Smart, pragmatic, measured, tough, passionate, motivated, PERSISTENT, creative, listener, focused, disciplined, patient .... somebody you would trust with your life.
It is sad that Hillary is measured by some other scale but that does not seem to change her. She has always tried to find solutions to problems where others would simply just give up .... and it does not appear that is going to change.
When history looks back in a decade or two I believe she will be viewed as one of the great American presidents. And then somebody will pull out their own measurement scale, add an asterisk, and say "But remember that Wikileaks stuff". To paraphrase a character called Kermit .... "It's not easy being a woman".
It is sad that Hillary is measured by some other scale but that does not seem to change her. She has always tried to find solutions to problems where others would simply just give up .... and it does not appear that is going to change.
When history looks back in a decade or two I believe she will be viewed as one of the great American presidents. And then somebody will pull out their own measurement scale, add an asterisk, and say "But remember that Wikileaks stuff". To paraphrase a character called Kermit .... "It's not easy being a woman".
341
AMEN!! BTW I notice that all except one of the NYtimes "picks" comments are by men, and the one by a woman says it ALL!!!
189
Great case for Clinton. But I would emphasize the important of becoming a HEROINE, as the first woman president. I believe that this feat will go down in history is more than a footnote.
Prof. Krugman, as an economist, can you imagine the economic impact of women's rights? Can you conceive of the idea that as women (and men) are encouraged to rise up in the workforce, the economy may just rise significantly, for years to come?
I would appreciate your comments:
One step for a (W)oman. One giant leap for (H)umankind?
===========================================
Prof. Krugman, as an economist, can you imagine the economic impact of women's rights? Can you conceive of the idea that as women (and men) are encouraged to rise up in the workforce, the economy may just rise significantly, for years to come?
I would appreciate your comments:
One step for a (W)oman. One giant leap for (H)umankind?
===========================================
82
The constant repetition about how unlikeable she is has actually induced me to like her more. I am starting to feel a real affection for her, after her debate performances, and after the constant exposure to unrelenting efforts to make me hate her.
She is a plucky little grandmother; takes one to know one, Mrs. Clinton. Godspeed (and never ever leave your bulletproof Spanks at home, you're going to need them).
She is a plucky little grandmother; takes one to know one, Mrs. Clinton. Godspeed (and never ever leave your bulletproof Spanks at home, you're going to need them).
282
It's obvious that thoughtful readers of the NY Times and Washington Post do not favor "The Entertainer." Secretary Clinton is a former New York Senator who is certainly respected by the Catholic Charities for Children for her work after 9/11 and for families and children's causes. Where is the list of Trump's good works? No wonder he was booed during his rants last night. Polls show that he has zero chance of winning New York, his home state.
Those who mention Secretary Clinton's trait of secretiveness must realize that she has successfully survived years of Republican muck-raking. Anyone in her shoes would need to adapt to such hateful treatment. As President Obama has proclaimed, Secretary Clinton is the most experienced and qualified candidate for President in history. It appears that, when elected as our first woman President, she will be a successful "Iron Lady" leader.
Those who mention Secretary Clinton's trait of secretiveness must realize that she has successfully survived years of Republican muck-raking. Anyone in her shoes would need to adapt to such hateful treatment. As President Obama has proclaimed, Secretary Clinton is the most experienced and qualified candidate for President in history. It appears that, when elected as our first woman President, she will be a successful "Iron Lady" leader.
160
They say Hillary is a bad candidate because Trump is a horrific candidate and they desperately want to equate both of them, although there's no basis for this. This is mostly the right wing media's attempt to discredit Clinton and the unbiased media's attempt at spicing things up a little, or the appearance of being unbiased, or both!
122
Never mind a third party, we need to return to a 2 party system— what we have now is one political party and a bunch of lapdogs lead by a mental patient.
The fact that the GOP had no trouble putting a moronic demagogue within reach of the nuclear buttons while complaining about email etiquette is sickening.
The fact that the GOP had no trouble putting a moronic demagogue within reach of the nuclear buttons while complaining about email etiquette is sickening.
223
"But even so, I don't have to like her or have a beer with her for her to have my support."
men want to have a beer with good ole bill and nothing from hilliary.
men want to have a beer with good ole bill and nothing from hilliary.
11
Who were those better candidates the GOP might have chosen? Easy, Michael Bloomberg.
27
I completely agree that she is capable of being a competent, maybe even first-rate POTUS. She's progressive _enough_.
The problem is, without 60 Democratic senators, she will get nothing done. In any case, the House will initiate impeachment proceedings within a week of her taking the oath. One or more GOP senators will put a hold on any SCOTUS nomination. Nothing will happen except by executive order, and those orders will be exhibit C of her impeachment proceedings.
Ah, but maybe after two years of that voters will finally throw the bums out. Don't hold your breath. The horse left the barn a while back, and this republic continues its decline.
The problem is, without 60 Democratic senators, she will get nothing done. In any case, the House will initiate impeachment proceedings within a week of her taking the oath. One or more GOP senators will put a hold on any SCOTUS nomination. Nothing will happen except by executive order, and those orders will be exhibit C of her impeachment proceedings.
Ah, but maybe after two years of that voters will finally throw the bums out. Don't hold your breath. The horse left the barn a while back, and this republic continues its decline.
33
Hear, hear!
50
Thank you. Were it not for the debates, Clinton would have never overcome the diminishing, delusional right wing narrative of her as a corrupt vessel of more powerful interests. Which is, in itself, a deeply sexist idea in light of all her accomplishments, ability and long history of public service in professional challenging poistions.
119
Thanks Paul. You hit the nail on the head with this Op-Ed. This is precisely why I'm enthusiastically supporting her and I have already voted.
119
No one is saying Hillary got to where she is at through luck. She is an ace manipulator of the political system with many connections and "friends". Now is that a good thing? To some extent. You want someone who knows the ropes. But it comes down to motivation and what does the candidate want to accomplish. I support some of Hillary's goals and find others troubling. In either case I am not convinced that what she says has any relation to what she thinks or what she will in the end do. She is a chameleon and will say anything. Most here and elsewhere are so focused on Trump that they do not even think about what the downsides of a Clinton presidency may be.
33
I like her, happy to be voting for her, and cannot understand the vitriol against her with the "evidence" we are given not substantiated or driven into a frenzy by a combination of facts and innuendo.
I am so happy to cast my vote for her!
I am so happy to cast my vote for her!
192
Hillary Clinton has a chance to be a great president, but only if she will ungrudgingly take on the issues that Bernie popularized. And she hasn't really done that yet. Most of those issues made their way into the Democratic platform, and it will be up to the people to use that platform as a cudgel to make her support them, and not just give them lip service. Like FDR said, "Make me do it."
34
Amen to all this, Paul. Great to see this from an entirely different angle.
82
Not to mention the fact that the conservative propaganda machine has been aggressively attacking and talking down Hillary for at least the past dozen years.
36
The Republicans in Congress used their power to 'swift boat' Ms. Clinton for years. The then went to great lengths to make paper cuts look like the rack. They just Parrot the same exaggerated attacks over and over. Should the candidate for President, concession speech or not, accept the outcome? Should Congress use their power to 'swift boat' opponents? Congressional Republicans have proven they abuse their privilege and power. Trash them at the polls for the good of the country; it's not just Mr. Trump. Ms. Clinton must not slow down until Nov. 8th..
63
Great piece. Thank you. Just because the right is saying she's dishonest doesn't mean she is. the Clintons have been in the Republican cross hairs since they came on the national scene.
69
This should be posed as a question, Why Hillary wins and the American electorate and democracy loses? The DNC and media and big players in Washington and on Wall Street played a big role in anointing Hillary.
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK elites- the powerful Washington backroom political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would through a fox into the Washington henhouse! We'd Trump the cabals and Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK elites- the powerful Washington backroom political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would through a fox into the Washington henhouse! We'd Trump the cabals and Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
8
After Mr. Obama was nominated for the Democratic candidate, the GOP threw their own token African-American candidates at us — with generally laughable results. This year, with Mrs Clinton as the frontrunner, the GOP dabbled in female candidates with Mrs. Fiorina. Not much better. What I gather from that is that it's not race or gender that makes the difference, but substance, experience and a sincere desire to bridge the network of fissures dividing the American electorate. Obama was not able to bridge those gaps — his presidency seems to have widened them — but that's more a matter of the GOP doubling down on a losing hand than anything Mr. O did. I doubt Mrs. Clinton will make much progress either as long as the GOP continues to mug for the cheap seats. Sooner or later, however, Republicans have to come to understand that "making America great again" means pulling back from the "exceptionalism" delusion and listening to the rest of the participants in the conversation. If Democrats retake the majority of the Senate this November, they will have no choice but to send their fringe elements back to the children's table.
39
you have to know the system to make it work. Trump knows how to game the system. Hillary can build on her legislative and executive experience to work with the House and Senate and with our governors and mayors. I voted last week because I'm a hemiplegic stroke survivor afraid to go to the polls in case an angry voter pushes me. I need help to stand up when I fall. Hillary Clinton is a stand up gal. She won my vote here in Philadelphia where our votes are not rigged.
99
This should be posed as a question, Why Hillary wins and the American electorate and democracy loses? The DNC and media and big players in Washington and on Wall Street played a big role in anointing Hillary.
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK elites- the powerful Washington backroom political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would throw a fox into the Washington henhouse! We'd Trump the elites and Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK elites- the powerful Washington backroom political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would throw a fox into the Washington henhouse! We'd Trump the elites and Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
19
Love this article Paul. Another example how threatened many are in our country by women who are strong, independent, powerful and intelligent. Ironic how these same people proudly proclaim the right of all Americans to reach our "God-given potential." Yet when the wrong person, or wrong group of people reach their own potential, there's a big problem. I am so proud of Hillary, her toughness, intelligence, persistence and strength. I enthusiastically support her and know she will be a superb POTUS.
125
Anyone with half a brain could have beaten Clinton. Fortunately, if you are a Clinton supporter, Trump didn't have one. She is a lesser-evil candidate and will win primarily on that quality. Yes, she's been battling for over twenty years in the political arena, but unfortunately she still views the world as it it were 1990. This will be remembered as the election that really wasn't an election, because we had no real choice. She is unchallenged. This is a democracy?
37
I am a big fan of Hilary and I am going to vote for her.But one republican candidate did impress me. If republican base had any common sense they would have chosen John Kasich as their nominee. Every poll showed that he was the strongest candidate From the Republican paty against Hilary. The Republican base was foolish to choose Donald Trump.
15
I agree with everything in this column except one thing: I would LOVE to have a beer with Hillary.
68
All this gushing over Hillary--Krugman looking for a spot in the White House?
19
The is should be posed as a question, Why Hillary wins and the American electorate and democracy loses. The DNC and media played a big role in anointing Hillary.
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK powerful political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would through a fox into the Washington henhouse! Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
We Americans are too brainwashed by the Democrat-Republican divide and conquer strategy used by post Eisenhower and JFK powerful political cabals to see we have a historic opportunity right here now in front of us-
vote NO on Hillary and Trump and vote YES for any other candidate beside these two. It's the only way to take back our democracy. Imagine that, both Hill and Trump losing out to a 3rd party candidate?! That would through a fox into the Washington henhouse! Hilarity of another kind would ensue!
7
As much as I agree with your column Prof. Krugman, you are missing the elephant in the room, I. e. who has been spreading the storyline that Mrs. Clinton is a terrible candidate. It's been the whole of the American media, including your own paper, the New York Times, specifically the "news" section. Their subtle or not subtle attempts to portray this like a symmetric election, disregarding all the evidence on the contrary, has been evident, so much that they had to try to correct their coverage lately, too little and too late should I say.
I find myself distrusting more and more your news coverage. If your paper has been so deplorable covering one of the most important elections In my lifetime, can they get away with misleading coverage of less important issues? I am afraid what the answer is.
I find myself distrusting more and more your news coverage. If your paper has been so deplorable covering one of the most important elections In my lifetime, can they get away with misleading coverage of less important issues? I am afraid what the answer is.
36
Ezra Klein criticized Trump the other day for failing to take the opportunity to expose Hillary Clinton as "inauthentic and out of touch." I suggested in a comment thread that maybe he couldn't because she wasn't. When she first ran for office in New York State, she began with a listening tour, and from all accounts listening is what she did. She, unlike Trump, does NOT isolate herself in a bubble of privilege. She is wealthy, but makes a point of getting out of her comfort zone to talk to people who are not part of the inside-the-beltway circle. Trump didn't walk over to address people during the town hall debate; she did. Trump didn't mix and shake hands after any of the debates; she did.
46
Hillary came out of the closet on Syria for all to see when she reaffirmed her support for "no fly" zone there. Obama has not taken this warlike step, but Hillary will. Blowhard though he is, Trump spoke more truth about foreign policy that did Hillary Clinton at the last debate. Her unrepentant bellicosity is a very good reason not to give her the nuclear codes.
23
Thank you for speaking the truth about Hillary Clinton. I am one of thousands of Clinton campaign volunteers who speak to voters every day. Many voters, especially women, are absolutely over-the-moon to have the choice to vote for her. I know I am. Thanks for speaking for us!
46
Speaking from the Great White North where we have not been subjected to years of anti-Hillary sentiment I find it very hard to determine what is the evidence that supports this anti-Hillary bias?
Thankfully yappy talking heads of the left or right variety have never been a major aspect of our media culture. Perhaps we live our stereotype and just don't like to get on the airwaves and sound off over nothing.
I can only conclude that a feature of the right wing media is they have to present a bogeyman [or woman] to their listeners to channel their angst towards and to throw mud at.
But look at the facts:
She was a first lady who tried to get universal healthcare for everyone.
She at all accounts was an effective Senator.
She has turned out to be an excellent campaigner.
Given that the media seems to want to make major issues out of minor miss-speaks I can understand why she has a tendency to keep things private.
So what's not to like? You American's should be glad to have her... after all there is a lot worse out there, and you have discovered what I mean this election.
Thankfully yappy talking heads of the left or right variety have never been a major aspect of our media culture. Perhaps we live our stereotype and just don't like to get on the airwaves and sound off over nothing.
I can only conclude that a feature of the right wing media is they have to present a bogeyman [or woman] to their listeners to channel their angst towards and to throw mud at.
But look at the facts:
She was a first lady who tried to get universal healthcare for everyone.
She at all accounts was an effective Senator.
She has turned out to be an excellent campaigner.
Given that the media seems to want to make major issues out of minor miss-speaks I can understand why she has a tendency to keep things private.
So what's not to like? You American's should be glad to have her... after all there is a lot worse out there, and you have discovered what I mean this election.
55
With Hillary as president, I think we have a fighting chance to roll back the inflated tax cuts for the wealthy that are sapping our economy and exacerbating income inequality, overturn Citizens United, and take back the House to fix the Republican gerrymander that's distorted the will of the voters for many disastrous years now. We the people have to show that that's our will by supporting Hillary and also by VOTING IN THE NEXT OFF-YEAR ELECTION. As we've all seen, the Trumpletons are fired up, and they'll be out for blood after two years of Hillary.
And everybody's seen that she's tough; she's not going to fold under the inevitable childish obstruction and drama led by the Tea Party. It's important that sane Americans show a lot of support for her leadership now because this is the time to pull America back from the edge of total ruin at the hands of the new robber barons.
I know it won't be perfect--real life rarely is-- but it will be great progress with Hillary following the path Obama found back up from the valley of despair where the last Republican administration left us flat.
Sounds like a wonderful turnaround in the plot of our story: from tragedy to triumph in sixteen years. I, for one, am grateful. Go Hillary!
And everybody's seen that she's tough; she's not going to fold under the inevitable childish obstruction and drama led by the Tea Party. It's important that sane Americans show a lot of support for her leadership now because this is the time to pull America back from the edge of total ruin at the hands of the new robber barons.
I know it won't be perfect--real life rarely is-- but it will be great progress with Hillary following the path Obama found back up from the valley of despair where the last Republican administration left us flat.
Sounds like a wonderful turnaround in the plot of our story: from tragedy to triumph in sixteen years. I, for one, am grateful. Go Hillary!
46
I wonder what position Professor Krugman has been offered in Clinton's administration?
Secretary of the Treasury? That would be great. Paul could run up the debt another twenty trillion without breaking a sweat. He's a Keynesian, you know. He thinks J.M. was for unfettered government spending. Keep the presses running at the mints, Secretarty Krugman.
Secretary of Commerce? Great choice. Open borders and free trade for all Big Money Corps (as his boss would say, we go after the rich because that's where the money is).
Wherever Paul lands in Washington, he deserves it. He has tirelessly moonlighted as Hill's greatest supporter while he has been on sabbatical as the economic columnist for the Times.
Secretary of the Treasury? That would be great. Paul could run up the debt another twenty trillion without breaking a sweat. He's a Keynesian, you know. He thinks J.M. was for unfettered government spending. Keep the presses running at the mints, Secretarty Krugman.
Secretary of Commerce? Great choice. Open borders and free trade for all Big Money Corps (as his boss would say, we go after the rich because that's where the money is).
Wherever Paul lands in Washington, he deserves it. He has tirelessly moonlighted as Hill's greatest supporter while he has been on sabbatical as the economic columnist for the Times.
18
What choice do we have? One candidate is about the grossest man in America and the other is the betrothed of the generals and the corporations. her perpetual laughter reminds me of Mme. Defarge at the guillotine in A Tale of Two Cities.
14
Memo to columnist-pundits: Hillary Clinton is not respected or trusted by a huge majority of the American voters, as polls have consistently shown for months and currently demonstrate. Donald Tump is a buffoon and a boor, but many of us Sanders supporters feel that Clinton is truly evil. The "choice" we confront is horrible because of the overwhelming evidence that Clinton stole the Democratic primaries---the real story of this sordid election. You won't find that reported in the NY Times. Your reporters have been outed by Wilileaks for the collusion with Clinton. It seems the Times has some explaining to do.
22
The same press that gave the Donald billions of dollars of free air time, also crucified Senator Clinton repeatedly as a scoundrel.
37
Some some comments are insisting that Hillary was a mediocre SOS, which, in my humble opinion, is mostly based on the premise that we could have done something that would stabilize the Middle East last 7 years. Wishful thinking. Even
25
There seems to be an outright campaign against older, white women, esp. on the left,which loves to cannibalizes its leaders and its young. Mrs. Clinton is the most qualified and hard working candidate we have ever had. For those of us women over the age of 50, this type of scorn and vitriol is a daily part of our lives. It made counting the stock options I received, however modest, all the sweeter given how many times I was forced to make a mediocre man into a king in the workplace.
