Here's What Krugman Just Does Not Understand

[Yavin4]

The Democratic majority in Congress under Obama IS NOT LIKE the Republican majority in Congress under Bush. They're not going to rubber stamp everything that Obama proposes.

Krugman wanted Obama's team to propose a huge stimulus with no tax cuts and then widdle it down in negotiation. That strategy would only work if the Democratic majority were all behind it. They would not be. Further, they would be upset at Obama for not including them in drafting it. Such a proposal would have been D.O.A.

It's easier for the Republicans to pick off Democrats like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu to block legislation than it was for the Dems on major Bush legislation.

Even with a 60-vote+ filibuster proof majority, Obama would have trouble moving legislation through Congress. Democrats are not like Republicans. They are more willing to take on their party's leaders and openly oppose him/her. Hell, there are Dems that voted to impeach Clinton for goodness sake.

Krugman is doing a great disservice to his readers by continuing to give them the false notion that Obama can pass anything that he wants through Congress or somehow Obama can manipulate Congress to give him whatever he wants. The truth is that Democrats on Capitol Hill follow their own agendas, and to even get their 100% support, let alone enough Republicans to hold off filibusters, is a mighty tall mountain to climb.

[Cant trust em]

1. It seems like Krugman is more of an expert on the economy, not legislative process.

Unfortunately Congress doesn't work the way that many of us would like it to.

[BlueCaliDem]

10. I guess Krugman bases his stance on how unified the Rushpublicants

have always been, thinking the Dems in Congress are anywhere near that loyal.

Hate 'em or not, the Rushpublicants are tightly unified.

[Cant trust em]

20. But not John McCain

He's a maverick.

[BlueCaliDem]

25. You forgot

the :sarcasm: emoticon, but you had me laughing even so!

[Cant trust em]

34. I'm anti Sarcasm emoticon.

I'm dry like the a fine Pinot Noir, baby.

[amborin]

33. Krugman and most who posted to his blog emphasize bargaining tactics

start large....

make your initial proposal HUGE....because it will only get watered down in the process

this was Krugman's point: Obama and his team should have started out with a colossal S proposal...before pitching it to Congress or hte Senate

[Enrique]

2. Obama agrees with Krugman

said to NPR that in hindsight he thinks he should have first proposed no tax cuts, then during negotiations concede some and let the republicans claim credit, even though Obama wanted the tax cuts himself.

[Better Believe It]

4. Seens like Obama now agrees with Krugman's approach to legislative process

[BeyondGeography]

5. That was snark from O...He said that as a joke last night at the presser

[Cha]

7. Exactly. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

9. I'm glad President Obama didn't allow the Republicans to take credit for not one damn thing....

especially tax cuts!

The GOP don't deserve to come off smelling good in this.

[QC]

30. True, but that shouldn't stop us from having our daily Krugman bashfest. n/t

[BootinUp]

3. Krugman is lending his credibility to supporting

a larger stimulus package. This is a very important thing for him to do. It is not hurting Obama's goal, just the other guys goal.

[Better Believe It]

6. Exactly! And this goes way over the head of political novices!

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Krugman's Addressing What's Needed

That's his job.

Shouldn't someone be doing that? Particularly a Nobel Prize holder?

[Yavin4]

11. Yes, He Should

But he should also acknowledge the legislative process.

Liberals believe that the awesomeness of our ideas should triumph, but that's not how the world works.

[Beetwasher]

12. Krugman Is Playing A MUCH NEEDED ROLE

Listen, this whole Obama vs. Krugman thing is ridiculous. Krugman has his role. He's the pressure from that side. He may very well be totally cognizant of that fact, or perhaps he's not, I don't know. But he's playing a very necessary role, and I'm sure Obama realizes that as well. Obama NEEDS Krugman pushing him from that end. He NEEDS Krugman's URGENCY and CRITICISM. Don't think for a second that Obama doesn't drop his name when he's speaking with Congresspeople about what is NEEDED.

