No, but I do believe that “fact-checkers” get it wrong often enough to be skeptical about what they say is.
Also, for what it's worth, it was a math video I was watching.
You don't seem to understand that this is how US elections are always called? The press calls the state when they estimate it's impossible for it to go any other way, and then the electors vote a while later.
If your statements don't hold water, you should be held accountable for it, and there should be consequences according to your power. When those consequences is more power, you sooner or later arrive at Mussolini (look him up).
Though, for many people, facts, science, teachers, doctors, none of that matter. So this means the political system must get out of its stalemates and address the real issues that lie beneath the bullshitters. People don't think alike, so you can't reach everyone, even if you think you have all the facts. Besides, facts can always be disputed, though not unreasonably so.
My conclusion is, no fact-checking will ever be sexy and viral. People will die of boredom instead :)
Good try though!
You're obviously not the target audience of fact-checkers. Most people agree on some basic principles of reality that can't be skewed.
For example, when a politician says something in public that millions of people hear and is recorded on video, and then he says he didn't say it, that is a lie. A fact-checker would provide the evidence and context.
Or if a politician says that nothing could be done to reduce Covid deaths in the US, that is less straightforward but also an easy lie to disprove because there are people who died due to lack of available tests for their coworkers, or people who died because of a huge nightclub being allowed to stay open.