Paul Krugman, The New York Times, April 18, 2008
Will Barack Obama’s now famous “bitter” quote turn out to have been a big deal politically? Frankly, I have no idea.
But here’s a different question: was Mr. Obama right?
Mr. Obama’s comments combined assertions about economics, sociology and voting behavior. In each case, his assertion was mostly if not entirely wrong.
Start with the economics. Mr. Obama: “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration.”
There are, indeed, towns where the mill closed during the 1980s and nothing has replaced it. But the suggestion that the American heartland suffered equally during the Clinton and Bush years is deeply misleading.
Oy.
So what Obama said was true, but he was “misleading” on a deeper level?
I used to like Krugman.
Comment by happymisanthropy — April 18, 2008 @ 2:56 pm
… and if you read the rest of the op-ed, Krugman repeats the Clinton misrepresentation of Obama’s remarks by leaving out half of the formula.
Economic frustration +
*Being lied to by politicians =
*No confidence in economic promises =
Voters who ignore those and vote based on guns and religion.
Krugman and Clinton deliberately ignore the lines in the middle and thus misrepresent Obama as:
Economic Frustration =
Voters ignore economics and vote based on guns and religion.
So, screw Krugman.
Comment by happymisanthropy — April 18, 2008 @ 3:08 pm