Letters to the Editor
-
Paul Krugman's been a Clinton hack from the beginning
This is like me writing "Jonathan Alter wants to know why Hillary Clinton is losing."
Krugman's mad because he got shot down by a bunch of intelligent Obama supporters about 3 months back where he was proven to be wrong and (much like a certain editor here with regards to her bias towards Hillary Clinton) was unable to bring himself to admit it.
Here's a comment from a writer on Ben Smith's blog that pretty aptly sums it up:
"Krugman needs to get over himself. He has been shot down by the NEWS section of the Times, the Washington Post and the Concord Monitor. Quite simply, he is WRONG on mandates. In any event, could someone ask a REAL health care economist what they think--I suggest starting with Krugman's Princeton colleague, Uwe Reinhardt."
Link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1207/Krugman_fires_back_Something_is_very_wrong_here.html
You can read about the whole Krugman-Obama back and forth there, but suffice it to say they have a history, Krugman's on record as saying he strongly dislikes Obama personally, would never vote for him, can think of nothing positive he (Krugman) would have to say about Obama and hates all of his economic proposals. We're not exactly talking about an impartial source here.
-
What's gone wrong is that working class voters
can smell bullshit quicker and more accurately than starry-eyed kids and rich liberal idiots.
-
An excellent New Republic piece on this written back in February
"Why Is Paul Krugman So Hostile To Barack Obama?
Paul Krugman has written a number of pieces that are highly critical of Barack Obama. Krugman is a distinguished economist as well as an exceptional writer, and on issues of substance, he raises reasonable questions and offers plausible objections. But as many people have noticed, the tone and intensity of Krugman's pieces are puzzling. It seems almost personal--a kind of campaign.
What accounts for this?
I don't know the full answer, but here's a significant part of it: Krugman and Obama have different approaches to political disagreement. Krugman likes partisanship, and Obama does not. In a revealing column in January 2007, Krugman cited Obama's lament that "politics has become so bitter and partisan," and rejected the Senator's suggestion that we have to become less partisan in order to solve our problems. In Krugman's view, we need an FDR, not a consensus-seeking Eisenhower. Politicians have "to tackle the big problems despite bitter partisan opposition."
Link:http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/open_university/archive/2008/02/11/why-is-paul-krugman-so-hostile-to-barack-obama.aspx
Like I said Krugman HATES Obama. We're talking Taylor Marsh/ Geraldine Ferraro/Lanny Davis level of dislike for Obama.
He makes Joan Walsh look like a bigger supporter of Barack Obama than anyone else.
So why anyone would even publish, let alone take seriously, Krugman's critiques of Obama is beyond me.
-
What;s gone wrong?
Nothing is going wrong he, he is winning!!!!
So only the white working class voters in PA and OH count. Considering Hilary only won by 9% in PA and 10% in Oh. It appears he is getting working class voters snce he ahs won more sttes by bigger wins across the nation.
These arguments just hold no water.
-
bias
I think that most pro-Israel and jewish writers and media owners are favoring hillary because they "believe" that she will be more sympathetic to Israeli policy than will Obama. I find this bias in Krugman, the NY Times, the Washington Post, etc. I think this is a faulty analysis. Obama will re-think the old methods that have not worked and hopefully, will suggest new paths through the morass. Hillary will perpetuate the morass.
-
Gosh, libertyson, should we only publish op-eds and articles
that lick your demigod's butt? Move to the old USSR, kiddo, if you want that kind of coverage. Partisan struggle is called democracy.
-
Clearly it's a Jewish plot
Let's agree to that. Salonmunists Unite!
-
I like Krugman, but...
Just because she's still running doesn't mean she's still in the race.
-
Paul Krugman is a hero
Krugman's has been one of the few consistent, steadying, reasoned, adult voices speaking out in the opinion columns this primary season. Too bad Thomas Friedman is on vacation, as he too is a reliable source of sanity. And really, really too bad that the NYTimes has once again allowed Maureen Dowd and Frank Rich to not only run amok, but to do so in a particularly vicious way. Krugman has been fair to Hillary Clinton, something far more scarce than hen's teeth. I always look forward to his columns as a remedy to the back knifing hysteria which permeates contemporary American media.
-
oh man Sith
so you're THAT guy/girl aren't you? The one that ALWAYS takes the joke too far?
heh..see you around.
(what a maroon)
-
a decade is an eon to a newsman
but a decade ago, krugman believed in "the long boom" (progress, progressing to infinity), the washington consensus and "the end of history" with liberalism, capitalism and democracy. to me that's a lot more swallowing than anyone's asked to do with Obama - which is, merely, to allow someone with an IQ explain things as he sees them and think.
-
@libertyson
Come on now, Krugman's one of the very few columnists who hasn't dumped all over Hillary Clinton in recent months. It's quite apparent that Obama fans have absolutely no qualms about the mountains of vitriol regularly heaped on Clinton's head (some of it emanating straight from Obama, much of it from his supporters). This is something she's just supposed to endure. But let one less than adoring column concerning Obama appear and y'all have conniption fits. It's quite telling that you and your fellow Obama supporters, not to mention your candidate, can't tolerate the least criticism of the Senator from Illinois. As many others have mentioned, this isn't a coronation, nor an ascent into heaven. It's politics, remember? Hardly an arena for jaws of glass.
-
Why is Paul Krugman so hostile to Barick Obama?
I would agree that they are diametrically opposite in the strategy in relation to the republicans. I also think the slogan of unity is phony and unworkable, but it serve Obama's interest in the primary as someone new and unifying. Bill Clinton didn't get 1 republicab vote in his tax increase bill and for his effort got the impeachment attempt. Do those Obama supporters really think they can get progressive legislations pass without fierce struggle and just mouthing unity will do? Paul Krugman dislike Obama because he's less progressive than all other candidates, not only in healthcare, but in all aspects, and he probably resent as I do that those Obama supporters whom feel he's entitled because of his race, and woe to any who oppose him with ample supply of race cards.