How can @usatoday allow Trump tp publish an article with documented falsehoods? usatoday.com/story/opinion/… via @usatoday
"Democrats have already harmed seniors by slashing Medicare by more than $800 billion over 10 years to pay for Obamacare." This is a tired 2012 talking point. Seniors were not "harmed." The solvency was extended and benefits were expanded.
"I have kept that [preexisting] promise, and we are now seeing health insurance premiums coming down." Trump supported plans that would have weakened pre-existing protections, and experts say premiums would be even lower if Trump hadn't weakened the law
Then the article descends into a series of false claims about open borders etc taken from his stump speeches. Trump could make a strong case against Medicare for all, based on real facts. Why didn't @usatoday insist on that kind of article so there can be a serious debate?
Oh, I meant to add: the $800 billion claim re Medicare is particularly ridiculous because the GOP leadership wants to cuts Medicare spending even more. And yet Trump says: "I also made a solemn promise to our great seniors to protect Medicare." washingtonpost.com/news/fact-chec…
Here's a full fact check of Trump's op-ed, just posted. washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/…