55
Utter nonsense, full of straw men. McCain or Romney might have fared well with at least different craziness. What about Susan Collins? Hillary IS a bad candidate. That's why Obama killed her in the primaries. Possibly Sanders would have also, if not for dirty tricks, who knows. All we know for sure is Trump is far worse than Hillary. When Hillary gets elected, we will find out whether she was a good candidate, and the Republicans will get another bite of the apple in 2020.
15
With Hillary Clinton, who knows, a shared beer might teach me a lot. It would certainly be worth far more that the $7 beer tab ($14 if I pick up Hillary's, but she can leave the tip.)
As for The Donald? All I can say is, "Drown me, please, in a keg!" And if Rudy Giuliani or Christie come along, supply a much -- and I mean MUCH -- bigger keg. Sharing a beer with them is almost as unthinkable as a Trump presidency.
Whew! I need a cold one!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
As for The Donald? All I can say is, "Drown me, please, in a keg!" And if Rudy Giuliani or Christie come along, supply a much -- and I mean MUCH -- bigger keg. Sharing a beer with them is almost as unthinkable as a Trump presidency.
Whew! I need a cold one!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
25
I don't really care if I like a candidate or not (barring the occasional Loathsome Bully, of course), and I look forward to the day when nobody else does, either.
I voted for Hillary Clinton yesterday because of her training in politics, her generally fighting for the right stuff, her frequent accomplishments, and her current policies and plans.
And I have to say, I voted for her because--as with the current President--her very presence is a sharp stick in the eye to some of the troglodytes. I spoze that's some of the same impluse that leads the trogs to vite for Trump, though I'd point out that supporting a candidate because of her gender and a sense that it's about time for a little balance is a lot different from supporting a fat, rich white guy because you're out of your mind about women and black people getting anything like a fair deal.
In any case, please make sure you get out and vote, and vote downticket too. We need to get this done.
I voted for Hillary Clinton yesterday because of her training in politics, her generally fighting for the right stuff, her frequent accomplishments, and her current policies and plans.
And I have to say, I voted for her because--as with the current President--her very presence is a sharp stick in the eye to some of the troglodytes. I spoze that's some of the same impluse that leads the trogs to vite for Trump, though I'd point out that supporting a candidate because of her gender and a sense that it's about time for a little balance is a lot different from supporting a fat, rich white guy because you're out of your mind about women and black people getting anything like a fair deal.
In any case, please make sure you get out and vote, and vote downticket too. We need to get this done.
43
As we get older, we get more practical. I've cast votes for Green candidates and other protest candidates. But I won't be likely to do it again.
Something happened inside me when I saw Bush beat Gore because of 90,000 votes spent on a protest candidate in Florida. I saw how Republicans beat Kerry in 2004 because of a massive turn out not matched by Democrats. And don't forget that the 2004 vote was primarily about Iraq. It was Republicans voting for the Iraq war that got Bush elected a second time!
And let's not forget the poor turnout by Democrats in 2010 that handed the Republicans the House for ten years, thus crippling Barack Obama's presidency, and likely doing the same to a potential Hillary Clinton presidency.
When we vote, or when we fail to vote, we have to consider the full consequences of our actions. Hillary Clinton, as has been said over and over by nearly everyone, is a very well qualified and talented politician. She will make a good president. But even if you don't find her attractive, consider what you are doing if you vote for Stein, Johnson, or if you simply stay home.
Your vote counts. Use it wisely!
Something happened inside me when I saw Bush beat Gore because of 90,000 votes spent on a protest candidate in Florida. I saw how Republicans beat Kerry in 2004 because of a massive turn out not matched by Democrats. And don't forget that the 2004 vote was primarily about Iraq. It was Republicans voting for the Iraq war that got Bush elected a second time!
And let's not forget the poor turnout by Democrats in 2010 that handed the Republicans the House for ten years, thus crippling Barack Obama's presidency, and likely doing the same to a potential Hillary Clinton presidency.
When we vote, or when we fail to vote, we have to consider the full consequences of our actions. Hillary Clinton, as has been said over and over by nearly everyone, is a very well qualified and talented politician. She will make a good president. But even if you don't find her attractive, consider what you are doing if you vote for Stein, Johnson, or if you simply stay home.
Your vote counts. Use it wisely!
71
Great thoughts. I also once thought if the opponent was not Trump, Hillary would have a difficult election this year. But what you said is perfectly right. Take any one of those Republican primary candidates other than Trump, I don't think none of them will have a chance of beating Hillary as much as Trump. The latter got closer in winning because he aroused the idling bigotry in some Americans. No wonder you got a Nobel prize :).
11
Hillary has prevailed against a constant driving headwind of trumped up scandals, sexism, and negative press - a feat that few other politicians could match. Her victory is no accident, indeed she has thoroughly beat the odds.
44
Hillary may lack charm, but Donald lacks grace. Besides, he wears his very long red tie like a mandrill in rutting season. He thinks macho is a winning hand.
Meantime, Hillary has been ready for this job for a decade or longer. She has things lined up and ready to go and she will make a fine president.
Meantime, Hillary has been ready for this job for a decade or longer. She has things lined up and ready to go and she will make a fine president.
34
Let's dispel with this fiction that Marco Rubio was suggesting a nefarious conspiracy. He was saying that Obama is deliberately trying to turn America into a Scandinavian country and that that effort, deliberate as it is, is undermining our strength.
You're interpreting his words erroneously. I've pointed this out before, but by all means, keep saying it, if you'd like—doesn't make it true. As for the rest of it, there's little question in my mind that this is correct. Clinton, in her deepest beliefs, and despite her progressive platform, is a calculating centrist. In the eyes of conservatives, centrists are communists. Seen through a socialist lens, centrists aren't too much different than, e.g., the Koch brothers.
And considering how many people have migrated poleward, Hillary hatred is unsurprising.
You're interpreting his words erroneously. I've pointed this out before, but by all means, keep saying it, if you'd like—doesn't make it true. As for the rest of it, there's little question in my mind that this is correct. Clinton, in her deepest beliefs, and despite her progressive platform, is a calculating centrist. In the eyes of conservatives, centrists are communists. Seen through a socialist lens, centrists aren't too much different than, e.g., the Koch brothers.
And considering how many people have migrated poleward, Hillary hatred is unsurprising.
5
I am continually flabbergasted by the gullibility of American electorate. My approach seems to be rather rare:
1. Assume the progress is usually slow in our political system. Having all 3 branches in hands of one party is rather rare (including 60 senators).
2. Review the program and proposed policies by each candidate and pick the most realistic, avoid wishful thinking and vague platforms. Look for real data and verifiable numbers. Avoid promises that have no basis in reality.
3. Review the quality of the candidate that offers the platform described above and determine the political chops necessary the carry the task.
Pretty easy, right? So why American electorate at large is so pre-occupied with debating issues that have no significance for the future of the country.
1. Assume the progress is usually slow in our political system. Having all 3 branches in hands of one party is rather rare (including 60 senators).
2. Review the program and proposed policies by each candidate and pick the most realistic, avoid wishful thinking and vague platforms. Look for real data and verifiable numbers. Avoid promises that have no basis in reality.
3. Review the quality of the candidate that offers the platform described above and determine the political chops necessary the carry the task.
Pretty easy, right? So why American electorate at large is so pre-occupied with debating issues that have no significance for the future of the country.
5
The most likely reason for male grousing about any female is that they have troubled feelings about their mothers from childhood on.
Marriage itself is perhaps a reminder of how much boys do depend on their mothers and in some cases males have a harder time leaving home than their sisters do.
Marriage itself is perhaps a reminder of how much boys do depend on their mothers and in some cases males have a harder time leaving home than their sisters do.
8
I don't want to drink beer with my presidential candidate -- I don't like it much, for one thing -- but if I did happen to converse with that person over a glass of wine or water, I would want a discussion of issues and policies, not a back-slapping conversation devoid of content. I don't want my president to be a "regular guy" -- that person should be exceptional! Do people really see the presidential election as a personal popularity contest? If so, woe is America.
I thought George Bush would be a good host at a barbecue; I give him that. But I would much rather have had a glass of water with Al Gore. This time around, I would even not want to be in the same room with Donald. But a talk with Hillary would be fascinating and enlightening.
I thought George Bush would be a good host at a barbecue; I give him that. But I would much rather have had a glass of water with Al Gore. This time around, I would even not want to be in the same room with Donald. But a talk with Hillary would be fascinating and enlightening.
35
Hillary Clinton is one of the best qualified people to run for president in decades maybe ever. She's been a Senator and Secretary of State. She's not a great orator, but her knowledge is deep and wide. She can actually debate. I'm proud to have voted for her. (Early voting.)
53
Amen Paul Krugman.
These thoughts have been on my mind since the last debate -- thank you for articulating them so beautifully and cogently, as always.
These thoughts have been on my mind since the last debate -- thank you for articulating them so beautifully and cogently, as always.
27
I find it hard to fathom, let alone express, my appreciation for what Hillary Clinton has done and is doing for our culture--over and above what she has done and hopefully will do for our country.
She IS breaking through a tough and tempered glass ceiling that says that the only appropriate way for a woman to exercise power is from behind the scenes through (1) raising children (especially sons, because their work will be directly consequential in the world) and (2) inspiring/supporting the men in their lives to do great things.
Naturally, she unleashed and has survived the most horrendous, decades-long backlash imaginable.
She has had to personally deal with misogyny and right wing bullying in every imaginable form--including but not limited to the heartbreak of the most publicly humiliating and consequential sex scandal of all time. In order to keep going and keep growing, she has HAD to work through the issues on so many levels that she CAN hold her own, no matter what that slime-slinging paragon of greed, misogyny, and male privilege throws at her.
A male candidate would not have triggered Trump and revealed what Hillary revealed. NOT ONE of the host of alpha male GOP primary candidates was able to prevail against his bullying.
HRC has already won a huge cultural battle for the dignity of women. She radiates the authentic grace and beauty--not dependent on youth or other conformity to stereotype--of a woman who has earned her power on many, many levels.
She IS breaking through a tough and tempered glass ceiling that says that the only appropriate way for a woman to exercise power is from behind the scenes through (1) raising children (especially sons, because their work will be directly consequential in the world) and (2) inspiring/supporting the men in their lives to do great things.
Naturally, she unleashed and has survived the most horrendous, decades-long backlash imaginable.
She has had to personally deal with misogyny and right wing bullying in every imaginable form--including but not limited to the heartbreak of the most publicly humiliating and consequential sex scandal of all time. In order to keep going and keep growing, she has HAD to work through the issues on so many levels that she CAN hold her own, no matter what that slime-slinging paragon of greed, misogyny, and male privilege throws at her.
A male candidate would not have triggered Trump and revealed what Hillary revealed. NOT ONE of the host of alpha male GOP primary candidates was able to prevail against his bullying.
HRC has already won a huge cultural battle for the dignity of women. She radiates the authentic grace and beauty--not dependent on youth or other conformity to stereotype--of a woman who has earned her power on many, many levels.
61
The irony here is that it's Clinton's skill as a politician that's branding her as a bad politician. Like a good politician she has;
--Held public office for 12 years in the Senate and the Cabinet
--Amassed a large network of supporters and donors
--Outlined specific policies to address major issues we face
--Shown how she will pay for those policies
--Earned the support of a broadly-defined demographic
--Been a tough competitor who never backs down in the face of attempted intimidation or outright contempt
--Mastered the art of public speaking, which, believe it or not, has nothing to do with oratory. Try it sometime if you think it's easy.
So this dislike of Clinton is based on the fact that her public persona is the public persona of a real person. We've had quite enough Billy Bob geniality over the last 50 years. What we need is a mind and a heart who can steer us away from the abyss and toward the future we deserve.
But instead of looking at what matters, we have people obsessed with her supposed dishonesty. Has any previous candidate had only the purest motives? You've got to be kidding. GW Bush lied through his teeth about Al Gore's climate change statistics during that campaign--leaving aside whatever happened in Florida. Is that the reason he's considered so "likable?"
--Held public office for 12 years in the Senate and the Cabinet
--Amassed a large network of supporters and donors
--Outlined specific policies to address major issues we face
--Shown how she will pay for those policies
--Earned the support of a broadly-defined demographic
--Been a tough competitor who never backs down in the face of attempted intimidation or outright contempt
--Mastered the art of public speaking, which, believe it or not, has nothing to do with oratory. Try it sometime if you think it's easy.
So this dislike of Clinton is based on the fact that her public persona is the public persona of a real person. We've had quite enough Billy Bob geniality over the last 50 years. What we need is a mind and a heart who can steer us away from the abyss and toward the future we deserve.
But instead of looking at what matters, we have people obsessed with her supposed dishonesty. Has any previous candidate had only the purest motives? You've got to be kidding. GW Bush lied through his teeth about Al Gore's climate change statistics during that campaign--leaving aside whatever happened in Florida. Is that the reason he's considered so "likable?"
37
Clinton's not bad for a politician who will enact neoliberal domestic policy and neoconservative foreign policy, all the while sporting two faces, a public one and a personal one.
No one ever said she wasn't a formidable figure.
No one ever said she wasn't a formidable figure.
10
I grew so weary of anyone, whether a correspondent or pundit, complaining what an awful speaker Hillary is, what an awful campaigner she is. The speeches she has made, that I have seen, were substantive and clear. Simple and straightforward. How many presidents of the modern era were inspiring speakers? Is that what they are being hired to do? No. I want a person who understands the real issues facing this country, this world in which we live, while not being afraid to deal with them, regardless of what anyone says, or if they will be popular. This isn't a high school popularity contest. There are serious issues facing this country that need to be addressed, issues the Republican Party has refused to contend with—outside of wanting to ban abortions and gay marriage, cutting taxes, or kicking immigrants out. And, lets not forget the cumbersome tax code. That is just too much work.
Republican policies, if one can call them that, are nothing but a shell game which accomplishes nothing in moving this country forward based on any reality at a point in time—other than 1950 perhaps. It's all smoke and mirrors. It amazes me people fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Yet Republicans are blamed for nothing, especially given the planned paralysis in the least effective Congress in my 64 years. It's time their deceit and continued recalcitrance came back to bite them in the butt.
As to Ms. Clinton's faults, none of us if perfect. Kudos to what she has achieved. It's more than most.
Republican policies, if one can call them that, are nothing but a shell game which accomplishes nothing in moving this country forward based on any reality at a point in time—other than 1950 perhaps. It's all smoke and mirrors. It amazes me people fall for it hook, line, and sinker. Yet Republicans are blamed for nothing, especially given the planned paralysis in the least effective Congress in my 64 years. It's time their deceit and continued recalcitrance came back to bite them in the butt.
As to Ms. Clinton's faults, none of us if perfect. Kudos to what she has achieved. It's more than most.
44
We are fortunate to have an intelligent, educated, poised, experienced grandmother as our president. Yes trumpians you are losing to a grandmother. How grand.
30
President Clinton will be followed in 8 years by Elizabeth Warren. It is way past time for America to let women have a chance to be President. As for the other side, my prediction is that there may NOT be a Republican party in 2020 after they get plastered on November 8th!
19
Thank you, I like Hillary and I find it baffling that so many democratic pundits find her passionless. Is it possible that they're looking at her civilized reactions to being relentlessly interrogated about everything as something to be denigrated rather than praised?
24
Paul, once again you eloquently tell it like it is. May you live long and prosper. And we're with her.
20
You end your column with this sentence: "So let’s dispel with this fiction that Hillary Clinton is only where she is through a random stroke of good luck. She’s a formidable figure, and has been all along."
I have to ask: Is there anyone in the entire United States who thinks Hillary got to where she is through a "random stroke of good luck"? Is there anyone -- like her or loathe her -- who doesn't think she's a formidable figure? I don't think so.
So let's give Trump some credit: He's very dangerous!! He's capable of winning. He's pushing some very hot buttons! If Hillary beats him, I will be impressed. And relieved. And hoping she will take on Wall Street and the banks. I don't think the people of America can afford to pick up the tab on another financial, derivatives-driven meltdown. And we certainly can't afford any more Iraq-like debacles. These are the most critical issues facing my family's future. I hope we don't have to go looking for a new place to live.
For an economist, you didn't even touch on these mighty issues. You almost sound like the Republicans do when they talk about family values. Which is how they pulled the wool over the eyes of hard-working people to get them to vote GOP: hook them with the anti-gay, anti-abortion rhetoric. Now you're spewing the same line from the opposite direction. And you're supposed to be an economist?
I have to ask: Is there anyone in the entire United States who thinks Hillary got to where she is through a "random stroke of good luck"? Is there anyone -- like her or loathe her -- who doesn't think she's a formidable figure? I don't think so.
So let's give Trump some credit: He's very dangerous!! He's capable of winning. He's pushing some very hot buttons! If Hillary beats him, I will be impressed. And relieved. And hoping she will take on Wall Street and the banks. I don't think the people of America can afford to pick up the tab on another financial, derivatives-driven meltdown. And we certainly can't afford any more Iraq-like debacles. These are the most critical issues facing my family's future. I hope we don't have to go looking for a new place to live.
For an economist, you didn't even touch on these mighty issues. You almost sound like the Republicans do when they talk about family values. Which is how they pulled the wool over the eyes of hard-working people to get them to vote GOP: hook them with the anti-gay, anti-abortion rhetoric. Now you're spewing the same line from the opposite direction. And you're supposed to be an economist?
5
This phrase is correct, but important for what it leaves out: "Remember, Mr. Trump won the nomination because he gave his party’s base what it wanted..."
Not quite. He won because 1. there were so many other candidates seeking votes. 2. Those candidates were, to a man, weak, save for, possibly, Kasich, and unwilling to take Trump on until it was far too late. 3. The Republican party, in most states, awards ALL of the delegates in the state to the person who gets a plurality, not a majority. Trump for months was properly labeled Mr. 33% because that reflects the general percentage of votes he received.
What does the process itself get ignored? The primaries for both parties are flawed, misdirected, chaotic and only quasi-democratic. Voters went for Trump because he was the one who stood out in a lackluster field and the only one willing to make bold statements (however wrongheaded). All traditional politicians are over coached and timid when it comes to actually saying what they will do, because it means they will lose support. Running for president means saying enough things to get elected, but not enough to cause trouble.
This year is Case Study #1 in how wrong our primary process is for picking people capable of leading the nation. When JFK was nominated in 1960, it was a hybrid process of open primaries and "big boss" domination. Since, we've gone wild with primaries without carefully considering whether we are getting the results we need. We aren't.
Not quite. He won because 1. there were so many other candidates seeking votes. 2. Those candidates were, to a man, weak, save for, possibly, Kasich, and unwilling to take Trump on until it was far too late. 3. The Republican party, in most states, awards ALL of the delegates in the state to the person who gets a plurality, not a majority. Trump for months was properly labeled Mr. 33% because that reflects the general percentage of votes he received.
