WaPo's Margaret Sullivan says journos are doing 'President Trump's work for him' by pressing Elizabeth Warren on funding Medicare for All

At this point, it’s really no secret that the Washington Post is all in — mind, body, and soul — for Elizabeth Warren. But you’d think that maybe, just maybe, at least someone over there would have the good sense to dial it back a little.

Nope. Margaret Sullivan — who loves her some Elizabeth Warren — put together a list of “Five ways the debate could have — and should have — been much, much better,” and this was number two:

2. Framing the (apparently unavoidable) question about universal health care and how to fund it in a non-gotcha way. Journalists are kindly doing President Trump’s work for him when they insist on trying to pin down Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), the new front-runner, to declare she’d raise taxes to fund Medicare-for-all. Of course, it’s legitimate to dig into the costs, but not in a way that creates a nice GOP campaign ad, and misses the larger lens of overall costs. (Warren, notably, refused to take the bait.)

So … Elizabeth Warren’s advocating a plan that would require a buttload of money, and she doesn’t really want to get into where that money’s going to come from … and asking her about it is baiting her? That’s really where we’re at?

Asking Warren how she's going to pay for her healthcare plan is a "gotcha" question?! My gosh.

She's standing next to Bernie (who wrote the bill she supports) who openly ADMITS it will raise taxes, but pressing Warren to admit that is "bait." https://t.co/6B4svjdi5m pic.twitter.com/BatQhlda3Z

— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) October 16, 2019

WaPo's Margaret Sullivan says journos are doing 'President Trump's work for him' by pressing Elizabeth Warren on funding Medicare for All

Recommended