is a matter of interpreting statistics. If you talk of it in ratios, sure, they were hit the hardest. If you talk in a matter of absolute terms, according to the data they cite (the Census Bureau) white wealth has decreased about $30,000 compared to $8,000 of African Americans (from 2005 to 2009).

(3) Lastly, when you see an article that is posted on reddit or for any news for that matter, its useful to ask as a first question not whether the article is true or not, but question why the article exists in the first place. why is Politifact even rating this? Why is Bernie even saying this? He's obviously (1) appealing to minorities and (2) targeting Wall Street. Bernie could have said that the African American community was hit particularly hit by the financial crisis or the Great Recession which are more proper terms but instead opted to use the word Wall Street collapse. To me, it seems like he's implying that it's Wall Street's fault that African Americans lost half their wealth. Sure, maybe it was. But the financial crisis was more than just the fault of one person, it had to do with government policy, the credit rating industry, wall street firms, mortgage lenders and lastly, homeowners.

A person can pretend to be non-biased in a number of ways, even though he/she uses only true facts. You can skew statistics, you can use guided-wording, and most importantly, you can choose to upload/write only those articles which are favorable to your preferred bias.

I'm mostly writing this not to dissuade you from supporting Bernie - in fact I think he's a great candidate - but I really urge you to think even more deeply than you think you are doing right now. Before siding with one side because you're already on his side, try viewing things neutrally first, or even play the devil's advocate.