What does the process itself get ignored? The primaries for both parties are flawed, misdirected, chaotic and only quasi-democratic. Voters went for Trump because he was the one who stood out in a lackluster field and the only one willing to make bold statements (however wrongheaded). All traditional politicians are over coached and timid when it comes to actually saying what they will do, because it means they will lose support. Running for president means saying enough things to get elected, but not enough to cause trouble.
This year is Case Study #1 in how wrong our primary process is for picking people capable of leading the nation. When JFK was nominated in 1960, it was a hybrid process of open primaries and "big boss" domination. Since, we've gone wild with primaries without carefully considering whether we are getting the results we need. We aren't.
5
Clintons are corrupt. NYT had a report on their
financial woes in Arkansas. Now they are worth
$150million without running a business or innovating
anything. They sold their political connections. What
words of wisdom could Hillary Clinton tell Goldman
Sachs on economy or investment banking? The only
thing she could is to call up a head of the country
who she met as secretary of state and put in a good
word for Goldman Sachs. That is why they were
paying her $225,000 in speaking fees. Bill Clinton
charges $500,000 and delivers. A Canadian
businessman running uranium operations was rejected
for a contract in Kazakstan. He took Bill Clinton along
who praised human rights in Kazakastan, met their
president and this businessman got the contract and
donated huge amount of money to Clinton foundation.
Our political class is corrupt. Yes, Clinton can make
good speeches and score point, but her values are
suspect.They hanker after money and are close to
wealthy. In one e-mail, leaked by Wikileaks, she
says that once a middle class has now moved away.
She is now wealthy and identifies with the wealthy. Sure
enough wealthy are doing well and will continue to do
so under Clinton presidency. What is she going to do
help middle and lower middle class? Haven't heard
any sound proposal from Hillary Clinton.
financial woes in Arkansas. Now they are worth
$150million without running a business or innovating
anything. They sold their political connections. What
words of wisdom could Hillary Clinton tell Goldman
Sachs on economy or investment banking? The only
thing she could is to call up a head of the country
who she met as secretary of state and put in a good
word for Goldman Sachs. That is why they were
paying her $225,000 in speaking fees. Bill Clinton
charges $500,000 and delivers. A Canadian
businessman running uranium operations was rejected
for a contract in Kazakstan. He took Bill Clinton along
who praised human rights in Kazakastan, met their
president and this businessman got the contract and
donated huge amount of money to Clinton foundation.
Our political class is corrupt. Yes, Clinton can make
good speeches and score point, but her values are
suspect.They hanker after money and are close to
wealthy. In one e-mail, leaked by Wikileaks, she
says that once a middle class has now moved away.
She is now wealthy and identifies with the wealthy. Sure
enough wealthy are doing well and will continue to do
so under Clinton presidency. What is she going to do
help middle and lower middle class? Haven't heard
any sound proposal from Hillary Clinton.
19
Hillary's that colleague you found cold, till she pooled the money for the wedding gift from the office. Or that mean, tough teacher, you ended up loving the most.
She won my begrudging respect after the Benghazi hearing. She got my enthusiastic vote after the debates.
She won my begrudging respect after the Benghazi hearing. She got my enthusiastic vote after the debates.
26
my only question is how much do you get paid by the Clinton machine to write your drivel.
You would be screaming about corruption if a Republican operative came out and said what floval and creamy said in the tapes by the "right wing conservative " group said. She is though of as corrupt because she is
You would be screaming about corruption if a Republican operative came out and said what floval and creamy said in the tapes by the "right wing conservative " group said. She is though of as corrupt because she is
15
I don't think anyone ever argued that she is where she is because of luck. Your false premise is not even remotely compelling.
She is where she is because the Clintons insisted that she be the nominee. They were strategic and aggressive to pursue this prize. And folks like you helped them.
She did not emerge from a ground swell of popular support. She is not a popular politician. She never will be. She is not like-able.
Partisans like you will rejoice your victory over Trump. Yay!
Hillary is a terrible candidate. She sets this country back. We need real leadership. The baby boom generation has failed. To insist on another round in the White House is the very height of hubris.
Good luck as Treasury Secretary, Paul. A true progressive era will follow your exit.
She is where she is because the Clintons insisted that she be the nominee. They were strategic and aggressive to pursue this prize. And folks like you helped them.
She did not emerge from a ground swell of popular support. She is not a popular politician. She never will be. She is not like-able.
Partisans like you will rejoice your victory over Trump. Yay!
Hillary is a terrible candidate. She sets this country back. We need real leadership. The baby boom generation has failed. To insist on another round in the White House is the very height of hubris.
Good luck as Treasury Secretary, Paul. A true progressive era will follow your exit.
10
Did anyone else see Cardinal Dolan flinch when HRC said the ultimate glass ceiling is the Pope's chair in the Roman Catholic church? Could be she's a lot like the Fisherman's Wife in the old German folk tale. Or did anyone else hear Al Smith IV say Obama would have problems in a Trump administration because he'd fall under the Muslim ban? It just gets weirder and weirder.
2
I couldn't agree more with this piece. I have been perplexed about the general opinion that Mrs. Clinton is not trustworthy, etc., etc. There is nothing in her past as an attorney, politician or mother that is shadier than that of many other presidential candidates, past and present. I have had to chalk it up to the fact that she is a woman. The gender double standard that she has had to overcome has been enormous, and, of course, inherently unfair. She is by far the most qualified candidate that I will vote for in my lifetime, and she would likely outdo many others from our American past.
Despite all that, she's going to win the election. I hope this leads to other doors being opened, including at least 50% of Congress being women, and, if we're lucky, at least half of the SCOTUS. I'm looking forward to her administration.
Despite all that, she's going to win the election. I hope this leads to other doors being opened, including at least 50% of Congress being women, and, if we're lucky, at least half of the SCOTUS. I'm looking forward to her administration.
43
This is precisely why I never bought into the Sanders hype or anyone else. there simply just was not anyone, on any side, good enough.
3
Even Hillary beats Trump. She's the man.
6
Thanks, Mr. Krugman, for saying what few others have had the courage, or brains, to say.
10
Will someone look into Trump's claim to be a negotiator? Does he attend or send a team? What makes him the proverbial "poker player" if he is indeed?
1
All this and more: for 30 years the GOP has been hell-bent on "taking down" the Clintons. The level of their hatred for this couple is exceeded - maybe - by their hatred of President Obama, but there is no other individual, or couple, that an entire political party has worked so hard and for so long to damage, as the Clintons.
So forget standing tall in a mere three debates against Donald Trump...any politician, or politician's spouse, who can live through three decades of constant attack and come up not only breathing, but smiling while doing so, has something we should want in our President.
When facing dangers coming from within our nation or from other countries outside our borders, that is exactly the type of person we need in this job.
Paradoxically, it is the GOP that has, in fact, provided the most true-to-life training ground for Hillary Clinton to develop the skills, master the knowledge, and assimilate the experience into an organic whole that renders her to be one of those very rare persons who is supremely qualified, and supremely fit, for this job.
They don't have to "like" her, nor do we, but THAT is the type of President that ALL Americans should want to be fighting for them.
So forget standing tall in a mere three debates against Donald Trump...any politician, or politician's spouse, who can live through three decades of constant attack and come up not only breathing, but smiling while doing so, has something we should want in our President.
When facing dangers coming from within our nation or from other countries outside our borders, that is exactly the type of person we need in this job.
Paradoxically, it is the GOP that has, in fact, provided the most true-to-life training ground for Hillary Clinton to develop the skills, master the knowledge, and assimilate the experience into an organic whole that renders her to be one of those very rare persons who is supremely qualified, and supremely fit, for this job.
They don't have to "like" her, nor do we, but THAT is the type of President that ALL Americans should want to be fighting for them.
14
Oh, Paul, will you be in for a shock!
5
"All he did was say out loud what his rivals were trying to convey with dog whistles, which explains why they were so ineffective in opposing him."
Ding. Ding. Ding.
Ding. Ding. Ding.
10
Mr. Krugman seems to have left out a factor that has been crucial to Clinton's rise in the polls: The mainstream media have turned sharply against Trump and for Clinton. No longer does Trump get free exposure simply to boost ratings. He is now getting grilled as he should have been from the start. Meanwhile, the sun shines brightly on Hillary. Gone from public discourse is anguish about her coziness with Wall Street or her decidedly hawkish foreign policy views. It was Bernie Sanders who forced those topics to the fore, and now that he is no longer running, the media have gone silent on them.
Hillary Clinton is not a uniquely strong candidate. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren could have wiped the floor with Trump while not carrying Clinton's baggage.
Hillary Clinton is not a uniquely strong candidate. Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren could have wiped the floor with Trump while not carrying Clinton's baggage.
11
She is certainly formidable. I think from a likability standpoint the American people need to give her a fresh look and not have their image of her distorted by pundits, haters, political opposition, conspiracy nuts like Trump, etc. Too many voters subscribe to the notion that where there's smoke their's fire- ignoring or belittling her accomplishments and clinging to the National Enquirer brand of "fact" finding.
She is worthy of our support.
She is worthy of our support.
11
Colin Powell said Hillary destroys everything she touches, through arrogance and hubris. To those of you who are about to vote for her, don't later say you didn't know.
7
Paul - I couldn't agree with you more I wish I could click the Recommend button 1000 more times
10
Hillary wins because she is the most qualified ( by far ) to be President.
Her opponent and his supporters do not make up a majority. It is a simple numbers game and their total is shrinking rapidly. You could categorize them a lot of ways, but I won't do that here.
Most of the time good ideas will win out over bad ones. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party have many of them. ( which the US is founded upon )
Vote for your own best interests ~ not against them .
Her opponent and his supporters do not make up a majority. It is a simple numbers game and their total is shrinking rapidly. You could categorize them a lot of ways, but I won't do that here.
Most of the time good ideas will win out over bad ones. Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party have many of them. ( which the US is founded upon )
Vote for your own best interests ~ not against them .
11
Surely Rubio said, "let's dispense with this fiction," not "let's dispel with this fiction." Or "let's dispel this fiction," which has a nice Harry Potter feel to it. Secretary Clinton has showed a sense of humor, self-deprecation, and grace under pressure (particularly highlighted in the Arthur Smith charity dinner). But most importantly, she has an informed perspective on the policy she espouses.
5
No, it is luck. She was lucky that the idiot wing of the Republican party nominated the ONE candidate who was totally unelectable in the General. Even Cruz probably could have beat her, given what has come out in the past few weeks. The others would have wiped the floor with her. Hillary is "coldly ambitious, calculating," considers herself above the law, and is indeed a "genuine" liar beyond compare. Everyone sees her just the way she is -- or at least 67% do, according to one poll. So, you Democrats may have dodged a bullet thanks to Trump, but the artillery will be coming in hard for the next four years.
6
I've learned along the way that liking someone or not has more to do with you than with the other person. Not only that, but it can even be considered a failing to not be able to find the jewel in each person; there's always at least one.
I happen to like Hillary and have witnessed how she lights up a room. She's more of a one-on-one type person, if I might dare to presume. But even so, I don't have to like her or have a beer with her for her to have my support. I'd rather have the smartest person in any room, which so many who know her have said, leading our country.
I happen to like Hillary and have witnessed how she lights up a room. She's more of a one-on-one type person, if I might dare to presume. But even so, I don't have to like her or have a beer with her for her to have my support. I'd rather have the smartest person in any room, which so many who know her have said, leading our country.
18
I for one applaud this woman who has survived the slings and arrows of outrageous conservatives who still could not cope with the fact that their GOP reign ended with a one term Bush.
7
You say pundits have blind spots, which gives them too much credit, as if they can see.
1
Thank you, Professor! even though in my case he was "just preaching to the choir". I wish I had seen comments from Karen Garcia and Rima Regas, agreeing with him finally and requesting all Bernie supporters to support Hillary wholeheartedly. We need them all desperately.
1
hey Karen,
i'm active in local politics - local property taxes pay for education mostly. We don't have enough money to fund programs for arts, and sports as is.
I doubt for the most part that these kids will ever contribute more than they take in. They'll each have 3 or 4 kids and take in more than they give - at least thats the history in recent decades.
Why do you think the quality of life keeps going down in america? These kids are growing up with a mother who thinks nothing of breaking immigration laws and no father - that won't help.
Of course we just took in an Ethiopian couple with 13 kids - but at least its a couple. (they just had twins)
Meantime my wife and i can't afford to go to the dentist.
i'm active in local politics - local property taxes pay for education mostly. We don't have enough money to fund programs for arts, and sports as is.
I doubt for the most part that these kids will ever contribute more than they take in. They'll each have 3 or 4 kids and take in more than they give - at least thats the history in recent decades.
Why do you think the quality of life keeps going down in america? These kids are growing up with a mother who thinks nothing of breaking immigration laws and no father - that won't help.
Of course we just took in an Ethiopian couple with 13 kids - but at least its a couple. (they just had twins)
Meantime my wife and i can't afford to go to the dentist.
3
Revenge of the Nerd Girls! Those of us who have worked hard, done our homework on time, been well-prepared, and cared more for substance than flash can appreciate Hillary's strengths. Our political processes favor the beautiful and the charismatic; Hillary may not measure up there, but maybe we need a workhorse not a show horse.
15
Please everyone: It is not over yet! Hilary has shown great fortitude and may have the stiffest back and hardest iron in her soul than any man, woman or other in this country. But Trump and his supporters will not go quietly in the night and they still may fire the poison arrow that finds her heal. I fear as election day gets closer, if they had bombs, they would have no hesitation in launching them bringing our house down without a care for our country.
7
"I know, we’re supposed to see her as coldly ambitious and calculating, and on some issues — like macroeconomics — she does sound a bit bloodless, even when she clearly understands the subject and is talking good sense. But when she’s talking about women’s rights, or racial injustice, or support for families, her commitment, even passion, are obvious. She’s genuine, in a way nobody in the other party can be."
She's genuine bad apple, Paul, but you don't care, because she's YOUR genuine bad apple. And her core is rotten because she is someone of bad character, no matter how many times you try to avoid it or paint her otherwise. She cares when it suits her and her political ambitions. She'll change her position as soon as the wind changes, not because she has "evolved" on an issue. This is the same person who couldn't beat Barack Obama eight years ago, and the only change to her resumé now is a four-year stint as Secretary of State.
Continue to shill all you want, Paul. I agree she is probably going to be the next President; the electoral map is too much in her favor. But quit trying to paint her as something she's not.
She's genuine bad apple, Paul, but you don't care, because she's YOUR genuine bad apple. And her core is rotten because she is someone of bad character, no matter how many times you try to avoid it or paint her otherwise. She cares when it suits her and her political ambitions. She'll change her position as soon as the wind changes, not because she has "evolved" on an issue. This is the same person who couldn't beat Barack Obama eight years ago, and the only change to her resumé now is a four-year stint as Secretary of State.
Continue to shill all you want, Paul. I agree she is probably going to be the next President; the electoral map is too much in her favor. But quit trying to paint her as something she's not.
7
She has to run up hill in heels to do battle with the big orange dragon. Will she ever get the credit she deserves? People say she's bad but most cannot give evidence about exactly why. Could it be that the right have spent millions over the decades trying to bring her down? How much time and government resources have been wasted for investigations? One week of investigations into Trump shows that MOST of his deals are way worse than we ever imagined. She is a politician and she is not perfect. Get over it and go vote you babies.
9
My support for Clinton is directly motivated by my fear of Trump and Trumpism, the political environment of hatred and irrational fear that Republicans have created beginning with at least Nixon and certainly Reagan to the present! My personal experience is that my "Clinton-Kaine" yard signs are repeatedly vandalized by the Trump Brown Shirts in my neighborhood! All else besides, Mrs. Clinton is SANE in contrast to Trump who is obviously mentally unbalanced as perhaps as many of his supporters! It is a campaign like no other in my life experience and I first voted for JFK!
9
Hillary is where she is because largely because of voter apathy. About 20% voted in the Primary. I don't believe the small percentage of rigged voting by the DNC hurt Bernie, I believe that he lost because younger people don't vote as much as older voters. Of course people like the Prof. Krugman here and much of the media marginalized Bernie. Big business favors Hillary too. Toughness is a trait that is needed to get to the White House. Yet, the reason we have two of the most unpopular Presidential candidates is because of voter apathy. We get the government we deserve.
5
So Hillary Clinton is not an inspirational enough candidate? Before 2008, these were some of the "inspirational" nominees I got to vote for: Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, George H.W. Bush and Al Gore and John Kerry. You know what? I'm Ready for Hillary.
9
No character Hillary Clinton wins over all caricature Donald Trump. America and Americans lose either way. Neither of them would ever be confused with a normal humble humane empathetic human being who believed in and practiced liberal progressive policies for the advancement of humanity.
Hillary made her multimillionaire dollars the new fashioned way by converting her and husband Bill's elected and selected "public service" into a $121 million fortune. Scheme Clinton believes in mass incarceration, welfare deformation, corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare and military-industrial complex war mongering. While Donald Trump was old fashioned royally born by wisely picking a real estate baron father. Instead of sending us it's best New York some demonic entity searched every immoral sewer and garbage dump to summon these two.
Hillary Clinton is no Rosa Parks nor Ella Baker nor Fannie Lou Hamer nor Shirley Chisolm nor Barbara Jordan nor Carol Mosely Braun nor Margaret Thatcher nor Angela Merkel nor Theresa May nor Julia Gillard nor Sheikh Hasina nor Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf nor Nancy Pelosi nor Elizabeth Warren. Who was their Mister?
Hillary made her multimillionaire dollars the new fashioned way by converting her and husband Bill's elected and selected "public service" into a $121 million fortune. Scheme Clinton believes in mass incarceration, welfare deformation, corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare and military-industrial complex war mongering. While Donald Trump was old fashioned royally born by wisely picking a real estate baron father. Instead of sending us it's best New York some demonic entity searched every immoral sewer and garbage dump to summon these two.
Hillary Clinton is no Rosa Parks nor Ella Baker nor Fannie Lou Hamer nor Shirley Chisolm nor Barbara Jordan nor Carol Mosely Braun nor Margaret Thatcher nor Angela Merkel nor Theresa May nor Julia Gillard nor Sheikh Hasina nor Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf nor Nancy Pelosi nor Elizabeth Warren. Who was their Mister?
7
I watched both candidates speaking at the Al Smith dinner last night. Donald Trump started off mildly amusing, but towards the end turned sour and mean. Hillary struck a few low blows, but her sharp daggers were mostly funny and hit their mark. It was her closing remarks regarding public service, however, that really caught my attention: Hillary Clinton sounded authentic and inspiring. She will make a fine president.
11
The Access Hollywood tape (amazing this is what it took) was what put her numbers up.
Too bad no one has even questioned that this is the best result from an Oppo' team - ever!
