2012 Presidential Election - The Ups and Downs

[astralis]

dale,

Wow. Krugman and Zakaria within ten posts of each other. I can feel my brain ensmallening already.

the krugman piece is an obvious partisan/ideological one but the zakaria piece is not. like i said, zakaria is actually discussing his field of expertise, IR.

[JAD_333]

JAD,



1. are you surprised, 2. the point of me including that was to point out that the Left DOES, to some extent, blame obama.

it may definitely be a minority share of the blame but it's there.

No; not surprised at all. I understood your reason for posting the piece, but I thought the blame Krugman put on Obama was gratuitous, in the spirit of journalistic balance, I suppose...lol.

yes, he's not a fan of compromise; that's why he bashes centrists every bit as hard as the republicans (if not more).

but no, i don't think he's 'pimping for obama' when he notes that obama has had major failings (and was snubbed by officials in the WH a while back for continually sniping at the administration for not doing stimulus right, etc). it's not hard to see why a person with a blog named 'conscience of a liberal' would back obama over romney or the republicans. after all, he makes no bones about his liberal bias, nor does he pretend to be impartial ("reality has a liberal bias".)

I think you can pimp for a candidate and get away with it by throwing in a few negatives to look objective.:) But I take your point.

[astralis]

JAD,

No; not surprised at all. I understood your reason for posting the piece, but I thought the blame Krugman put on Obama was gratuitous, in the spirit of journalistic balance, I suppose...lol.

no, this is just the way he thinks; he hates the idea of "gratuitous attack for journalistic balance" with a passion:

The Cult That Is Destroying America - NYTimes.com

in any case, this is what he thinks of obama:

Stuck in the Muddle - NYTimes.com

but comparatively speaking:

Theses On Taxes - NYTimes.com

know thy enemy, right?

[dalem]

dale,



the krugman piece is an obvious partisan/ideological one but the zakaria piece is not. like i said, zakaria is actually discussing his field of expertise, IR.

Whatevs. Neither one impresses me.

-dale

[JAD_333]

JAD,



no, this is just the way he thinks; he hates the idea of "gratuitous attack for journalistic balance" with a passion:

The Cult That Is Destroying America - NYTimes.com;

Now you really got me interested. A vintage Krugman rant on those who don't see the bright shining path in his brain. So I slipped down to the comment section and lo and behold his readers lit into him. Now that's unusual. Could be they are dumber than he is or they can spot mental overexertion when they see it. :)

in any case, this is what he thinks of obama:

Stuck in the Muddle - NYTimes.com

Top should read the comments on this one to get a foretaste of what's coming in November. Are we going to see a slew of stay-at-home dems?

but comparatively speaking:

Theses On Taxes - NYTimes.com

know thy enemy, right?

He may or may not have a point. I'd like to see 1) the details of Romney's proposed tax cuts and offsets via ending tax credits and loopholes; 2) a real analysis of whether they will work. Bottom line, just because Krugman says so ain't enough for even the most loyal of his believers, except those who don't think for themselves. BTW, some read Krugman to know what to think and others read him to know what people are going to think. :)

[dalem]

Maybe this'll buck you up, TH:

Via Hot Air, Is Obama Slipping?

-dale

[JAD_333]

In the interests of equal time, here is the view from the other side, also written last July just before Krugman's piece.

An Intransigent President

By George Neumayr on 7.21.11 @ 6:09AM

He is willing to risk default rather than pass up a chance to enact tax hikes.

The American Spectator : An Intransigent President

[JAD_333]

Maybe this'll buck you up, TH:

Via Hot Air, Is Obama Slipping?

-dale

The link is in there to Krauthammers op ed on Romney's visit abroad, which I read in the Wash Post today. Worth reading if anyone has any doubt where the MSM stands on Romney. The TV news organizations, CNN and the like, have been reduced to semi-scandal rag status in their quest for ratings. I don't doubt their decision to highlight snippy talk from a Romney press person rather than the substance of his speech in Poland was aimed at the over-stimulated, short attention span crowd. I do, however, give credit to CNN's Piers Morgan for a good interview of the Romney's in London.

Charles Krauthammer: Romney’s excellent trip - The Washington Post

[astralis]

JAD,

I'd like to see 1) the details of Romney's proposed tax cuts and offsets via ending tax credits and loopholes; 2) a real analysis of whether they will work.

have you read the tax policy center's analysis? they filled in the vague holes in romney's proposals by assuming the most optimistic proposals on his behalf and it still did not work.

it's pretty clear why romney's been so vague; his plans are getting ripped apart by nonpartisan analysis.

Romney confirms his tax cuts won’t be paid for - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

----

as for his "excellent trip", well, if it went so great i don't think krauthammer would have needed to write an editorial on exactly how excellent it was, lol.

[Triple C]

Guys,
As the son of (very opinionated!) journalists, I think I should just say that Krugman is not a reporter. He writes OPINIONS, it's exactly what it says on the label. Op-Ed writers are not under any obligation to be neutral. They are expected to be able to defend their opinions and attract readers.

[JAD_333]

Guys,
As the son of (very opinionated!) journalists, I think I should just say that Krugman is not a reporter. He writes OPINIONS, it's exactly what it says on the label. Op-Ed writers are not under any obligation to be neutral. They are expected to be able to defend their opinions and attract readers.

Yes, yes...you are quite right about that, but you're not suggesting we can't challenge their opinions, are you? As for neutrality, there is at least an expectation that when they support or oppose a candidate's position they are 1) independent of his/her campaign and 2) they make at least some sense.

[Triple C]

Yes, yes...you are quite right about that, but you're not suggesting we can't challenge their opinions, are you?

Of course not.

As for neutrality, there is at least an expectation that when they support or oppose a candidate's position they are 1) independent of his/her campaign and 2) they make at least some sense.

I am not sure it is fair to characterize Krugman of subordinating his column to the Obama agenda. Krugman had been very vocal about Obama's weak commitment to Keynesian economics, especially in what he perceived as inadequate stimulus spending and the compromised 2011 budget which would include steep spending cuts. Considering the GOP's position on those issues, it would be strange for him not to attack the GOP.
As for how convincing his arguments were, I don't think that topic is something in which most people are willing to change their minds about. =)

[dalem]

Guys,
As the son of (very opinionated!) journalists,

I'm curious: do your parents understand how low their profession is judged by so many people?

-dale

[astralis]

son of TAIWANESE journos. taiwanese media has an even lower reputation there than it does in the US...

[RollingWave]

certainly, anything could still happen, and Obama's lead on Romney is not insurrmountable (though the US voting base is increasingly partisan), though 08's RCP poll trend didn't really change nearly as dramatic as you would think. McCain only had an extremely slim lead immediately after the Convention that barely lasted 2 weeks.