Krugman: Dumb and Dumber

[Human101948]

But how can this be happening? After all, the antiestablishment
candidates now dominating the field, aside from being deeply ignorant about
policy, have a habit of making false claims, then refusing to acknowledge error.
Why don’t Republican voters seem to care?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/21/opinion/the-donald-and-the-decider.html?emc=edit_th_20151221&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=70251688

[Moral Compass]

1. Trump (or someone like him) was inevitable

If this long, slow slide into idiocy hadn't been twinned with incredibly canny tactical dominance of the electoral process in this country we could all be having a big laugh right now.

Instead, the Republican party has captured one state house after another, secured through artful gerrymandering a formidable majority in the House, and gotten Mitch McConnell his dream job in the Senate.

Somehow, the minority in this country has pulled off a bloodless coup d'etat.

Yeah, they're dumb, but with people like Debbie Wasserman running the show they may run the table before this is all over.

Given that these "base" voters seem to have some sort of love for strong man dictators like Putin America could become the stuff that nightmares are woven from. We are perilously close already.

[eppur_se_muova]

2. Wrong movie. It's "Idiocracy". nt

[Moral Compass]

3. Have to agree...

That's the more accurate movie analog.

[NewJeffCT]

4. He is right, though

While I'm not a huge fan of Clinton, Sanders or O'Malley, it's amazing how like night and day the debates are - the Democrats actually know details about the issues. The Republicans just spew out angry sound bites with no regards to facts.

[aksptth]

5. 60%?

Not sure about this:

Even more striking, the triumvirate of trash-talk — Mr. Trump, Ben Carson, and Ted Cruz — now commands the support of roughly 60 percent of the primary electorate.

I think he means 60% of the Republician electorate???

[pampango]

6. "Bluster and belligerence as substitutes for analysis, disdain for any kind of measured response,

dismissal of inconvenient facts reported by the “liberal media” ..."

So Donald Trump as a political phenomenon is very much in a line of succession that runs from W. through Mrs. Palin, and in many ways he’s entirely representative of the Republican mainstream. For example, were you shocked when Mr. Trump revealed his admiration for Vladimir Putin? He was only articulating a feeling that was already widespread in his party.

In case you’re wondering, nothing like this process has happened on the Democratic side. When Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders debate, say, financial regulation, it’s a real discussion, with both candidates evidently well informed about the issues. American political discourse as a whole hasn’t been dumbed down, just its conservative wing.

Going back to Republicans, does this mean that Mr. Trump will actually be the nominee? I have no idea. But it’s important to realize that he isn’t someone who suddenly intruded into Republican politics from an alternative universe. He, or someone like him, is where the party has been headed for a long time.

[eppur_se_muova]

7. Take it back to St. Ronnie, the king of the superficially inspirational, but vacuous, sound bite.

And frankly, Goldwater's famous "Extemism in the defense of liberty is no vice", looks a lot better from a distance as well. The common thread is "movement" conservatism, with its obligatory adherence to dogma, facts be damned.