If any of Trumps 17 GOP challengers had done their job they'd be standing there instead of the @realDealIdiot
Too bad no one has even questioned that this is the best result from an Oppo' team - ever!
If any of Trumps 17 GOP challengers had done their job they'd be standing there instead of the @realDealIdiot
1
OK it's true, you probably don't feel like having a beer with Hillary. But, if you were interviewing people for President, you would hire her. You would if for no other reason than how well she's done on this job interview - one heck of an interview process all around.
3
My 35 year old son asked me over dinner just last night which one of the other republican wanna bes would have beaten Secretary Clinton. We ran off the names, Bush-nobody wants another Bush, Rubio-she'd eat his lunch- NJ Governor (what's his name?)- no way with his bridgegate-, Kasich-not after everyone took a hard look at his history- Cruz-no way, Fiorina, Carson, Pataki, blah, blah, blah, no, no, no. She could and would beat every last one of that pathetic group.
11
"Strange to say, however, Mrs. Clinton won the Democratic nomination fairly easily..." First, the easy part isn't true. Mrs. Clinton nearly managed to wrestle defeat from the jaws of victory against an opponent who wasn't even a Democrat. Second, how is it "strange" when a candidate with enormous advantages in resources which kept anyone other than Bernie Sanders from running wins? This is the writing of an economist? More like a party hack in North Korea penning a tribute to "The Beloved Leader".
7
Thank you, Mr. Krugman, for reminding us of Rubio's crazy and ludicrous claims that Obama is purposfully trying to bring about America's defeat. When he repeated this claim over and over again during the debates, I never understood why nobody pointed out how insane he sounded.
6
Let's hope that Hillary Clinton, my choice for president, has something to say about Ford Motor Company's decision to build more cars in Mexico. Ford says there will be no job losses as present USA workers will all be making big vehicles for the flush buyers here at home & that the little cars from Mexico will be affordable to lower income buyers.
Sounds to me that the only car a big box employee or fast food worker can afford will be a Matchbook replica. Growing the economy through outsourcing? I don't think so.
Sounds to me that the only car a big box employee or fast food worker can afford will be a Matchbook replica. Growing the economy through outsourcing? I don't think so.
5
Good article. I like that you expose Rubio for his robotic dog whistling. That he was calling into question President Obamas integrity, inferring that he was somehow working against America, was an insult to all of us who elected him twice. This pandering simpleton, who is now trying to continue his salaried senatorial seat, (that he rarely shows up to because it is boring) is the kind of opportunistic parasite that appears to inordinately affect the Republican party.
9
thank you for an interesting and fair assessment of the situation. I agree.
5
I note that a number of comments show a dislike of Hillary Clinton. I would like to know the reason for that. My own thoughts are that it is because she is a strong, independent woman who is smarter than a lot of men. There is no real reason to dislike her except for the unrelenting propaganda from the Republicans besmirching her reputation. Of course they did the same to Barack Obama. What is wrong with them and those of you who just repeat their lies and innuendos? I have already cast my vote for Hillary.
15
Thank you Paul. Hillary Clinton is not a great orator. Period. There is nothing else about her that makes her a poor candidate as she is smart, experienced, tough, calm, thoughtful and, yes ... if you are paying any attention to her and not the pundits who will have you believe otherwise ... very charming and likeable. Everyone who has worked closely with her including her GOP colleagues in the US Senate have only the nicest things to say about her and praise her intelligence and work ethic.
We have been pretty much ordered by the media and political pundits to believe otherwise since 1992. No wonder so many Americans don't like her ... they've pretty much been told for 24 years that they weren't supposed to.
Once commentator in this thread said he (paraphrasing) began to dislike her when she made the disparaging comments about stay at home moms during the 1992 election. The writer should realize that in 2016 she would never even be in a position to make that statement because the question wouldn't even come up. Back then much of America was so horrified that the wife of a candidate for president was also his top advisor and and highly successful attorney and advocate in her own right. She had to make the "could have stayed home and baked cookies" statement because of the way the interviewer was looking down on her. That would never happen today except perhaps in an interview on the 700 Club.
We have been pretty much ordered by the media and political pundits to believe otherwise since 1992. No wonder so many Americans don't like her ... they've pretty much been told for 24 years that they weren't supposed to.
Once commentator in this thread said he (paraphrasing) began to dislike her when she made the disparaging comments about stay at home moms during the 1992 election. The writer should realize that in 2016 she would never even be in a position to make that statement because the question wouldn't even come up. Back then much of America was so horrified that the wife of a candidate for president was also his top advisor and and highly successful attorney and advocate in her own right. She had to make the "could have stayed home and baked cookies" statement because of the way the interviewer was looking down on her. That would never happen today except perhaps in an interview on the 700 Club.
16
Hillary has proved herself to the max. Look at her stellar debate performances in front of millions of Americans. Even when debating a guy who repeatedly calls her a "liar," chants "lock her up,"claims she is an "enabler," says she is "corrupt," has no stamina and is physically ill, is physically aggressive to the point of assault on the debate stage, and to top all that off has suggested to his deplorable followers that an assassination might be needed so that 2nd Amendment rights are upheld "if Hillary becomes President." A top Trump campaign advisor has called for her "execution." And all of this craziness is based on years of Republican "over the top" anti Hillary mania fomented by Fox news and conservative talk radio. And Trump has the temerity to call Hillary a "nasty woman!"
8
A good i.e. surviving, enduring (as those things are implied by Krugman's use the term "good") politician is immediately suspicious to many people and doesn't say much about her actual policies. To many, it means she's just succeeded at furthering herself at the expense of the nation for a long time, which would explain the enthusiasm for "new" politicians like Trump or Obama back in 2008.
Hillary's been around long enough to become a good politician whether she's a good leader is a different question entirely.
Hillary's been around long enough to become a good politician whether she's a good leader is a different question entirely.
2
Mrs. Clinton IS a terrible candidate. Or at least a deeply flawed one. Lets call remember that this isn't her first crack at this nut - the Clintons have been preparing for this since the late 90s, and her carpetbagging the NY Senate election in 2000 was in large part to gain her a solid political base from which to amass experience and political allies. She was the darling of the Democratic elite in 2008, as well. The difference then was that there was a competent (even great) candidate running. Part of the reason there are so few acceptable Democratic presidential candidates is because it has been treated as a fait accompli that Mrs. Clinton would run, and that any challenger would earn the scorn of the powerful in the party. Which... did happen.
So yeah. Instead of saying "she beat Bernie Sanders," maybe its worth asking how an long serving but totally unknown politician from a tiny (read: electorally meaningless) state managed to actually draw off huge portions of Mrs. Clinton's support? No reasonable person is claiming she's winning by cheating, or anything like that. But for a decade, the Clinton's have been preparing for this run. It isn't luck that she's consolidated her hold on the Democrats, but if she were running against a Romney, or worse yet a McCain type character, she'd be getting slaughtered. And that IS luck.
So yeah. Instead of saying "she beat Bernie Sanders," maybe its worth asking how an long serving but totally unknown politician from a tiny (read: electorally meaningless) state managed to actually draw off huge portions of Mrs. Clinton's support? No reasonable person is claiming she's winning by cheating, or anything like that. But for a decade, the Clinton's have been preparing for this run. It isn't luck that she's consolidated her hold on the Democrats, but if she were running against a Romney, or worse yet a McCain type character, she'd be getting slaughtered. And that IS luck.
69
The inexorable de-legitimization of the upcoming Clinton presidency has begun -- with the argument that "It doesn't count; a normal Republican candidate would have beaten her." Well, guess what? According to poll data, Trump is the new normal. The majority of registered Republicans say Trump represents the values of the party -- and its future. The idea that "a Romney . . . [or] a McCain" could have even been nominated, let alone triumphant, is absurd. The Republican party is now fragmented into three incompatible camps: the "traditional" wing (i.e., the elitists), the Tea Partiers, and the Trumpsters. This factionalism dooms Republicans to years of internecine warfare. As a divided house cannot stand, look for an implosion after November 9 -- and the ultimate triumph of "Hope and Change."
13
I agree with Professor Krugman that Hillary Clinton is a formidable figure. I support her happily and totally. But I have very little faith in American voters. A high percentage of them, it seems to me, vote either for or against the personality of a candidate or on a single issue. A bunch more vote for the candidate of their party, whoever it is. Also, I think the anti-Clinton smear campaign that the Republicans have conducted since the 1990s has been very successful. Most people think Hillary Clinton is a flawed candidate, although they can't come up with a real reason why. Our nation and the world should be grateful that the Republicans nominated Donald Trump, a very, very big loser. We will have a fine President in Hillary Clinton largely by default. I'll take it!
5
You left out one thing: She's been through the wars against the Republicans for thirty years and is probably the smartest politician in America, even moreso than her husband -- and not prone to his occasional excesses. Which is why the Republicans are petrified at the prospect of HRC in power: she will talk and work circles around them, far more so than wonderful Obama. She comes with no illusions about bringing people together and wasting two years to get started.
16
Great column PK.
2
Ditto.
2
Well said, giving rise to welling of pride, nearly bringing tears to my eyes. Go Hillary!
2
The Republican Party and Faux News with spillover from mainstream media have done their job well over the last 15-20 years; even those who are reluctantly supporting Hillary are still sure she's evasive, war-mongering, hasn't done a bit of good in her 30-year career, etc. Never any facts to back it up but this stuff has been said so often in so many places, that it becomes popular truth. Even Chris Matthews, a supposed MSNBC "liberal," has been a reluctant supporter over the last few weeks, repeating the same tired old adjectives slung at Hillary like so much mud, so much so that I'm wondering if he's auditioning for a job on Faux News.
Hillary is a centrist. This country is always better off when governed from the center with true compromise from all parties. Time to step up, Republicans and learn the art of compromise which is NOT, "If you don't do it my way, you're not compromising," which is what they have been screaming the last 8 years.
Hillary is a centrist. This country is always better off when governed from the center with true compromise from all parties. Time to step up, Republicans and learn the art of compromise which is NOT, "If you don't do it my way, you're not compromising," which is what they have been screaming the last 8 years.
5
I agree that Rubio would not have been the GOPs savior the way they imagine, but, there is someone who could have fairly easily beaten Hillary. Romney.
Romney and Hillary have all the same weaknesses, as well as almost all the same strengths. An election between them would never come down to who is more likable, it would rest on the fact that we have had 8 years of a Democrat as president and Americans like variety. It is a stupid reason, but there it is.
Romney and Hillary have all the same weaknesses, as well as almost all the same strengths. An election between them would never come down to who is more likable, it would rest on the fact that we have had 8 years of a Democrat as president and Americans like variety. It is a stupid reason, but there it is.
4
Krugman is so full of it. For over a year, column after column, he has been trashing Bernie, trashing Trump, trashing Republicans. For over a year, Krugman has been writing that the reason to vote for Hillary is that Bernie is so bad, his policies (now adopted by Hillary) are unrealistic and will never be enacted. For months now, Krugman has been writing that the reason to vote for Hillary is that Trump is so bad. While it may be that Bernie's policies have no chance of being enacted and that Trump is so bad, rare is the Krugman column that talks about Hillary and her policies or why Hillary is so good. If Krugman thinks that this one column somehow substitutes for more than a year of trashing Bernie and trashing Trump, he is sadly mistaken.
Hillary is still a corrupt, congenital liar. Krugman and other Hillary shills may complain about how WikiLeaks got all of those emails from Podesta and others showing some of how corrupt and conflicted Hillary is, but there is very little denial of the veracity of the substance of the emails. Krugman may spend his life trashing Hillary's opposition, but there is no way Krugman can put enough lipstick on Hillary and make her look good. The corruption and the lies will never disappear, no matter how much Krugman tries to ignore them.
Hillary is still a corrupt, congenital liar. Krugman and other Hillary shills may complain about how WikiLeaks got all of those emails from Podesta and others showing some of how corrupt and conflicted Hillary is, but there is very little denial of the veracity of the substance of the emails. Krugman may spend his life trashing Hillary's opposition, but there is no way Krugman can put enough lipstick on Hillary and make her look good. The corruption and the lies will never disappear, no matter how much Krugman tries to ignore them.
10
What else do you expect from 'pundits' that understand nothing of what they glibly pretend to explain? They could never understand what Clinton was saying and dismissed her as boring. We need some boring to save our country from one line solutions and instant media hacks.
Once upon a time, we used to have experts with deep knowledge of topics on TV - nowadays they will pick anyone with a foul mouth. It boosts ratings. Refreshing to see Hillary is changing that, with her depth and smarts. And it is nice to see that the media has finally realized that they found someone in Trump who is even less informed than the media pundits!
Once upon a time, we used to have experts with deep knowledge of topics on TV - nowadays they will pick anyone with a foul mouth. It boosts ratings. Refreshing to see Hillary is changing that, with her depth and smarts. And it is nice to see that the media has finally realized that they found someone in Trump who is even less informed than the media pundits!
7
All you say is true. But I did vote Obama in '08 and do not regret it.
4
I am convinced that Trump ran as a Republican, rather than a Democrat (which he was for many years), because the bar is so low for being a Republican candidate.
First, you have to memorize a few talking points fed to you by the right-wing "think tanks", and pull one out to answer any question posed. This technique was on exhibit in one of the Republican primary debates when Marco Rubio pulled out the same talking point repeatedly, sounding like a poorly programmed automaton.
Second, you have to learn all the "dog whistles" to direct at your base. Of course, as white guys like me grow old, our hearing of high pitched tones deteriorates, so it makes sense to abandon the high pitched "whistle" and just come out and say what you think. Trump was, of course, highly praised by his supporters for "telling it like it is."
Imagine what would have happened if Trump had tried to run as a Democrat. He wouldn't have had to change his position on social security, medicare, global warming (he is protecting his golf courses from rising sea levels), abortion rights and Planned Parenthood, but his complete lack of credibility for the job would have been instantly obvious to the Democratic primary voters.
First, you have to memorize a few talking points fed to you by the right-wing "think tanks", and pull one out to answer any question posed. This technique was on exhibit in one of the Republican primary debates when Marco Rubio pulled out the same talking point repeatedly, sounding like a poorly programmed automaton.
Second, you have to learn all the "dog whistles" to direct at your base. Of course, as white guys like me grow old, our hearing of high pitched tones deteriorates, so it makes sense to abandon the high pitched "whistle" and just come out and say what you think. Trump was, of course, highly praised by his supporters for "telling it like it is."
Imagine what would have happened if Trump had tried to run as a Democrat. He wouldn't have had to change his position on social security, medicare, global warming (he is protecting his golf courses from rising sea levels), abortion rights and Planned Parenthood, but his complete lack of credibility for the job would have been instantly obvious to the Democratic primary voters.
5
Testing, testing... planet Earth to Paul Krugman. Check, one two. Have you seen her recent nett approval ratings? You do realise that she will make history with being elected with the greatest negative approval rating of any candidate since tracking began? Kind of undermines the whole "she will win because people really think she would be good" fantasy of the die-hard Hillary fans. She wins because the other guy is even worse. Simple, end of story. Choosing between bad and worse doesn't mean the bad is actually good. So dispel that fiction.
7
Amen!
4
YYYessss! I am looking forward not only to having a woman in the White House but also to what that might mean for stereotypes of "likeability". I am so sick and tired of women having to get into public life, if they manage it at all, by way of proving that they Care About the Family aka baking cookies. Does Angela Merkel bake cookies? Does anyone care? When it comes to the chief of our executive branch, personally, I "like" them (never having met any of them) when they govern well. Or, as one young man said, when interviewed on the eve of Barack Obama's first election: "I don't need someone I could have a beer with in the White House. Why would I want someone just like me to be President? They're supposed to be better at it than I could be, that's why we elect them". Amen, brother. And that was a white guy with limited education and job opportunities, interivewed in a bar.
11
Nice write up on Hill, thanks. Let's not forget one other quality of hers that we had counted on and that is necessary in this cold world. Hillary knows how to finish something off and sink the chiv deep when she has to. I'd been waiting for the Clinton war machine to finish him off and they did on Wednesday. Cold, hard, facts.
6
Amen, Paul! The explanation for the pundit "blind spots", as you call them, and the news media's overall patronizing attitude towards Hillary is not all that hard to explain.
Journalism, especially cable "news", is now fundamentally an entertainment medium, heavy on celebrity news and gossip, with the critical coverage decisions now being made by entertainment executives and producers.
The pundit-values you list (nice guy, grand oratory, etc.) are the entertainment-culture values that allow you to succeed on TV. Thus, the pundits and media are simply projecting their own criteria for success on to the population as a whole.
What they don't understand is that fortunately, when the general public examines the candidates, for the most part it is still able to look behind the surface glitz and examine the candidates' underlying intellect, values and general competency. Thank God for the wisdom of the American people!
Oh yes, we have heard a lot lately about the "Cartoon Hillary". In that spirit, the cartoon character that best portrays Hillary is no doubt The Roadrunner. She is happily "beep-beeping" her way past the Wiley Coyote Trump and the pundits on her way to the White House on January 20.
Journalism, especially cable "news", is now fundamentally an entertainment medium, heavy on celebrity news and gossip, with the critical coverage decisions now being made by entertainment executives and producers.
The pundit-values you list (nice guy, grand oratory, etc.) are the entertainment-culture values that allow you to succeed on TV. Thus, the pundits and media are simply projecting their own criteria for success on to the population as a whole.
What they don't understand is that fortunately, when the general public examines the candidates, for the most part it is still able to look behind the surface glitz and examine the candidates' underlying intellect, values and general competency. Thank God for the wisdom of the American people!
Oh yes, we have heard a lot lately about the "Cartoon Hillary". In that spirit, the cartoon character that best portrays Hillary is no doubt The Roadrunner. She is happily "beep-beeping" her way past the Wiley Coyote Trump and the pundits on her way to the White House on January 20.
6
Prof. Krugman:
please:
caution, sir.
at the time of this writing,
it remains highly unlikely that HRC will receive anything
close-to 50% of the ballots caste.
yes:
she is currently favored for a plurality and a win in the Electoral College.
but she cannot "command" a universal-mandate.
the bigger questions are:
why couldn't she reach, say, 55%?
the two simplest answers are:
she is extremely flawed, unliked, and perceived-to-be untrustworthy;
and our nation is fractured and divided to a level approaching 1860.
and we know how that 19th century chasm was incompletely "healed".
finally:
DJT's acolytes have an energy-level and commitment that will
almost certainly assure that they will actually caste ballots.
HRC still needs to convince the remaining voters to show-up.
President Obama went a long-way-toward making this very
basic and fundamental point yesterday in South Florida...
people have gotta vote...
and their families, friends, and neighbors need to do like-wise.
then,
on November 9th,
we-all will have to set ourselves to the task of attempting to bridge
the differences and reconcile the hurts and misunderstandings all across this land.
setting the stage for the 2018 mid-terms,
which will give us the next-opportunity to retake the Congress.
