An informed public is essential to democratic representation, and the news media have traditionally played a central role in supporting this ideal. However, the changing media environment and a rise of misinformation have raised new questions about how citizens acquire and retain political knowledge, prompting distinctions between the uninformed and those holding directional or evidence-resistant misbeliefs. We extend this discussion by arguing that even individuals who are factually accurate may not necessarily be politically knowledgeable, as directional beliefs can sometimes coincide with correct information. We address this both theoretically—by integrating concepts of certainty and attitudes toward evidence—and empirically, by analyzing belief patterns across political issues using Swedish survey data (N = 2,268). Our findings suggest that individuals can be knowledgeable on some issues yet holding directional (mis)beliefs on others, selectively aligning with facts that support their views. These belief patterns are not associated with traditional news use but correlate with alternative news consumption.