You might take a look at this one: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/unemployment-low-trump/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/unemployment-low-trump/ The clai

You might take a look at this one: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/unemployment-low-trump/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/unemployment-low-trump/ The claim is that Trump got unemployment to a 50 year low. Snopes rules it "Mostly False". The problem I have with that is that unemployment really was at a 50-year low. Snopes just wanted to deny Trump any credit for it so they throw up a lot of dust and smoke about whether the president deserves credit for it. Compare that with this one: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-created-more-jobs-trump/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-created-more-jobs-tr... In this case, the claim is that Obama created more jobs than Trump during adjacent 3-year periods. Snopes rules it true, full stop. They don't throw in any caveats about whether the president should get credit. Whether a sitting president deserves credit for economic conditions is always a debatable point. Politicians will just hold whatever position is convenient for them and partisans will line up on their respective sides. I can't help but notice that Snopes lines up pretty predictably on one side of any political issue.