Many pundits and commenters have said something along the lines of, "Mrs. Clinton is a flawed candidate, but she's better than Trump," feeding the narrative that the only choice is the lesser of two evils.
Not for me.
I, and I suspect millions if not tens of millions of others, am thrilled to vote for Hillary Clinton for President. I admire her deeply and trust her completely to make decisions in the best interests of this country and of every person in it, including those who did not vote for her, indeed, voted against her. She will make a wonderful President and I will be proud that my fellow Americans have selected such an outstanding person as our leader.
Not for me.
I, and I suspect millions if not tens of millions of others, am thrilled to vote for Hillary Clinton for President. I admire her deeply and trust her completely to make decisions in the best interests of this country and of every person in it, including those who did not vote for her, indeed, voted against her. She will make a wonderful President and I will be proud that my fellow Americans have selected such an outstanding person as our leader.
7
Clinton's biggest ideological liability is the failure to integrate the needs of poor and working class white men and their families into her thoughts and messages.
She will enter the White House with continued legal investigations driving White House- Congress interactions.
She will enter the White House with continued legal investigations driving White House- Congress interactions.
1
My wife and I send money to the Hillary campaign regularly. There is one thing that would allow us to do so with enthusiasm. It is a simple adjective that is never used to describe Hillary and that adjective is the word creative.
3
Secretary Clinton's greatest strength as a candidate was the Donald's lips. And perhaps his 3AM Twitter typing fingers. Whenever he opened his mouth unconvincing sentences came out. Including ones that were obvious lies, and others that were remarkably narcissistic. Believe me.
His debate performances were simple repetitions of internet innuendo that travel freely in the alt-right world that he successfully appealed to during the primaries.
Secretary Clinton is a mature, intelligent, sensible person who "won't do stupid stuff" in the Oval. We can trust and depend on her.
Her greatest challenge will be to alter the complexion of the economy so that a new American middle class and culture emerges.
If she is able to achieve that her Administration will go down as one that created the pivot point that saved the country from its darkest angels.
God speed, Secretary Clinton. God speed.
His debate performances were simple repetitions of internet innuendo that travel freely in the alt-right world that he successfully appealed to during the primaries.
Secretary Clinton is a mature, intelligent, sensible person who "won't do stupid stuff" in the Oval. We can trust and depend on her.
Her greatest challenge will be to alter the complexion of the economy so that a new American middle class and culture emerges.
If she is able to achieve that her Administration will go down as one that created the pivot point that saved the country from its darkest angels.
God speed, Secretary Clinton. God speed.
2
This election looks more and more like the election of 1860. This is not a superficial analogy. One party is deeply divided, the other party's candidate benefits from that division and will probably win, and many of the losers already vow they will respond with obstructionism, and possibly violence, if that happens. The country's division isn't regional, but it is otherwise just as passionate.
That said, Clinton bears striking similarities to Abraham Lincoln. He had a long political record before being elected president, and what he learned from his defeats were what made him a skillful politician, not what he learned from his victories. His political skill at a time of crisis is what made him a great president.
That said, Clinton bears striking similarities to Abraham Lincoln. He had a long political record before being elected president, and what he learned from his defeats were what made him a skillful politician, not what he learned from his victories. His political skill at a time of crisis is what made him a great president.
5
Donald J. Trump, in one sense only, is right that the election was rigged. The media pushed and pushed and pushed Trump and the DNC and the media downplayed Sanders to death leaving the field to "the Chosen One", Hillary Clinton and the only one she could beat, the more-than-half-mad Donald J. Trump. This state of affairs is demonstrated by the widespread "elite" support of the Clinton candidacy either directly or by deserting Trump.
5
There's no dramatic arc to quiet, consistent competence (granted, with some big flubs mixed in). That's one reason the press has been following Donald's every word during this process, and only talks Hillary when there's some expectation of scandal.
1
The debates put to rest any doubts that Hillary Clinton is the right person at the right time to succeed President Obama. She has been preparing all of her life for this position. And now when she has been tested, she has shown her grace under pressure. What a relief that we are finally emerging from this long nightmare of her absurd and unscrupulous opponent!
7
The nightmare will only be over if people show up and vote. There is always a risk in people feeling too confident she will win and not going to the polls. I think this was the issue for Gore. People were a little too confident it would all go his way.
7
Like her or not, HRC is knowledgeable, smart and experienced. She can do the job. I'm not so sure about Trump. He started well at the first Republican debate over a year ago. He has showed nothing since. Mrs. Clinton seemingly effortlessly outpointed him in each of their 3 debates and will easily capture the Electoral College majority.
That should put at least 2 Clinton appointed Justices on the bench in the next 4 years. With more to come with another term. During the '50's and '60's, Republicans professed to hate 'court law,' But starting in the '80's, when they started winning the Presidency, they fell in love with the Supreme Court. Parting with the Court this time around does not promise to be a "sweet" sorrow.
That should put at least 2 Clinton appointed Justices on the bench in the next 4 years. With more to come with another term. During the '50's and '60's, Republicans professed to hate 'court law,' But starting in the '80's, when they started winning the Presidency, they fell in love with the Supreme Court. Parting with the Court this time around does not promise to be a "sweet" sorrow.
5
True, It is hard to imagine anyone else could have come through 30 years of deliberate attacks and smears by the GOP and be on top.
10
It has been a long time (if ever) that 2 candidates were so far apart in ability, suitability and experience.
The media, in a desperate attempt to appear balanced, attacks both candidates with a similar level of questioning, when in fact Hillary is far above Trump in every aspect of ability, suitability and experience.
Thus Hillary is dragged down towards Trumps standards and Trump is elevated to Hillary's standard in this politically correct media world we live in. This makes the coverage appear balanced, whilst in reality it is far from being so.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in NPR broadcasts, where when fact checking exposes an outrageous Trump lie ( great work ) to balance the report a fact check of some relatively minor inaccuracy by Hillary is treated as equally culpable.
The media, in a desperate attempt to appear balanced, attacks both candidates with a similar level of questioning, when in fact Hillary is far above Trump in every aspect of ability, suitability and experience.
Thus Hillary is dragged down towards Trumps standards and Trump is elevated to Hillary's standard in this politically correct media world we live in. This makes the coverage appear balanced, whilst in reality it is far from being so.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in NPR broadcasts, where when fact checking exposes an outrageous Trump lie ( great work ) to balance the report a fact check of some relatively minor inaccuracy by Hillary is treated as equally culpable.
7
I still agree with Robert Reich, who said that "Hillary Clinton is the best candidate for the system that we have right now, and Bernie Sanders is the best candidate for the system that we desperately need".
Therein lies the reason for the success of Donald Trump. Our government has been failing the American People since tbd time of Ronald Reagan, and people are desperate.
I do fear that Hillary is too old school, -and set in her ways.
However, she has started to talk the talk. We will see if she can walk the walk.
Therein lies the reason for the success of Donald Trump. Our government has been failing the American People since tbd time of Ronald Reagan, and people are desperate.
I do fear that Hillary is too old school, -and set in her ways.
However, she has started to talk the talk. We will see if she can walk the walk.
4
Thomas Jefferson said that we have a good system, if we can keep it.
You are way to easy on American electorate, which is uninformed, gullible and emotional. It is them, who keep sending idiots to D.C. and complain that D.C. doesn't work. Last 16 years is a stunning example of the degeneration of our democracy caused by American people. Yes, they are very close to elect a dictator, think about it!
You are way to easy on American electorate, which is uninformed, gullible and emotional. It is them, who keep sending idiots to D.C. and complain that D.C. doesn't work. Last 16 years is a stunning example of the degeneration of our democracy caused by American people. Yes, they are very close to elect a dictator, think about it!
2
Hillary Clinton will get my vote, and I liked much of what she had to say at the last debate. That said, I think her push for regime change in Libya was wrong in principle and misguided in terms of substance. The fallout of regime change has been catastrophic across the region. In addition, I will be well-pleased if she appoints real reformers to the key jobs that oversee economic policy and financial regulations. Who she appoints as the Treasury Secretary is a biggie. I'm fed up with the argument that HRC's cozy ties to Wall Street aren't a big deal and that I'm a bad person for thinking otherwise. I'm sorting of hoping that ex post facto we wind up with a President who can earn my support instead of lecturing skeptics on the apostasy of skepticism. But for now, my vote comes along with strong disapproval, because things like Middle Eastern policy and the revolving-door problem are at the top of the list in terms of what I care about.
4
Hey Hillary is a terrible candidate. She gets a real opponent and all her baggage comes tumbling out and she is defeated. It would be good if a candidate would have arrived who wasn't determined to lead the country into a new dangerous round of cold war with the Russians. Or who wasn't sourly defensive when asked legitimate questions that she should have answered honestly. Who knows where Hillary Clinton is on Wall Street or on the minimum wage or on Netanyahu or anything really. Its hard to imagine a more unforthcoming candidate.
8
Krugman's logic is clear: there can be no false analogies, no slippery slopes, straw men, ad hominem attacks that stick on Hillary when lobbed by The Donald. If he had argued on the merits, discussed the issues in any sort of rational manner, perhaps he would not be so dismissed as he is. Add to the boorish attacks, his own considerable problems: bankruptcies, no evidence of his so-called charitable giving, and his tendency (or real problem) to go after women. Yes, he has lots of company on that point from many men, including Hillary's husband, but on the issues of her merits v-a-v his, no contest. Hillary wins.
2
The second President Clinton has won because she possesses something even the buffoon Trump understands, she doesn't give up. Superhuman levels of tenacity got Clinton this far. Most lesser people, man or woman would have given up years ago. Clinton has faced down millions of people who hate her and still came out on top.
I'm in awe of Hillary Clinton. There's no way I would put up with the misogyny, hatred, lies, and persecution she has. Vladimir Putin is clearly scared of her, Wikileaks is scared of her, she will be the strongest president we will have since Roosevelt. She has to be. She survived the buzzsaw and came out like a champion.
I'm in awe of Hillary Clinton. There's no way I would put up with the misogyny, hatred, lies, and persecution she has. Vladimir Putin is clearly scared of her, Wikileaks is scared of her, she will be the strongest president we will have since Roosevelt. She has to be. She survived the buzzsaw and came out like a champion.
5
It kind of feels like for a woman to win the Presidency of the U.S., she first needed to face off against a candidate who represents the very worst stereotypical male behaviors. Hillary's passing of this ultimate test will open the door for female candidates to compete on more level ground in the future.
5
Is Hillary perfect? of course not! Does she have flaws as a candidate? Sure. But what she does have is passion. She believes her message, and she wants you to as well. And she has something to back that up. Her career for decades says it all. And her wonkishness shows us that she has spent a great deal of time developing policy. And yes, she is a woman. Doesn't look at all like the guys who proceeded her. We've got the vote, but are woefully lacking representation in governing. Repeal the 19th indeed. Sorry, there's NO going back. Will women decide this election? With any 'luck' at all, I think we will.
7
I believe it was Christie who humiliated Rubio, not Trump, but otherwise you are correct: Rubio would have been crushed by Clinton.
You say that for Republicans "...pretending to believe these things is the price of admission to the club..." and it most certainly is. My conservative friends act surprised when I accuse them of political correctness, but that is exactly what is going on here.
You say that for Republicans "...pretending to believe these things is the price of admission to the club..." and it most certainly is. My conservative friends act surprised when I accuse them of political correctness, but that is exactly what is going on here.
3
Thank you Paul Krugman for putting these thoughts into Words! How often, over a 30 year career, have I heard a woman's accomplishments put down to luck - too many times, even from family. It's not luck, it's hard, hard work, preparation, tenacity. Secretary Clinton is winning because she's the best candidate, and would have been even if Trump were not the nominee. I'm only sorry she didn't have a more competent and challenging opponent so we could put the "luck" stories away once and for all.
13
I guess some voters really want to have a beer with their presidential candidate and then head into the locker room for a bit of backslapping. I'll skip that, thanks.
I would rather spend some quiet time with somebody who has something to offer in a discussion about our complex world or maybe just wants to talk about the joy of having a grandchild. It would be nice to have a conversation when the pronoun "I" isn't featured so prominently and maybe some of the good words actually do get used.
When our older daughter was doing the college tour (yes, we were lucky enough to be able to send our daughters to good colleges - many parents aren't able to, I know), one of the admissions officers said "We see lots of strong female applicants. Maybe 7 or 8 out of the top ten graduates of any high schools are girls. With the boys, we need to figure out which ones will grow up and achieve their potential."
I will stick with the smart girl. The guy just never grew up.
I would rather spend some quiet time with somebody who has something to offer in a discussion about our complex world or maybe just wants to talk about the joy of having a grandchild. It would be nice to have a conversation when the pronoun "I" isn't featured so prominently and maybe some of the good words actually do get used.
When our older daughter was doing the college tour (yes, we were lucky enough to be able to send our daughters to good colleges - many parents aren't able to, I know), one of the admissions officers said "We see lots of strong female applicants. Maybe 7 or 8 out of the top ten graduates of any high schools are girls. With the boys, we need to figure out which ones will grow up and achieve their potential."
I will stick with the smart girl. The guy just never grew up.
17
The picture has been painted about Hillary for the last 30 years by the Rs. Why, because she is a very competent, bright woman. If Hillary has done three things wrong it is, being married to Bill, around for Benghazi, and having a personal server. If Hillary was a Republican none of those three would be issues because Democrats aren't that way. I think people see they were over blown. So Hillary will be the next president.
6
I thank Mr Krugman for his fair coverage of Sec. Clinton in this campaign. The political media is male dominated. They are accustomed to covering our political traditions that have been controlled and developed by men over 200 + years. Male campaigns have focused on projecting male strength, drawing from male life experiences. Like in our workplaces, women are seen as an aberration to the default. The themes of her being unlikeable, untrustworthy and boring have been the standard one-dimensional analysis for the last 15 months. The last month has been an Awakening for some pundits and writers as they seem to have been made suddenly aware of the overt and subtle ways that women are shut down personally and professionally. The relatively small number of female writers on staff at large papers and online news outlets have been loud about the sexism that she faces - not only from her opponent, obviously - but from the coverage and the general public. I've heard the 'lucky' explanation many, many times over. It is yet another way to explain the aberration, rather than accept it is now the norm.
3
Paul, You have been consistent -- consistently right. You have been, for me, an island of sanity. You have unraveled the tangled tropes thrown at Hillary and shown them to be true only in the mind of an idiot. I nominate you to lead the post-election truth and reconciliation movement,
4
It is not often that I feel compelled to thank someone for saying the obvious, but this election and Hillary Clinton are exceptions. Thank you, Professor Krugman.
6
I remember at the beginning of the primary season when so many pundits were gawking over what a strong field of candidates the Republicans had. I was like Huh? Really?
3
Hillary will probably win the presidency, and I'll be voting for her, but we'll all truly win if we can ensure that she does not revert to some of the worst policies and behavior revealed on those hacked Wikileaks Podesta emails.
For whatever reason, Professor Krugman, you won't deal with the substance of what those emails reveal, but even you have criticized the nonstop Washington consensus on "deficit reduction," the horrible Grand Bargain (cutting and privatizing Social Security and Medicare), and the obsession with inflation.
So when Hillary Clinton becomes president, which will be a historic first, will you commit yourself to ensuring that she does not revert to the neoliberal globalism those tapes reveal?
For whatever reason, Professor Krugman, you won't deal with the substance of what those emails reveal, but even you have criticized the nonstop Washington consensus on "deficit reduction," the horrible Grand Bargain (cutting and privatizing Social Security and Medicare), and the obsession with inflation.
So when Hillary Clinton becomes president, which will be a historic first, will you commit yourself to ensuring that she does not revert to the neoliberal globalism those tapes reveal?
4
Never a question that Hillary would win. Energy wise, the Sanders presence was a wonderful compliment and it greatly enhanced the value of Hillary's election by putting goals that the People really want and desperately need up there. In my view Hillary wants these goals just as much as Bernie but because of the politics could not give full voice to them. Politics are real and as President Obama said, even when you know that your 100% right you might have to compromise.
Just watch what happens when we have control of the Senate and hopefully the House.
Huge change is coming and it is going to come fast. It has been held back for 35 years by the greed and power hunger of the few. During that time, the pressure of the people's will has been growing..The more resistance the ship of State faces, the more power it generates.. The evolution of humanity into sanity, into, as Hillary said in her stomping of Donald the other night, equality and justice are unavidavle perid
Just watch what happens when we have control of the Senate and hopefully the House.
Huge change is coming and it is going to come fast. It has been held back for 35 years by the greed and power hunger of the few. During that time, the pressure of the people's will has been growing..The more resistance the ship of State faces, the more power it generates.. The evolution of humanity into sanity, into, as Hillary said in her stomping of Donald the other night, equality and justice are unavidavle perid
2
In my opinion some have mistaken a lack of display of passion on Clinton's part as a lack of her devotion to things she does care deeply about. Passion is usually displayed through outward emotion, and can pass quickly, while devotion requires commitment. Clinton may lack fiery emotion, but she has been committed to combatting racism since she was fresh out of Yale Law School, and she has been unwavering in her devotion to the welfare of women, children, families and the Middle Class. She is the one who has remained faithful to her ideals over the course of her political career, while Trump - well Trump- has been devoted to himself above all.
While President Obama is a commanding orator, he has always displayed a calm, cool intellect that has served this country well. Clinton has lacked the skill of an orator as you have pointed out, but it is her calm, cool intellect that is needed to deal with the immense complexities of our economy and our foreign policies. Trump looked so out of his depth in the last debate as Clinton very ably discussed strategies for coping with the enormous quagmire of Syria and the Middle East, and our sluggish economy.
Right now we need someone with strength, knowledge, and a keen intellect, who can maintain the "grace under pressure" Clinton exemplifies. As for Trump? "Grace under pressure"? Absolutely not, we have all seen the flares of temperament on full display. However, his lack of knowledge alone should disqualify him to be President.
While President Obama is a commanding orator, he has always displayed a calm, cool intellect that has served this country well. Clinton has lacked the skill of an orator as you have pointed out, but it is her calm, cool intellect that is needed to deal with the immense complexities of our economy and our foreign policies. Trump looked so out of his depth in the last debate as Clinton very ably discussed strategies for coping with the enormous quagmire of Syria and the Middle East, and our sluggish economy.
Right now we need someone with strength, knowledge, and a keen intellect, who can maintain the "grace under pressure" Clinton exemplifies. As for Trump? "Grace under pressure"? Absolutely not, we have all seen the flares of temperament on full display. However, his lack of knowledge alone should disqualify him to be President.
