I find that if an article has a glaring factual error in its first paragraph it does rather undermine its overall credibility.
Your politician's college was a long time ago, he as a man would have had time to change. The article's mistakes are right now; there's little reason to believe the sloppy fact checking improves right between the first paragraph and the second.
The lack of fact-based critical thinking is precisely what causes things like the 2008 financial crisis. If an argument is riddled with factual errors I cannot give any faith in its conclusion even if I am generally supportive of them.