General Discussion

Logical

(22,457 posts)

1. So you know more about government than Krugman? n-t

Reply to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Original post)

Sat May 5, 2012, 07:35 AM

May 2012

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

75 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Krugman is correct but he's not right! He is brilliant on economics, naive on GOVERNANCE! [View all] Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 OP

So you know more about government than Krugman? n-t Logical May 2012 #1

Actually, I do! Not only have I worked for two state legislatures, I also have worked for Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #5

Your opinion is appreciated. randome May 2012 #7

LOL. well, I bet Krugman has talked to some government people also. just a wild guess. n-t Logical May 2012 #10

So under your "logic" Olbermann and Michael Moore and Bill Maher should not discuss.... Logical May 2012 #11

Krugman's specialty is economics...the OPs specialty is politics. dkf May 2012 #16

Krugman has as many credentials as Olbermann on politics! Give me a break. Logical May 2012 #18

You're misinterpreting my point. This is NOT about shutting down debate or shutting people up. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #37

You have a point. I heard Krugman respond to Chris Matthews's query about how CTyankee May 2012 #28

Jonathan Alter does One of the 99 May 2012 #71

I'm always amazed that people think that getting rid of BlueDogs would help. Honeycombe8 May 2012 #2

Yep. dkf May 2012 #17

Harry Reid wanted to fight Enrique May 2012 #3

That was the ONLY way to get the Blue Dogs to vote for something! Judd Gregg is a Republican. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #6

The other guy who was on Tweety with Krugman yesterday BumRushDaShow May 2012 #4

So why didn't the administration fight for a larger stimulus? MadHound May 2012 #8

Yup, this gratuitous May 2012 #50

they were thinking they'd get a second round of stimulus and *krugman* is naive about governance? fishwax May 2012 #9

That's pretty much the sum of it. JHB May 2012 #12

I maintain my position because the Republicans were going to treat Obama exactly how they Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #55

Krugman's position has been that by shooting for a larger stimulus... JHB May 2012 #13

And he still did not edhopper May 2012 #14

Exactly, Sir The Magistrate May 2012 #15

Think small pscot May 2012 #19

Yes edhopper May 2012 #20

Yes it did ProSense May 2012 #21

The point was edhopper May 2012 #22

The bill ProSense May 2012 #24

But he edhopper May 2012 #26

I think he made the bill weaker to get Blue Dogs--who were not onboard with this. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #57

Precisely. hifiguy May 2012 #49

So the administration intentionally hurt the economy in order to cthulu2016 May 2012 #23

Yeah, ProSense May 2012 #25

Yes, I am going to marry a carrot cthulu2016 May 2012 #32

Congratulations. n/t ProSense May 2012 #35

I don't get your point. I think he saw that the votes weren't there and went with what he could. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #38

Your logic makes no sense. You concede the fact that the Republicans weren't Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #56

Term limitations, corporations are not people, campaign finance reform..... MindMover May 2012 #27

The problem here is that in order to fail, you first have to try. Egalitarian Thug May 2012 #29

And CAPITAL LETTERS make it SO!!111!! WilliamPitt May 2012 #30

I appreciate the humor. The caps were to give emphasis. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #39

Have you read Noam Scheiber's new book "Escape Artists"? CTyankee May 2012 #31

I will pick up this book. I'm willing to admit that I may be wrong. I just don't think it is as easy Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #41

I tend to believe Scheiber on this, altho I certainly can't know what the "truth" is CTyankee May 2012 #43

Maybe that's why Krugman is an economist and not a politician. shcrane71 May 2012 #33

I'm not blaming economists for anything, but there is a reason why there is a fundamental Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #40

I understand there are difficulties and obstacles that legislators face. shcrane71 May 2012 #44

Again, I am not suggesting that Krugman remain quiet about the difficulties that families face and Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #46

I understand what you're saying... Yet, Krugman's job isn't to be reasonable about the political shcrane71 May 2012 #48

And his anecdote is correct. There should have been a larger stimulus. That's for sure... Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #51

I read an article in the 90s about the necessity of voting a straight-party ticket. shcrane71 May 2012 #54

The single ProSense May 2012 #34

I too blame this on the Blue Dogs.... Tippy May 2012 #36

The Blue Dogs need to be taken to the woodshed Lydia Leftcoast May 2012 #42

Krugman is correct and right Johonny May 2012 #45

Once again, read my post... Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #47

It comes down to style n2doc May 2012 #52

That misses the real point cthulu2016 May 2012 #58

If Obama had pushed for a 2 trillion dollar stimulus n2doc May 2012 #62

The point is that the real world exists cthulu2016 May 2012 #64

We need Krugman to keep fighting and pushing from the political Left. We need his voice. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #59

Didn't want it bad enough to fight for it, though...unrec joeybee12 May 2012 #53

You are misstating Krugman's position jeff47 May 2012 #60

That's what we call "politiking." They had to sell this thing, of course. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #61

No, they didn't. They could have gone with "it's a nice start". jeff47 May 2012 #63

And you've opened yourself to "the stimulus didn't work" cthulu2016 May 2012 #65

They could've done what? Nothing or sell this thing? Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #66

They could have called it "a good start" jeff47 May 2012 #67

They DID call it a first start but once it was clear that Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #68

Why on earth did they need to sell it AFTER IT PASSED? jeff47 May 2012 #69

You have to sell it to the public, jeff. That's the way it works. You have to get Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #70

So what you're saying then is they're idiots? jeff47 May 2012 #72

I don't understand what you're saying here. I never stated that the administration was stupid. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #73

The claims of stupidity rise from your claims of what they're trying to do. jeff47 May 2012 #74

Again, we'll agree to disagree. Have a nice day. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2012 #75