4
Thank you for stating what has clearly been missing from the coverage of this election. Sec Clinton deserves to win on November 8th because she is by far the BEST CANDIDATE with the best plans and the best political team. The media has spent a lot of its resources in the pursuit of ratings and entertainment, hence the rise of Trump who knew exactly how to play them. Only now that Trump is losing is the media finally waking up to the fact that he is in his own words a disaster as a candidate and a potential greater disaster as a president. In truth the same could be said of each and every republican candidate. Their biggest problem as a party is that they tolerate no differences, each candidate has to meet a checklist of positions that over the years has become more and more ridiculous. The end result is they can 'tell even talk about much less address the problems that concern the American people such as climate change, inequality, retirement security, healthcare, gun safety and immigration reform to name just a few. Is it an accident that they control both houses of congress but actual propose or legislate nothing? From their rhetoric you would imagine President Obama having to use his veto daily, in reality only once. I for one can't wait for Hillary Clinton's presidency which I hope comes with control of both houses of congress so that we can actually start on the work that needs to be done.
4
Destroy the person when you have nothing else ...
Is there one Republican of equal intellect, knowledge, and practical experience to H. Clinton? They have an empty bench. Their star players on injured reserve recovering from season ending wedgie injuries inflicted in the locker room pre game by Trump. Even if they could field a competent team, every single play is predictable, running the same end rounds since Reagan was quarterback, and the working poor getting stuffed behind the lines every play.
Having years to develop a game plan to confront their toughest opponent, Republicans drop the ball before play begins and focus enormous energy on public destruction of the character of Hillary Clinton. Giving HRC the finger, calling names, taunting from the trenches has failed. Spreading false conspiracies is the kamikaze tactic of those already defeated, not a strategy to win an election or govern a nation.
The Republican's Achilles heel? They have no Achilles, no champion. They have weakened and divided their army, destroying moral of the base by fanning flames of terror. The world ends the moment Hilary storms the gates and breaches the walls of the presidency.
Calling reinforcements to their cause foiled time and again by sending forth a lone, orange haired suicide bomber with a grenade in his mouth.
Left with only an endless barrage of email, stolen by their ally Putin,
Republicans hunker down in a bunker desperate for a hail Mary scandal.
Pathetic ...
Is there one Republican of equal intellect, knowledge, and practical experience to H. Clinton? They have an empty bench. Their star players on injured reserve recovering from season ending wedgie injuries inflicted in the locker room pre game by Trump. Even if they could field a competent team, every single play is predictable, running the same end rounds since Reagan was quarterback, and the working poor getting stuffed behind the lines every play.
Having years to develop a game plan to confront their toughest opponent, Republicans drop the ball before play begins and focus enormous energy on public destruction of the character of Hillary Clinton. Giving HRC the finger, calling names, taunting from the trenches has failed. Spreading false conspiracies is the kamikaze tactic of those already defeated, not a strategy to win an election or govern a nation.
The Republican's Achilles heel? They have no Achilles, no champion. They have weakened and divided their army, destroying moral of the base by fanning flames of terror. The world ends the moment Hilary storms the gates and breaches the walls of the presidency.
Calling reinforcements to their cause foiled time and again by sending forth a lone, orange haired suicide bomber with a grenade in his mouth.
Left with only an endless barrage of email, stolen by their ally Putin,
Republicans hunker down in a bunker desperate for a hail Mary scandal.
Pathetic ...
6
I'd be much harder on the GOP. I've just read McKay Coppins' book The Wilderness on how Republican prospective candidates acted up to the 2016 campaign. There wasn't one of them that had any sense of what the nation really needs.
At this point, all the bien-pensants are very enthusiastic about Ryan, but as Coppins describes him clearly, he may have some amount of good will for African-Americans and other people with serious problems, but his cuckoo Republican economic ideas are something he has to throw away if he wants to really do something constructive. Even "moderate" Republicans like him are prisoners of trickle-down, cut taxes on the rich ideas that have been proven wrong over and over.
At this point, I really have no respect for any Republicans (not that I ever had much for them in the past.)
At this point, all the bien-pensants are very enthusiastic about Ryan, but as Coppins describes him clearly, he may have some amount of good will for African-Americans and other people with serious problems, but his cuckoo Republican economic ideas are something he has to throw away if he wants to really do something constructive. Even "moderate" Republicans like him are prisoners of trickle-down, cut taxes on the rich ideas that have been proven wrong over and over.
At this point, I really have no respect for any Republicans (not that I ever had much for them in the past.)
3
This is my personal endorsement of Hillary Clinton. I've posted it before, but I think it's worth repeating....
I'm voting for Hillary. I'm not settling for Hillary. I'm not choosing the lesser of two evils. I'm voting enthusiastically for a candidate I believe in. Do I agree with her on every little thing? Absolutely not, but I learned long ago that the only way I'm going to agree with a candidate on everything is if I run for office and even then I would have some doubts. No matter what you believe in you are going to sometimes disagree with any President because that President has to represent the interests of everyone, not just you. Every single decision, every single policy position that pleases one person is sure to displease someone else. This will be true for anyone in any office. Too many people look at the past through rose colored glasses and say why can't she be more like (fill in the blank)? The truth is that none of our political icons of the past would hold up any better in today's world of full exposure and snark. Please, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Don't get distracted by what social media thinks is "cool" And to paraphrase an old movie exec, if you want to send a message use Twitter, not your vote. Young people particularly need to keep in mind that the next President will decide the tenor of the Supreme Court for a generation. This is quite literally your future that you are voting for. Don't throw it away.
I'm voting for Hillary. I'm not settling for Hillary. I'm not choosing the lesser of two evils. I'm voting enthusiastically for a candidate I believe in. Do I agree with her on every little thing? Absolutely not, but I learned long ago that the only way I'm going to agree with a candidate on everything is if I run for office and even then I would have some doubts. No matter what you believe in you are going to sometimes disagree with any President because that President has to represent the interests of everyone, not just you. Every single decision, every single policy position that pleases one person is sure to displease someone else. This will be true for anyone in any office. Too many people look at the past through rose colored glasses and say why can't she be more like (fill in the blank)? The truth is that none of our political icons of the past would hold up any better in today's world of full exposure and snark. Please, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Don't get distracted by what social media thinks is "cool" And to paraphrase an old movie exec, if you want to send a message use Twitter, not your vote. Young people particularly need to keep in mind that the next President will decide the tenor of the Supreme Court for a generation. This is quite literally your future that you are voting for. Don't throw it away.
9
For those who are still undecided, it is becoming clearer that the legitimacy of our election is the primary question. It really is not about personalities now. It is whether or not we vote for DEMOXIT.
3
I would LOVE to have a beer with Secretary Clinton!
3
Yes. That. Thank you for saying what the pundits and "professional" journalists, even some left-leaning ones, do not - namely that Mrs. Clinton is competent and capable, caring but careful, and she has the best interests of PEOPLE in mind. Especially the people who have no voice in our government.
Oh, and not republican. Mrs. Clinton has too much class for those haters. I think most of us do and that is why she wins on 8 November.
Oh, and not republican. Mrs. Clinton has too much class for those haters. I think most of us do and that is why she wins on 8 November.
3
Democrats must pour all remaining resources into Senate races, they must re-take the Senate!
Hillary will be ok at this point, the Senate is sooooo important.
The House will fix itself once the Gerrymandering suites get to the SCOTUS
Hillary will be ok at this point, the Senate is sooooo important.
The House will fix itself once the Gerrymandering suites get to the SCOTUS
4
I think 'lets dispel with' is going to be become grammatically accepted, and equivalent to 'lets dispense with' soon. Meanwhile, the use of 'lets dispel the' will be frowned upon. Ah, the evolution of language. Your welcome.
2
Really hoping the second to last word in your post was meant to be ironic....
2
My neighbor is voting Trump because he is anti abortion. Her husband is voting Trump because he is pro gun. That is what they told me and they have a Trump placard in their yard to prove it.
I do not know of any single issue Democrats.
That exactly defines the state of American politics.
I do not know of any single issue Democrats.
That exactly defines the state of American politics.
2
"She’s a formidable figure, and has been all along."
Yes, and this is exactly why she has been a target of the right wing Hate Machine for decades. A powerful, competent woman is absolutely a terrifying threat to the misogynistic status-quo of republicanism, especially when it is connected to a message of racial inclusiveness.
Yes, and this is exactly why she has been a target of the right wing Hate Machine for decades. A powerful, competent woman is absolutely a terrifying threat to the misogynistic status-quo of republicanism, especially when it is connected to a message of racial inclusiveness.
13
Nicely said.
If someone like Trump "bested" the dozen+ GOP contenders, even some who were thought to be shoe-ins as POTUS, what does it say about those contenders in the first place? Why would anyone believe they would be doing any better at this point than Trump is doing against Hillary?
Hillary gets blamed for some outlandish things: Benghazi, as if she perpetrated the crime herself and pulled the trigger; ISIS, as if she and Obama were Al Baghdadi's puppet-masters and funders; Aleppo disaster, as if she was the one dropping the bombs instead of the Russians and Syrians; Putin's behavior, as if Hillary or Obama can reason with, control or bully a thug without starting a major conflict.
Oh yea, the deleted e-mails. I am sure everyone who has deleted any e-mails whatsoever has something to hide - especially those making the false and baseless accusations against our first woman President-to-be. By my count, I delete an average of 10,000 SPAM e-mails a year - I really must be hiding "something."
If someone like Trump "bested" the dozen+ GOP contenders, even some who were thought to be shoe-ins as POTUS, what does it say about those contenders in the first place? Why would anyone believe they would be doing any better at this point than Trump is doing against Hillary?
Hillary gets blamed for some outlandish things: Benghazi, as if she perpetrated the crime herself and pulled the trigger; ISIS, as if she and Obama were Al Baghdadi's puppet-masters and funders; Aleppo disaster, as if she was the one dropping the bombs instead of the Russians and Syrians; Putin's behavior, as if Hillary or Obama can reason with, control or bully a thug without starting a major conflict.
Oh yea, the deleted e-mails. I am sure everyone who has deleted any e-mails whatsoever has something to hide - especially those making the false and baseless accusations against our first woman President-to-be. By my count, I delete an average of 10,000 SPAM e-mails a year - I really must be hiding "something."
3
DJ bested the other candidates simply because the rabble making the choice liked a rabble-rouser. Not to say the other competitors were better quality - they weren't, just less rousing.
1
Hillary will win only because there is no other choice besides a poor choice in third party candidates. We have the choice of an idiot or Hillary. No contest.
5
I can’t wait for the day when Paul Krugman finally stops his role as a propagandist for Hillary Clinton and starts writing on Economics again. It always amazes me to see so many NYT liberals swooning over a candidate who is effectively a moderate right of center Republican masquerading as a liberal democrat. May be being a woman gives her the protection from criticism. It will be interesting to see how they and NYT react when President Clinton tries to demonstrate her machismo by confronting Vladimir Putin. Do I hear the word quagmire!
9
re the trumpina wisdom of the mainstream republicans and the false idea that Trump is an outlier to this kind of "thinking": let us not forget "legitimate rape" ...the kind that no woman can become pregnant as a result of, because it just "shuts down the whole thing"....this was introduced by republican congressmen who are neither doctors nor scientists ...just the KKK of women's reproductive rights.
1
Nice summary of *Republican* political correctness -- that "tax cuts have magical powers, that climate change is a giant hoax, that saying the words 'Islamic terrorism' will somehow defeat ISIS." Why has the political correctness criticism targeted only *Democratic* beliefs?
2
Thank you Dr. K. Please send a copy of this to your colleague Mr. Brooks.
This election has been a disaster for many reasons but one of the biggest is that Clinton deseved to run against a better candidate. I fear the gop will dismiss her victory since she ran against such a bad candidate. I fully anticipate that they will be just as obstructionist with her as they have been with Obama.
Unfortunately this election has not been about issues.The gop will not have learned one lession and they wili trot out their old 17th century ideas ala Ryan.
This election has been a disaster for many reasons but one of the biggest is that Clinton deseved to run against a better candidate. I fear the gop will dismiss her victory since she ran against such a bad candidate. I fully anticipate that they will be just as obstructionist with her as they have been with Obama.
Unfortunately this election has not been about issues.The gop will not have learned one lession and they wili trot out their old 17th century ideas ala Ryan.
7
The GOP will vet their candidates more carefully in future and try to get pusillanimous panderers as rabble rousers like Ryan & McConnell instead of a diva like DJ.
1
Let's look at the last two options that were standing:
Kasich likely would be leading by double digits if he had won the nomination. He basically tacks to the center on every issue vis-a-vis Hillary, and would have held up well in a debate against her (he can policy-speak just like she does). And no questions about his demeanor or competence (vis-a-vis Trump)
Cruz might be tied (at least likely would have been outperforming Trump in Florida)
And even Trump was close to even in many polls before the Access Hollywood video.
So, yes--it helps Clinton to have someone as incompetent and flawed--and with as many skeletons in his closet--as Trump.
Kasich likely would be leading by double digits if he had won the nomination. He basically tacks to the center on every issue vis-a-vis Hillary, and would have held up well in a debate against her (he can policy-speak just like she does). And no questions about his demeanor or competence (vis-a-vis Trump)
Cruz might be tied (at least likely would have been outperforming Trump in Florida)
And even Trump was close to even in many polls before the Access Hollywood video.
So, yes--it helps Clinton to have someone as incompetent and flawed--and with as many skeletons in his closet--as Trump.
1
Yeah, because all that would hold Cruz back is his total lack of accomplishments, his sucking up to "Pastor," Kevin Swanson (don't hang gay people till they've had a chance to convert to his One True Church!), his wife being a Goldman, Sachs exec, and so on.
'Course, there is the little matter of Cruz' remarkable cravenness and bizarre political timing, what with his having chosen to float Trump's way (i could swear there was something about never supporting a guy who'd attacked his wife and claimed that his dad killed Kennedy) about two days before Trump flew straight into a whole series of mountains.
Kasich, we can argue. But Kasich has his own baggage, and isn't one bit more likable. And what is WITH the man's hair?
'Course, there is the little matter of Cruz' remarkable cravenness and bizarre political timing, what with his having chosen to float Trump's way (i could swear there was something about never supporting a guy who'd attacked his wife and claimed that his dad killed Kennedy) about two days before Trump flew straight into a whole series of mountains.
Kasich, we can argue. But Kasich has his own baggage, and isn't one bit more likable. And what is WITH the man's hair?
I agree with most of what Krugman writes about Hillary Clinton, but would also add that the focus on Mrs. Clinton's personality and record seem excessive. If she wins, she will likely pursue policies very similar to those of Barack Obama. She may be somewhat to the left of Obama on some economic issues, thanks to pressure from the left half of her party, and Sanders' strong showing in the primary. She may pursue a somewhat more interventionist foreign policy and take a somewhat tougher line on Iran and Russia, in this case perhaps because of her own experiences as secretary of state and the judgments she's formed about world politics over the years. But in general, the Obama-Clinton transition could be the most seamless in decades.
As to her personality and personal integrity, what is there to say at this point? She doesn't always tell the truth, and she likes to be in the money, much like, well, every other politician, also including Obama.
In short, if you voted for Obama, regardless of your degree of enthusiasm in doing so, I'm not sure why you would even consider not voting for Hillary Clinton.
As to her personality and personal integrity, what is there to say at this point? She doesn't always tell the truth, and she likes to be in the money, much like, well, every other politician, also including Obama.
In short, if you voted for Obama, regardless of your degree of enthusiasm in doing so, I'm not sure why you would even consider not voting for Hillary Clinton.
4
Rubio's ,and the other 15 GOP Trump rivals' collapses do to Trump's needling display the one Hillary's most important differences from them : not only did she not collapse in the face of Trump's barbs and insults during the 3 debates,she smiled and chuckled at them,displaying a charm she wasn't known for ,often this way sending Trump flying off the handle,and letting him have the goofy,unpresidential facial expression while she made her points.She showed she was fully prepared for Trump's insults and fabrications,while in each debate Trump was obviously hopelessly unprepared for the composure she displayed.
And in this way Hillary has let Trump prove that someone HAS rigged this election against him : someone named Donald Trump.
And in this way Hillary has let Trump prove that someone HAS rigged this election against him : someone named Donald Trump.
2
Hillary has a hard shell around her good heart. Trump has an empty shell where his heart and brain should be. He's a cavity, spewing a noxious halitosis none of us would dare breathe if we had even a barely functioning olfactory system. Her breath is brimming with fresh, hygienic ideas that foster good health for all.
3
Hear, hear!
Thank you, Prof Krugman.
Thank you, Prof Krugman.
5
Nearly a half century ago the term "limousine liberal" entered the American lexicon. Today it needs to be updated to 'private jet liberal', a term that describes Clinton perfectly.
Her shoutouts to women and minorities are uplifting. But I get a sinking feeling when I hear them because I know that she will make middle class blokes like me pay for it all. She promises that she will not increase the deficit, which leaves income redistribution as the only source of funds for her programs.
But redistribution from whom? The poor don't pay taxes because they can't. The rich and transnational corporations don't pay taxes because they don't have to. That leaves you and me, the rapidly disappearing middle class, to pick up the check.
Her shoutouts to women and minorities are uplifting. But I get a sinking feeling when I hear them because I know that she will make middle class blokes like me pay for it all. She promises that she will not increase the deficit, which leaves income redistribution as the only source of funds for her programs.
But redistribution from whom? The poor don't pay taxes because they can't. The rich and transnational corporations don't pay taxes because they don't have to. That leaves you and me, the rapidly disappearing middle class, to pick up the check.
2
Paul, thank you, and your kind, for supporting the second worst candidate to ever run for the Presidency.
4
I heard a regular commentator on PBS suggest that a Hillary landslide wouldn't mean much since she is disliked so much by the electorate. And that was PBS. Expect the media to begin trashing her on November 9th. They have been doing in for 25 years, only stopped when they realized that their Hillary hate might cause a lunatic like Trump to become President. It will resume once that danger has passed.
I remember a front page editorial in the Washington Post, 2 weeks after Bill Clinton took office, asking if he was a 'failed President'. 2 weeks!! Give her a chance, our country needs it.
I remember a front page editorial in the Washington Post, 2 weeks after Bill Clinton took office, asking if he was a 'failed President'. 2 weeks!! Give her a chance, our country needs it.
6
Several comments mentioned that Bernie supporters were denigrated. Did you read a different column than I did? What this column is telling us is that Hillary Clinton will make a wonderful President. That she has been a "formidable figure" all along.
So, let us all get out and defeat Donald Trump.
Vote Hillary Clinton.
So, let us all get out and defeat Donald Trump.
Vote Hillary Clinton.