And yes, Krugman is NOT a politician, so in a sense while his criticisms may be well founded, they are not fully contextualized because they are not necessarily taking into account the political process that has it's own unique pressures.

That being said, it's entirely possible to be supportive of both Krugman AND Obama. There's no need for the derision from either side, and that's not pointed at you, I've seen none from you. But the hate levelled at Krugman because he dares criticize Obama, as if that's counterproductive, is absurd. They are NOT diametrically opposed entities, but rather they are symbiotic.

[Bread and Circus]

13. I agree. By Krugman being far left, he makes Obama look more centrist. Win, win.

[TheBigotBasher]

28. Krugman is not FAR LEFT

What he is saying is right. Worse what stupid give in Democratic crawlers have surrendered to is a more expensive bill that helps fewer people. Great.

[BeyondGeography]

14. I mostly agree with you, but it usually starts with Krugman being derisive himself toward Obama

which is posted by a "see, this is why Obama sucks" DU'er, which leads to "see, this is why Krugman sucks" responses. All hell breaks loose for a couple of days until Krugman does/does not start the process again.

[Beetwasher]

15. I Haven't Seen Any Derision From Krugman

I've seen reasoned criticism. And that's always welcome. Obama would be the first to say so.

[BeyondGeography]

17. ...

[Beetwasher]

19. Ok, So Show Me The Derision

I haven't seen it. Maybe it's there and I missed it.

[amborin]

31. Krugman has NEVER been derisive toward Obama; he WANTS Obama to WIN again in 2012

[Yavin4]

16. Should Not His Ire Be Directed At Ben Nelson et al in the Congress?

What does bashing Obama accomplish? What does laying blame on Obama, and not the Dems who would filibuster this package be more at fault?

Obama gave Congress the outline for the stimulus package. It's CONGRESS' RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT TOGETHER AND PASS SPENDING LEGISLATION, NOT THE PRESIDENT'S.

Again, my point stands that Krugman is doing a disservice to his audience because he's creating the assumption that Obama, not the Congress, is primarily responsible for spending bills.

[Beetwasher]

18. Obama Is The Leader

The leader gets the heat. That's the way it works.

I really don't see it as bashing, I guess that's the difference. I'm first in line to defend Obama from bashing. I read Krugman pretty religiously, and I've seen plenty of criticism of Obama, some I agree with, some I don't. But I really don't see much (if any) that I would call "bashing". But then, that's me and I guess it's open to interpretation depending on how you define "bashing".

Reasoned criticism is never a disservice, IMO.

[Yavin4]

21. I Agree That "Reasoned criticism is never a disservice". However...

Mis-directed criticism is a disservice. All that I am saying is that in our constitutional system, THE CONGRESS IS THE ONE THAT MAKES THE APPROPRIATION BILLS, NOT THE PRESIDENT.

CONGRESS IS THE ONE THAT HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO CREATE, ENHANCE, AND UPGRADE THE STIMULUS PACKAGE.

KRUGMAN SHOULD BE DIRECTING HIS CRITICISM AT CONGRESS!!!!

[Beetwasher]

22. But Obama IS Involved And IS Taking A Leadership Role

It's valid to say Krugman should ALSO be criticizing congress, but Obama IS involved in the negotiations, like it or not and that would make him open to criticism.

And from Krugman's POV (not even necessarily mine) Obama should not have taken such a bipartisan stance going into the negotiations. Personally, I don't necessarily agree with that criticism, but it's still valid and not bashing, IMO.

[Yavin4]

27. Once More. CONGRESS IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SPENDING APPROPRIATIONS

ALL THAT OBAMA CAN DO IS PROPOSE LEGISLATION. CONGRESS IS NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO DO, AND IN PARTICULAR THIS CONGRESS WILL DO WHAT IT WANTS TO DO.

THIS BILL IS THE BEST PACKAGE THAT COULD CONCEIVABLY GET PASSED IN CONGRESS GIVEN THE CURRENT MAKE-UP OF THE CONGRESS.

