Lame Krugman
- Posted by ryan on April 25th, 2008 filed in Policy/Politics
Paul Krugman has been studying his colleagues’ work and he can now hack with the best of them. The wording of today’s piece is, I think, unchanged from the Clinton campaign talking points. From the assertion that Obama can’t win big states (except for the ones he does win), to the ominous statement that, “general election polls suggest that he might well lose to John McCain,” this is lame stuff. Embarrassing, really, for such a great economist and rhetorician.
April 25th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Considering that “(You)’ve said all along that (you) don’t care how long she runs, (you) only ask that she not base her campaign on Republican talking points.” I bet this part really got to you:
“During the closing days of the Pennsylvania primary fight, the Obama campaign ran a TV ad repeating the dishonest charge that the Clinton plan would force people to buy health insurance they can’t afford. It was as negative as any ad that Mrs. Clinton has run — but perhaps more important, it was fear-mongering aimed at people who don’t think they need insurance, rather than reassurance for families who are trying to get coverage or are afraid of losing it.”
April 25th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
I don’t defend that statement. I don’t think it’s as bad though as ads featuring Osama and Hillary saying we really need to focus on the Weather Underground and Obama’s ties to Hamas in the debate. But the broader point is that if you know it’s unlikely that you’ll get the nomination, the negative attacks become less tolerable.
But I get it, you like Hillary more. I’m sorry you’re not an Obama supporter.
April 25th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
You’re “sorry I’m not an Obama supporter”? How belittling.
I just point out when your arguments lose intellectual consistency, like your thoughts on negative advertising (ok for my guy, not for your guy). I don’t claim to speak for all of the supporters of any candidate, but when you post fluff and propaganda in the name of electioneering I think you do a disservice to your readers.
Your blog is great when you write on urbanism, design, transportation, etc. But when you drift into candidate coverage it’s hard to distinguish you from any of the millions of amature pundits on the web.
April 25th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
There is nothing intellectually inconsistent about taking into account degree and context. Hillary is looking at, maybe, a 20 percent chance at the nomination. That’s where the political markets are at the moment. Given those long odds, it takes a certain disregard for the good of the Democratic Party to make many of the statements she’s made.
And the idea that it’s ok because the GOP is going to do it anyway doesn’t hold water. Now the GOP can run advertisements showing Hillary doing it.
I wasn’t trying to belittle you, merely stating that it would be nice, from my perspective, if more Hillary supporters were Obama supporters.