12
HRC is the living breathing shining lady on a hill--the case study of what it takes for a woman to make it to the very very top in this country. If she makes one misstep--either too much in the direction of "manliness" or too "girly-girl"--she's been roasted and toasted.
I have absolutely no doubt she is a warm, wonderful, loving mother and grandmother, but if she overplayed that on the campaign trail, she'd be toast. It's funny though how a male candidate can slobber all over about his family values, isn't it?
The balancing act this woman has had to carry out over decades to accomplish what she so passionately wanted to do, FOR THE GOOD OF OTHERS is simply extraordinary.
Dancing backwards in high heels indeed.
I have absolutely no doubt she is a warm, wonderful, loving mother and grandmother, but if she overplayed that on the campaign trail, she'd be toast. It's funny though how a male candidate can slobber all over about his family values, isn't it?
The balancing act this woman has had to carry out over decades to accomplish what she so passionately wanted to do, FOR THE GOOD OF OTHERS is simply extraordinary.
Dancing backwards in high heels indeed.
13
Always a pleasure to read Krugman's bought-and-paid-for propoganda pieces. Is there anything that Hillary could say or
do that would make him even think of criticizing her? No because the powers to be own him and his newspaper. We are basically living in North Korea with these types of sycophants in the media.
do that would make him even think of criticizing her? No because the powers to be own him and his newspaper. We are basically living in North Korea with these types of sycophants in the media.
4
For the whole of a long career in politics, Hillary Clinton has been the subject of ferocious attacks or at least the spouse of the subject. She has been accused of nearly every crime, sin, dirty deed, lie, misjudgment or stupidity in the book. And she's been proved innocent of nearly all the incessant charges or at least not guilty of them.
But being accused, even when absolved, has its cost. Her strength in preserving and carrying the stains of endless accusations is remarkable, and her soon-to-be victorious campaign for president appears to prove the tired maxim about what doesn't kill you.
Donald Trump conversely aims hateful barbs at everyone who doesn't worship loudly at his shrine and adapt to its endless inconsistencies. But he slings boomerangs instead of arrows. Someone in his campaign needs to grab him by his tweeter; but who's up to that job? Rudy, Chris, Ivanka? Kellyann is probably (excuse the expression0 "the man for the job."
But being accused, even when absolved, has its cost. Her strength in preserving and carrying the stains of endless accusations is remarkable, and her soon-to-be victorious campaign for president appears to prove the tired maxim about what doesn't kill you.
Donald Trump conversely aims hateful barbs at everyone who doesn't worship loudly at his shrine and adapt to its endless inconsistencies. But he slings boomerangs instead of arrows. Someone in his campaign needs to grab him by his tweeter; but who's up to that job? Rudy, Chris, Ivanka? Kellyann is probably (excuse the expression0 "the man for the job."
7
I don't agree that Mrs. Clinton lacks charisma. She's being careful - good for her. The charm often leaks through.
On the other hand, remember the curse: "that you will live in interesting times." Let's hope for boring times -- peace and financial stability -- which would be more likely with President Clinton than with her opponent.
On the other hand, remember the curse: "that you will live in interesting times." Let's hope for boring times -- peace and financial stability -- which would be more likely with President Clinton than with her opponent.
8
Clinton has come under much more scrutiny than Trump has for a very long time. The result: she is careful with her speech, and knows that being prepared is indispensable. She knows her stuff; she can withstand a lot of pressure.
Trump, like many others, has spoken freely without consequences for a very long time, and so is quite unprepared for the way his words will be weighed and tested as POTUS.
Trump, like many others, has spoken freely without consequences for a very long time, and so is quite unprepared for the way his words will be weighed and tested as POTUS.
2
At this point, Hillary's Certain Victory can't come too soon. We among the coherent, the civil, the tolerant, are exhausted by Windbag Trump and his "Lock up Hillary" Spew Minions.
For us, waiting for November 8 is like being kids again and counting the minutes till Christmas morning.
For us, waiting for November 8 is like being kids again and counting the minutes till Christmas morning.
15
Why Hillary wins? Two words: Donald Trump.
2
No, Tuna, the two words are "Most Qualified".
14
Tuna, by your logic all Republican candidates were not as competent as DJT.
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
1
Above all else in this circus of an election, what stands out to me the most is that to be a Republican means that you follow your party over a cliff if that is what they tell you to do. You put party over country and fantasy over reason. You believe everything you are told by a media unwilling to scratch the surface of any issue. This election has shone a bright light on the reality that if given the chance, Republicans would elect anyone to the highest office, no matter how dangerous to our democracy he is. Closing their eyes to facts and following blindly.
How can they believe their Party leaders in the future after they have said "Vote for Trump, only he can save our country." Like all cults they will not make the connection and not hold the Party accountable. They are being misused and will be led wherever the Republican Party wants them to go, against their own best interests, over and over again.
How can they believe their Party leaders in the future after they have said "Vote for Trump, only he can save our country." Like all cults they will not make the connection and not hold the Party accountable. They are being misused and will be led wherever the Republican Party wants them to go, against their own best interests, over and over again.
3
I agree with Prof. Krugman that Hillary is a strong candidate on her own and has demonstrated great strength and endurance in putting forth sensible policy solutions to tackle a wide array of difficult issues from gun violence to income inequality. My only misgiving is how she will fare in her Presidency, particularly in the face of Republican obstructionism. Her husband caved in to Republican demands resulting in two of the worst outcomes in recent history: the incarceration of millions of African-Americans for minor offences and the near-Depression arising from the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. President Obama has held his own in the face of an unrelenting Republican assault for eight years but I am afraid Hillary might be as willing as Bill to accommodate the opposition for short term gains,
3
Hillary was actually a beautiful speaker at the Al Smith dinner last night. Some of her jokes were good, and not badly timed (and so were a couple of his), but her intro and closing comments showed a depth, vision, and integration of heart and mind that was inspiring and comforting. I think she even reached Donald Trump. It is what we want in a president.
Speaking at a rally may not be her strong suit, but speaking adult-to-adult, in a more normal setting (of 1,000 people) is.
Speaking at a rally may not be her strong suit, but speaking adult-to-adult, in a more normal setting (of 1,000 people) is.
4
Does the american electorate fathom what’s at stake with Trump as President and McConnell and Ryan in charge of Congress? White supremacists empowered to burn Mosques and black churches. Voting rights shredded across the land. The Supreme Court packed with right wing ideologues. The GOP assault on women’s rights shoved into high gear. The fossil fuel industry unchained. With the planet at a tipping point on global warming, the US withdrawing from the Paris accord. The EPA gutted. The ACA repealed. A ground war begun with Iran over some perceived insult. Taxes dramatically lowered on corporations and the super rich and with huge boosts in military spending, deficits going through the roof. In short, a disaster of unmitigated proportions from which the country and the world might never recover. All this brought about by a profit driven, false equivalency, news as entertainment media who deserted the country in our hour of greatest need.
5
For all of Mr. Krugman's disdain of tax cuts, he ignores the fact that neither Obama nor Clinton has proposed rescinding the Bush tax cuts. Indeed, in his first term Obama called them fundamental to economic recovery. They've been tweaked a bit for the top 1% of the population but pretty much left intact for everyone else.
3
I was shocked at the number of major media top "reporters" and talking heads who were at the dinner, sponsored by the New York catholic church, to raise money for the catholic children in the area they serve. Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton called it a "press party". Are they opposed to her because she is for women's choice?
I was angry to hear a local radio jock say he knows many military and police and they say they will not vote for Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Is it because she is a woman and the big macho men refuse to answer to a woman?
I think the answer is yes on both counts. Those of us who support her must stay the course and call out those who would try to diminish her once we elect her. WE must stand behind her as she helps US restore civility, safety, reason, social and economic justice and true democracy in America.
Let's give her the biggest victory in America's 240 years!
I was angry to hear a local radio jock say he knows many military and police and they say they will not vote for Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Is it because she is a woman and the big macho men refuse to answer to a woman?
I think the answer is yes on both counts. Those of us who support her must stay the course and call out those who would try to diminish her once we elect her. WE must stand behind her as she helps US restore civility, safety, reason, social and economic justice and true democracy in America.
Let's give her the biggest victory in America's 240 years!
12
I suspect that if the Hillary tormentors of the past 20-plus years could be injected with a truth serum, that they would probably all agree with Mr. Krugman. What I have seen, especially in the last month, is is a confident, intelligent, determined, and extremely confident woman destroy her political opponent. I have full confidence that Hillary Clinton will be an exemplary president for this country for the next four years.
9
As a taxpayer I will help pay her presidential salary of $400,000 a year. Goldman Sachs, and other parties with business before the government, paid her $225,000 an hour for speeches. I can't compete with that. I'm sure there was no explicit quid pro quo, only nod nod wink wink because the Clintons have a keen sense of how to take all that money and keep it legal. But GS is still expecting favors for that money they gave her (corruption). Her and Bill are worth over $100 mil so she didn't need the money (greedy). And she told Goldman Sachs what they wanted to hear which is very different from the things she told progressives like me what we wanted to hear (two-faced).
The fact that Trump is the worst person to run for president of the US ever does not change the facts that she is greedy, corrupt and two-faced. I'm not with her, ever.
And I don't care that much about what Paul Krugman has to say any more either.
The fact that Trump is the worst person to run for president of the US ever does not change the facts that she is greedy, corrupt and two-faced. I'm not with her, ever.
And I don't care that much about what Paul Krugman has to say any more either.
9
"Greedy, corrupt, and two faced"? ... really?
Trump and his campaign have generated so many untruths that Factcheck.org declared that in the 12 years since its founding, “we’ve never seen his match.” And that was before this year began.
Trump repeatedly spews false, unsubstantiated or wildly exaggerated assertions — that Mrs. Clinton “slept through” the Benghazi attack (false); that the current administration is financing illegal immigration (false); that it is not vetting refugees from the Middle East (false); that Hillary wants to the abolish the second amendment (false); that Hillary wants to raise taxes on the middle class (false); that Hillary has not proposed a child care plan (false).
According to Politifact, 19% of Trump's claims are "pants on fire" lies (vs. 2% for Hillary) while a whopping 70% of his claims are mostly false or worse (vs. 27% for Hillary). You could fill a broadcast with the lies the con man has told just since the GOP convention.
Trump and his campaign have generated so many untruths that Factcheck.org declared that in the 12 years since its founding, “we’ve never seen his match.” And that was before this year began.
Trump repeatedly spews false, unsubstantiated or wildly exaggerated assertions — that Mrs. Clinton “slept through” the Benghazi attack (false); that the current administration is financing illegal immigration (false); that it is not vetting refugees from the Middle East (false); that Hillary wants to the abolish the second amendment (false); that Hillary wants to raise taxes on the middle class (false); that Hillary has not proposed a child care plan (false).
According to Politifact, 19% of Trump's claims are "pants on fire" lies (vs. 2% for Hillary) while a whopping 70% of his claims are mostly false or worse (vs. 27% for Hillary). You could fill a broadcast with the lies the con man has told just since the GOP convention.
4
I wonder when in 2017 Krugman and other Democrats will start blaming Donald Trump and Republicans for the election of Hillary. If only the Republicans had nominated a reasonable candidate . . . .
The only certainty is that Krugman and other Democrats are already preparing their excuses and where to point their fingers for the failure of Hillary's presidency, the same way they were so quick to cast blame for the inability of President Obama to run roughshod over the democratic process.
The only certainty is that Krugman and other Democrats are already preparing their excuses and where to point their fingers for the failure of Hillary's presidency, the same way they were so quick to cast blame for the inability of President Obama to run roughshod over the democratic process.
2
Unfortunately there was never a reasonable republican candidate - they all have to pass the same checklist of ridiculous positions on the issues. If Trump with his dreadful personality and personal history was able to beat them so handily why would you expect Sec Clinton to have a hard time doing so? Until we get actual conservatives with conservative ideas to address issues like climate change, retirement security, healthcare and inequality to name just a few you will continue to see a never ending roster of deplorable candidates. The Tea Party may well spell the end of the Republican Party.
Again the GOP shows that it cannot make its case without false equivalence. The criticism of Clinton’s fund raising is hypocrisy.
1. For generations, Dems have proposed serious campaign finance reform. The GOP blocks it. Dems have no choice to get their money where most of it comes from, the large corporations.
2. Hillary Clinton put in leg work travelling and giving fundraising speeches for $2-500 thousand each. She worked for that money. There are vastly more right wing billionaires supporting the GOP than billionaires supporting Dems. These billionaires and the corporations they control dump 7 figure checks on GOP candidates who do little to work for the money beyond a private meeting and easy conversation. The GOP always attack the same two, Soros and Buffett, but they are not secretive and have great records of public service.
3. Consider the largest hypocrisy. Pols have been raising money from fat cats forever. The first time we hear criticism of it is in just the last year when it was done by the first woman seriously running for president? She is the wrongdoer. Never mind all the men who did it before.
4. For years the GOP has met at the “Koch primaries” and the “Adelson primaries” to talk and take big checks. When have our “serious” media folk asked for those transcripts? Every year ALEC holds secret meetings to promote a conservative agenda. Where are the media folk asking for those transcripts? (The funding comes in meetings held after the ALEC meetings.)
1. For generations, Dems have proposed serious campaign finance reform. The GOP blocks it. Dems have no choice to get their money where most of it comes from, the large corporations.
2. Hillary Clinton put in leg work travelling and giving fundraising speeches for $2-500 thousand each. She worked for that money. There are vastly more right wing billionaires supporting the GOP than billionaires supporting Dems. These billionaires and the corporations they control dump 7 figure checks on GOP candidates who do little to work for the money beyond a private meeting and easy conversation. The GOP always attack the same two, Soros and Buffett, but they are not secretive and have great records of public service.
3. Consider the largest hypocrisy. Pols have been raising money from fat cats forever. The first time we hear criticism of it is in just the last year when it was done by the first woman seriously running for president? She is the wrongdoer. Never mind all the men who did it before.
4. For years the GOP has met at the “Koch primaries” and the “Adelson primaries” to talk and take big checks. When have our “serious” media folk asked for those transcripts? Every year ALEC holds secret meetings to promote a conservative agenda. Where are the media folk asking for those transcripts? (The funding comes in meetings held after the ALEC meetings.)
12
she and the FINC cheated Bernie out of the nomination. Oh yeah, and she wants to start a war CV with Russia.
2
Paul, great job! HRC is a multi-talented,highly educated,accomplished and passionate person, who will be a very good President. I base that prediction on her record FLOTUS,Sen from N.Y. and Sec,of State. Bc of her talents and successful experiences she would have defeated any of the Rep. candidates.
Bottom-line she is very intelligent,just like our current President.
Bottom-line she is very intelligent,just like our current President.
4
For years the GOP and their legions of shrill extreme right wing pundits have been waging a veritable war of attrition on the Clintons ... their legacy and their character. It is one of the most ugly persistent prolonged smear campaigns in US political history, and is the only reason Clinton has a high unfavorability rating. They have used every propaganda trick and legislative gimmick deliberately designed to literally destroy her ... code-words, dog whistles. endless congressional investigations and widely publicized kangaroo-court-style hearings, and even pointless impeachment proceedings ... all based on contrived lies and obfuscations ... ultimately going no where. The charges made and the evidence offered up invariably through prolonged 'due process' slowly dissolved into nothing but unfounded scurrilous gossip and innuendos as both the GOP concocted Benghazi and email server episodes so poignantly demonstrate. Yet the GOP drumbeat goes on with the never ending spewing of exaggerated notion's of Hillary Clinton's being "untrustable" (sic) and baseless unfair one sided attacks on her record.
6
Right on!
I have heard mang right wing pundits admit to this.
I have heard mang right wing pundits admit to this.
2
Hillary did what 16 of the Republican's best and brightest (presumably) couldn't do, she showed the world that intelligence and compassion trumps ignorance, racism and sexism. She did it without going in the gutter with dangerous donald. She went higher and higher as he went lower and lower. I am with her to the White House. She will be the best president ever , and once and for all she will show the world women can do everything men can do, and often do it better.
1
Thank you for this column. I tried to imagine Hillary against some of the other Republicans, and still think she would have won the debates easily. Marco Rubio is a lightweight who has nothing to recommend him besides being the child of immigrants. As are millions of others in this country and they know that's not a qualification for the presidency. Jeb would not show the same passion she does, while Cruz might have been a debater on her level. But he would have smirked and mansplained and been generally detestable. Hillary has many, many good qualities that the pundits can't see. Thank you again for reminding us.
2
Well said, sir, well said.
1
Bravo, Mr. Krugman!
I am so glad that you so eloquently described some of the strengths Hillary Clinton so obviously possesses. If she were so weak, incompetent and foolish, why would she be able to mop the floor with Trump three times in a row during the debates and lead him in the polls so decisively when none of the other 16 candidates could do that? She remained professional, gracious and immensely competent throughout - all qualities that will serve her well when she is President of the United States of America.
I am so glad that you so eloquently described some of the strengths Hillary Clinton so obviously possesses. If she were so weak, incompetent and foolish, why would she be able to mop the floor with Trump three times in a row during the debates and lead him in the polls so decisively when none of the other 16 candidates could do that? She remained professional, gracious and immensely competent throughout - all qualities that will serve her well when she is President of the United States of America.
1
While Trump is clearly not fit to be President, lets not go overboard with praise of Clinton. Firstly, apparently her talents were not evident to her party when she lost the nomination to Obama , after starting out as an overwhelming favorite. Secondly, exactly what were her accomplishments as Secretary of State? Thirdly, she did vote for the Iraq war.Fourthly, why are her unfavorable s in polling so consistently high? You could argue that its a vast right wing conspiracy or that anyone who questions her honesty is simply dumb? Trump was a gift for Clinton, but she may not be able to expand her support beyond her Democratic base, given the doubts about her sincerity and honesty.
6
I agree with the conclusion: Hillary Clinton is a formidable candidate.
However, she found difficulties in defeating a socialist, candidate, and she received help from the hundreds of super-delegates of her party.
on the other hand, to watch her resisting to the bullying of trump, shows that she may have the stamina to face the challenges of a POTUS.
However, she found difficulties in defeating a socialist, candidate, and she received help from the hundreds of super-delegates of her party.
on the other hand, to watch her resisting to the bullying of trump, shows that she may have the stamina to face the challenges of a POTUS.
2
Obama makes great speeches. And that's all. Time to get something done. I hope Hillary keeps her promises.
2
You must have slept through the past 8 years not to notice all the things Obama got done, scandal free too!
2
There are of couse certain significant differences between Mrs Clinton and any of the other politicians she could have faced.
An eleven hour grilling was just an exercise for this woman who is, and has been labeled a serial liar, and that was years ago.
In 1996 William Safire, of The New York Times called Mrs Clinton a congenital liar. The Washington Times , in September of this year, picked up the story and defined congenital as " having by nature a specified character".
