In his latest New York Times column Paul Krugman makes a series of predictions, all predicated on the assumption of a Democrat being elected president in November and serving with a Senate that has a majority of Democrats as well. Basically, he says that it doesn’t make a great deal of difference which individual running on the Democratic ticket is elected as long as someone running on the Democratic ticket is elected. Here’s his prediction of the outcome:
In practice, any Democrat would probably preside over a significant increase in taxes on the wealthy and a significant but not huge expansion of the social safety net. Given a Democratic victory, a much-enhanced version of Obamacare would almost certainly be enacted; Medicare for All, not so much. Given a Democratic victory, Social Security and Medicare would be protected and expanded; Paul Ryan-type cuts wouldn’t be on the table.
What caught my eye was his definition of the Republican Party:
Now, the Democratic Party is very different from the G.O.P. — it’s a loose coalition of interest groups, not a monolithic entity answering to a handful of billionaires allied with white nationalists.
I will leave it to those interested to provide their own definitions of the parties. I don’t think his view quite captures the nature of either today’s Republicans or Democrats.
But I think he’s wrong. Assuming the House, Senate, and the White House all in Democratic control, I think a Sanders presidency or perhaps a Warren presidency would be significantly different from a Biden presidency. Said another way, this time it really does make a difference.
I guess the larger question is does the outcome of the election actually depend on who is nominated? I’m afraid it no longer does.
Paul Krugman is even less accurate regards to politics and economics than Joe Biden is on foreign policy, and that’s saying a lot.
I especially like his laughable assertion:
‘Now, the Democratic Party is very different from the G.O.P. — it’s a loose coalition of interest groups, not a monolithic entity answering to a handful of billionaires allied with white nationalists.’
The Republican Party is arguably an even looser coalition than the Democrats except on a few key issues such as the 1A, the 2A, rights of the unborn, and freedom of association. Soros, Steyer, Bloomberg, Bezos are all white billionaires who at this point are effectively financing the Democratic party. If Krugman believes what he wrote he needs to stop writing and appearing on TV, because those mediums are controlled or owned by ‘gasp’ white billionaires who therefore must be supporting Trump.
As far as white nationalism is concerned, maybe he should have wandered down to Richmond for the 2A protest and sneered at all those race and gender traitors participating in massive gun violence massacre of their opponents and completely trashed the joint. Oh, wait, that didn’t happen.