CRITICISM OF OBAMA AT THIS POINT IS UNFOUNDED, AND INSTEAD, CRITICISM SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO CONGRESS.

[amborin]

32. That was Krugman's point....that the Original SB should have been Much Larger

just as the evil Bush's tax cut proposal was:

Bush was cunning and evil: his original proposal for tax cuts for the wealthy was insane...something like "the wealthy will never pay any taxes ever again...."

of course, this got whittled down through lots of hard bargaining, until Bush got the tax cuts for the wealthy that we're all familiar with

it's just Real Politik, or the reality of bargaining

Never start with your compromise position, always start much, much higher

Obama says he started out with the compromise proposal in the interest of bipartisanship....but that is naive.....haven't we seen during the past 8 yrs just how non-bi-partisan rethugs are??????

Obama didn't like Hillary Clinton's initial demands for health care, during the primary....He said she was "asking for too much, right away"

but that is alarming.....she was deliberately asking too much, knowing proposals get watered down....

[Beetwasher]

35. Obama Is Leading This Effort

Regardless of your caps. And criticism of him is perfectly acceptable. I say that as someone who disagrees with Krugmans critiques of O.

Even though I disagree w/ Krugman, I think what he's doing is actually a SERVICE. A meaningful debate is being had, not between Dems and the Repubs idiotic ideas, but between Obama and Krugman. The debate isn't Tax cuts vs. spending, it's "is there TOO LITTLE Spending and TOO MUCH tax cuts and is it happening FAST ENOUGH".

[CTyankee]

39. You are probably right, but we are frustrated and want to see more happen.

This is difficult for me, I know. We won and yet we have such obstructionism in Congress. I think that kind of frustration is what is being expressed on DU.

We would do well to step back and look at the situation as you have just done. Thanks for the perspective!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. I really hope you meant "whittle it down"...

NT.

[Yavin4]

26. Sorry, Donald. It Should Be Whittle Down

You feel better now?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

36. Well, I think the mental image may never entirely leave me...

N.T.

[Joe Chi Minh]

24. What about executive orders and the nuclear option? Isn't this historic, national crisis, serious

enough for emergency measures - used freely until quite recently for nefarious Republican ends - to be implemented by Obama?

It beggars belief that he yielded tax cuts to the vermin, and their intransigent, obstructionist response seems little more than poetic justice, now.

I think he's finding out the hard way that Washington doesn't work like local politics, nor is there the time-frame available for the kind of prudence that might normally prove far-sighted in the latter political environment.

[KakistocracyHater]

29. Krugman doesn't get how petty people really are

& how short-sighted they are; what a shame that Bush could get alot of what he wanted but that Obama cannot, & this being said by 'Lefties'. I guess they do not have anything BASIC IN COMMON that they could march in lockstep for: like healthcare for all Americans-like the rest of the industrialized nations already have, women's rights to be adults with full adult authority, safe workplace rules-nothing worth joining together for here, right? Safe environment, how about tornado-proof underground electric powerlines? & underground tornado cellars again enforced for those who livve in 'tornado alley'? With backhoes they could really quickly be dug versus digging with shovels & pick axes.

[Onlooker]

37. Obama can try to pass what he wants; he doesn't need to coddle the right-wing

He doesn't need to negotiate with the Republicans until the plan fails. If he did that, Republicans would be on record as blocking the recovery. But, the way he's handling it, they will not be on record as blocking the recovery because the stimulus bill will never have the opportunity to fail.

Krugman is completely right.

[olegramps]

38. Obama and the Democrats have defined the Republicans.

If I were running for office in 2010, I couldn't think of a better charge to take to the working class people than the fact that the Republicans clearly demonstrated that they are the heartless swore enemy of the working class and the minion's of the wealthy. The Republican's greed and hatred so blinded them that they turned their backs on their fellow citizens when they were in dire need of assistance.