https://twitter.com/2sy_Juunee/status/808326805056868352
The New York Times’ Paul Krugman’s gone off in recent weeks in assigning blame for Clinton’s election loss, and today is no different except that the list of culpability now includes journalists:
Question: are journos expressing shock or puzzlement over Trump/R response to CIA, Tillerson, etc really that naive? Are they only 1/
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) December 12, 2016
now beginning to grasp what we've been trying to tell them all along — that Rs are not a normal party, that they'll do anything to win? 2/
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) December 12, 2016
If so, astonishing example of refusal to see the obvious until it bites you — and swallows your democracy 3/
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) December 12, 2016
All he knows for sure is that there are many people responsible for Clinton’s loss, and Hillary is not one of them:
Faced with subversion of American democracy by foreign govt and rogue FBI, "Hillary should have run a better campaign" not a good response
— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) December 12, 2016
In that case, Krugman probably wouldn’t consider this an acceptable replacement:
Perhaps @BernieSanders should have been the candidate is a better response. https://t.co/dBPcoMvlyV
— J.Arturo.Silva-Ordaz (@SOJArturo) December 12, 2016
Feel the Bern!
Run a piss poor candidate.
Candidate overlooks voters.
Gets routed on Election night.
Blame secret nefarious plot#p2 #tcot #SMH https://t.co/RqPIyO4VEp— Jean R. Ewing (@GenNerd) December 12, 2016
It's almost like Paul Krugman is undermining my faith in our democratic institutions. https://t.co/a39QqqkBwb
— Robert P. Murphy (@BobMurphyEcon) December 12, 2016
Join the conversation as a VIP Member