So for Hillary lying is by nature part of her being.
An eleven hour grilling was just an exercise for this woman who is, and has been labeled a serial liar, and that was years ago.
In 1996 William Safire, of The New York Times called Mrs Clinton a congenital liar. The Washington Times , in September of this year, picked up the story and defined congenital as " having by nature a specified character".
So for Hillary lying is by nature part of her being.
4
Thank you again Mr K. The GOP needs to be held accountable and voted out of existence....even in Kentucky. Especially in Kentucky. One generation of generous funding for integrated public education, pre-school through college, should do it.
4
Nobody "deserves it." One earns it and if incessant lying, dissembling, misspokes, and foot-in-it awkwardness is earning it, then by all means, have at.
As the campaign winds down, what we know of Mrs. Clinton now is the same as what we've known all along: not as bad as THAT guy ... and that is absolutely no reason to vote for her or anyone.
As the campaign winds down, what we know of Mrs. Clinton now is the same as what we've known all along: not as bad as THAT guy ... and that is absolutely no reason to vote for her or anyone.
3
Hilary Clinton does indeed have many strengths and she will, in my view, make a great president.
Nevertheless, the pundits are right. As she herself admits, she is not a good politician and not a good candidate because she lacks charisma.
Nevertheless, the pundits are right. As she herself admits, she is not a good politician and not a good candidate because she lacks charisma.
1
Thank you!
2
Hillary is the only Democratic candidate, that I know of, who has vaunted being an admirer of & mentee to Henry Kissinger. I'm 61, and had moved to France in 1977. I knew many refugees from Kissinger's Operation Condor.
Outside of "our shining city upon a hill" he is universally known as a war criminal. You may as well suggest that I vote for an devotee of Heinrich Himmler.
Jill Stein is the only "non-toxic" candidate.
You could have written about the Secretary Hill's dirty works in Honduras; ditto for her involvement in the botched attempt of Regime Change in Libya (w/ Obama "leading from behind". You could also have commented on her defense of the $3 Haitian work day and her anti-BDS stance. (aside, our cluster bombs harming Yemeni children.)
You should be concerned with Hill and Obama's Red-Baiting and (her "Putin's Puppet" slander of Trump.
When direct conflict starts with Russia,
Professor, what shall you be saying?
Outside of "our shining city upon a hill" he is universally known as a war criminal. You may as well suggest that I vote for an devotee of Heinrich Himmler.
Jill Stein is the only "non-toxic" candidate.
You could have written about the Secretary Hill's dirty works in Honduras; ditto for her involvement in the botched attempt of Regime Change in Libya (w/ Obama "leading from behind". You could also have commented on her defense of the $3 Haitian work day and her anti-BDS stance. (aside, our cluster bombs harming Yemeni children.)
You should be concerned with Hill and Obama's Red-Baiting and (her "Putin's Puppet" slander of Trump.
When direct conflict starts with Russia,
Professor, what shall you be saying?
10
I am your age. I am a HRC supporter. But I thank you for raising the points that you did, and as an American citizen, I truly regret that this election has not focused on any of them.
2
Jill Stein, the other Putin-Puppet. The end of the world is where left and right meet.
We have seen women rule countries like UK snd Germany, and NO, like some of them told me behind closed doors, they don't make bad decisions when they have the period!
We should get over these kinds of people that can't imagine the country being ruled by a black person or by a women. We proved them wrong the first time, and we will prove them wrong the second time. For sure. Go Hillary!
We should get over these kinds of people that can't imagine the country being ruled by a black person or by a women. We proved them wrong the first time, and we will prove them wrong the second time. For sure. Go Hillary!
8
I have a question.
I have a simple question.
When Hillary speaks to us, gives her position on this and that is what we hear her "public position" or her "private position".
In one of her numerous, high dollar corporate talks she said she had two "positions", one "public" and one "private".
Just where does she stand - on anything ?
I have a simple question.
When Hillary speaks to us, gives her position on this and that is what we hear her "public position" or her "private position".
In one of her numerous, high dollar corporate talks she said she had two "positions", one "public" and one "private".
Just where does she stand - on anything ?
8
Simple people don't need to understand complex issues so Hillary simplifies things for the public.
1
The pundits and the public dislike Clinton for 3 main reasons -
1. She is 2 faced - just like every other great leader in history - learn some things about Lincoln, Churchill, Roosevelt, Elizabeth 1, etc, etc.
2. She admits to not being able to make omelets without breaking eggs.
3. She is not male.
1. She is 2 faced - just like every other great leader in history - learn some things about Lincoln, Churchill, Roosevelt, Elizabeth 1, etc, etc.
2. She admits to not being able to make omelets without breaking eggs.
3. She is not male.
8
Now that Hillary has clearly proved herself to be the best candidate for the job, I look forward to a shift away from the focus on Trump. He has lost and is currently dragging America down with him in a blaze of self-destruction. Let's not let Trump's terrible misogynistic, racist, hateful and completely obfuscating diatribes overshadow this 'Huge' moment in American history. We are all so tired of this endless election, so why not spend the remaining three weeks in excitement of how far our already great country has come in electing the first female President of the United States of America. It will be a momentous honor to watch Madame President inaugurated as our 45th President, reaching the pinnacle of her lifelong career in public service. Let's all drop the negativity, and lean in, focusing on the good. Our collective consciousness will be grateful.
7
Indeed, as Paul has outlined well, the GOP picked a bunch of losers they thought would be a nice supplement to the Ryan-McConnell blockade of Congress. They also put Pence in place to take over if DJ made it, and shortly thereafter was forced to resign after a few inevitable alarming gaffes.
Simply put, the GOP has already taken over the majority of state legislatures and Congress. Only the presidency stands between them and take-over of the courts. Oligarchy blew it this time - couldn't find a viable spineless candidate with no qualms, and DJ just doesn't listen. But success is nigh; there is always next time, and only one move needed for checkmate.
Simply put, the GOP has already taken over the majority of state legislatures and Congress. Only the presidency stands between them and take-over of the courts. Oligarchy blew it this time - couldn't find a viable spineless candidate with no qualms, and DJ just doesn't listen. But success is nigh; there is always next time, and only one move needed for checkmate.
3
Likeable will get you George W. Bush, so be careful what you wish for. Clinton has withstood 25 years of harassment from the Republican Establishment, and if that does not make you cautious and secretive, nothing will. Yes, she makes some dumb unforced errors, but we all do. The difference is there is a small army of people constantly trying to find hers. She plays the Long Game, and that requires dealing with your enemies and making compromises in order to make progress. Last time I checked, that was called politics. So let's get over it and vote.
6
Ah yes, TGI Friday and another PK love letter to HRC.
And they say there is no liberal media bias . . .
No doubt we will soon be seeing the author in the new Clinton administration.
And they say there is no liberal media bias . . .
No doubt we will soon be seeing the author in the new Clinton administration.
4
Sounds like a personal problem. Every time I tune to the AM band I'm inundated with political opinions which can't separate history from politics from reality. That, and commercials for vitamins, investing in gold, and dog nutrition.
1
Whether you came early to Hillary's camp (as I did, thinking in 1992 that she should be the one running) or late (as many who began with Bernie this cycle), it is all coming down to these next 18 days. Let's do this.
5
Hillary Clinton deserves an enormous amount of credit for standing up to Trump, for standing alone on the debate stage to challenge his lies when most of the Republicans and many in the media were afraid or just unable to do this. She did this before the release of the "bus" talk that may have finally put the end to his campaign, but she certainly prepared the way for his downfall.
3
The one new thing I've learned about Hillary Clinton during this campaign is just how tough and unflappable she is.
Keeping one's cool against a monster for three debates is not something many are capable of doing.
She is what a president should be, smart, tough, empathetic and cool under pressure.
Keeping one's cool against a monster for three debates is not something many are capable of doing.
She is what a president should be, smart, tough, empathetic and cool under pressure.
2
I am a Democrat and I will vote for Hillary Clinton. I think she is often awkward in public, but I don't dislike her.
However-- and it's a big however--millions of my fellow Americans do. 55% by the latest polls I've seen. And it's incredibly dishonest of you, Dr. Krugman, not to mention condescending, to attribute that to all of them being some combination of misogynists and too stupid to see through GOP propaganda. The GOP has assailed many politicians. But there's something about Hillary Clinton that rubs an awful lot of people the wrong way.
As Democrats, we need to accept that and work with it. Telling the people who dislike her that they're idiots is just more name-calling and convinces Trump's sizable base that the "liberal media" has no use for them. That does not serve anyone well.
However-- and it's a big however--millions of my fellow Americans do. 55% by the latest polls I've seen. And it's incredibly dishonest of you, Dr. Krugman, not to mention condescending, to attribute that to all of them being some combination of misogynists and too stupid to see through GOP propaganda. The GOP has assailed many politicians. But there's something about Hillary Clinton that rubs an awful lot of people the wrong way.
As Democrats, we need to accept that and work with it. Telling the people who dislike her that they're idiots is just more name-calling and convinces Trump's sizable base that the "liberal media" has no use for them. That does not serve anyone well.
2
to step back from a campaign that seemed to run from substance of Presidential powers, and problems...
In the second debate the issue of trade balance was briefly brought up, to be ignored. Yet. after years of a trade ledger deep, hundreds of billions deep, in the red we sit atop a bubble of IOUs that exceed, considerably, the national debt. &GDP.
The problem, of course, is as Econ 1B texts used to say, that money is in essence, a generalized IOU. You make something, sell something, you get a gov issued IOU in return, that you can pass along in a transactive chain (letter). All good as long as everyone believes the IOU has a given value. But.... there is only so much GDP to spend those IOUs within. If there is a question that one can actually use the IOUs in time they lose value.
The great thing is once you get someone to take, and hold, IOUs they are stuck. They need to keep everyone believing in their value, or they lose out.
Otherwise they bought nothing for something. They have stock docs for a non extant bridge.
If one country has few IOUs floating and they go south, no biggie. If some major failure in the whole world economy occurs and the world currency goes bust.... and the Hanjin shipping bankruptcy, or even the German bank on the edge are ignition points now...
Well, it would have been nice to have gotten some insight from the candidates.
I doubt any bail outs will make it through The Hill this time...
In the second debate the issue of trade balance was briefly brought up, to be ignored. Yet. after years of a trade ledger deep, hundreds of billions deep, in the red we sit atop a bubble of IOUs that exceed, considerably, the national debt. &GDP.
The problem, of course, is as Econ 1B texts used to say, that money is in essence, a generalized IOU. You make something, sell something, you get a gov issued IOU in return, that you can pass along in a transactive chain (letter). All good as long as everyone believes the IOU has a given value. But.... there is only so much GDP to spend those IOUs within. If there is a question that one can actually use the IOUs in time they lose value.
The great thing is once you get someone to take, and hold, IOUs they are stuck. They need to keep everyone believing in their value, or they lose out.
Otherwise they bought nothing for something. They have stock docs for a non extant bridge.
If one country has few IOUs floating and they go south, no biggie. If some major failure in the whole world economy occurs and the world currency goes bust.... and the Hanjin shipping bankruptcy, or even the German bank on the edge are ignition points now...
Well, it would have been nice to have gotten some insight from the candidates.
I doubt any bail outs will make it through The Hill this time...
1
Finally, an article highlighting Secretary Clinton's formidable strengths and intellect. The misogyny underlying comments, "She's only winning because..." put to rest in your article. Thank you.
3
I would love to have a beer with Hillary.
7
According to professional gamblers, people who could not care less about politics or policy and whose only care is to pick the winner, at the start of the campaign Hillary Clinton was the biggest odds on favorite to win the presidency of any non-incumbent ever. The reason Hillary was such a big favorite even before the campaign started was because if you older enough to vote and to young for social security the best president of your life time was Bill Clinton and the worst was George W Bush. Therefore no Bush, or Bush like was going to defeat Bill's wife. Which is by the way how Trump got the nomination, not being a Bush or Bush like gave him at least a chance at winning. The problem for Mr. Trump is to keep the GOP together he either has to avoid talking about economic issues or has to support policies that are good for only about 1% of Americans. That is the bigger problem for the GOP in the long term is not Donald Trump but Paul Ryan because Ryan is the face of GOP economic policy that as Paul Krugman constantly points out is terrible for most Americans.
3
Great article. In the book "Quiet," author Susan Cain talks about how our current culture is in thrall to the cult of personality, which trumps (pun only slightly intended) the kind of deep, foundational qualities that Krugman enumerates so well in this piece. I, for one, am so tired of hearing presidential candidates discussed as if they were contestants in a beauty pageant (oops, did it again). But seriously, I strongly believe that history will view Hillary's achievements as a politician, public servant, and I hope, as president, much more positively, and more accurately, than we do today.
6
I agree with the thrust of this opinion piece and would add that she has the added advantage of hitting the ground running both internationally and domestically.
There are few politicians that have her grasp of the international state, as the global international community matures. The 320 million people of the US are only a small fraction of the global population of 7.2 Billion.
Clearly, when you examine what humankind has achieved as a World community, the US has been a very successful experiment. We are still learning and as we move into the future, Mrs. Clinton, who has been a good student of humanity and has enough history and exposure at the highest levels of government to understand how we got to now. Which most would say that the US has capitalized on the technologies that have been built on the energy derived from fossil fuels.
We have reached a point in global economic development that makes it compellingly mperative that the US lead the World in continuing the development of the global economy with technologies that will replace the fossil fuel energy with other sources of energy.
We can do it but it will take an extraordinary international leader to be the pathfinder for humanity. Her time in office will require a master set of skills. Knowing what I know in the US system, she is probably the best qualified person for the job.
I very much hope she will layout the logic of achieving a higher quality of living by making the carbonaceous shift.
There are few politicians that have her grasp of the international state, as the global international community matures. The 320 million people of the US are only a small fraction of the global population of 7.2 Billion.
Clearly, when you examine what humankind has achieved as a World community, the US has been a very successful experiment. We are still learning and as we move into the future, Mrs. Clinton, who has been a good student of humanity and has enough history and exposure at the highest levels of government to understand how we got to now. Which most would say that the US has capitalized on the technologies that have been built on the energy derived from fossil fuels.
We have reached a point in global economic development that makes it compellingly mperative that the US lead the World in continuing the development of the global economy with technologies that will replace the fossil fuel energy with other sources of energy.
We can do it but it will take an extraordinary international leader to be the pathfinder for humanity. Her time in office will require a master set of skills. Knowing what I know in the US system, she is probably the best qualified person for the job.
I very much hope she will layout the logic of achieving a higher quality of living by making the carbonaceous shift.
1
Hillary wins because the only reason Trump and every republican candidate before him is to lower taxes for their wealthy friends. Its never worked and would never have worked this time either. After any lowered taxes for employers might have happened employers still have to decide if there's any increase in demand to warrant paying better or hiring. Where is demand going to increase from except an increase in income decided at the payroll department even with a new windfall landed in their lap? If proportions for wage or salary distribution stay the same where might any increase in demand come from? Lowering taxes for wealthy people is the only reason any republican submits to running for President or any office if only to discredit the opposition. There is no argument, the economy's health depends on Demand not supply. Refusal to understand that is what's kept any hiring situation underwater. Add to that; how can anyone expect to win back jobs that overseas pay so little - costs that Trump himself takes advantage of? Imagine what those products would cost if they paid a living wage to an American to perform? Whats the solution to that? I haven't heard it anywhere. There is no solution but to learn a skill.
Hillary Clinton has shown a complete lack of judgement and probably utter lack of respect for established procedures when she decided to use her own Private email server to transact official emails. For pretty much everybody else who is working is a Private Corporate or a Federal/Stage Agency, this is an offense that simply gets you fired.
I regretfully will be voting for Hillary but I sincerely believe that that she is ineligible to a President for that email fiasco alone.
I regretfully will be voting for Hillary but I sincerely believe that that she is ineligible to a President for that email fiasco alone.
4
Paul, let's be totally honest--something this nasty campaign of degradation has been missing. While I will be voting for Hillary Clinton, it will be with the hope that she'll actually enact many of the populist, progressive reforms that Bernie Sanders forced her reluctantly to embrace like free college tuition at public colleges and universities, and rejecting the TPP trade deal. I also hope her victory will be "bigly" enough to retake the Senate and put a progressive justice on the court. And, most importantly, I hope the entire morally-challenged Republican Party of Trump enablers and endorsers suffers the mortal wound they deserve for their silence in the face of vicious bigotry against Hispanics, Muslims, and women as well as a challenge to the very basis of our democracy--our electoral process.
8
Thanks for this. I completely agree. From the beginning, I have supported Mrs. Clinton--no ifs, ands or buts. I think she'll make, if not a great president, then a good one, a competent one, a president that will look after the interests of the United States. After all, the president swears to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution," not create jobs, not lower taxes, not provide health insurance. That's the job of Congress. I'll have no problem voting for her at all.
10
The way Hillary talked about the Soviet Union was deceitful. She scares me to death. America needs WWIII to get out of its economic slump and Hillary will start it and finish the world.
8
In what world are you living? You're a journalist for God's sake, do some journalism. The stink of circumstantial evidence that wafts around the Clintons should give any right thinking person pause. That reek is the smell of a morally bereft, deeply cynical opportunism looking to snake oil the people for one last big score.
To paraphrase that judge who tried to define pornography - we can't maybe prove Clinton corruption but we sure can smell it.
Trump's gone over the edge. He's acting like someone who has seen into the abyss occupied by the Clintons and their ilk and it has maddened him. He appears to be on a suicide mission now, looking to kamikaze everything that is causing the diminishment of America's democracy.
You idiots at the Times have no idea how big of a favour he is doing for your country.
To paraphrase that judge who tried to define pornography - we can't maybe prove Clinton corruption but we sure can smell it.
Trump's gone over the edge. He's acting like someone who has seen into the abyss occupied by the Clintons and their ilk and it has maddened him. He appears to be on a suicide mission now, looking to kamikaze everything that is causing the diminishment of America's democracy.
You idiots at the Times have no idea how big of a favour he is doing for your country.
3
I'd like to hear an explaination for the apparent enbrace of Simpson-Bowles by Clinton. Anyone?
3
....And by all accounts of those who know her a great person to have a beer with. The notion that having a beer with dystopian Don or Bully Bush would be fun vs Hillary is one of the strangest of ironies. By even mean John McCaine's accounting she's a great person to kick back and have a drink with. As I watched the last debate a warm, smart, funny woman made the Wicked Witch Donald melt through the floor as his sickening and desperate attempts to project on her all his own worst chracter traits backfired bigly
8
Hillary may indeed be a terrible candidate, but who cares? She's going to be a great president.
4
Clinton did not win the nomination 'fairly easily' despite the biased attempts of Krugman to paint it that way. She is obviously not a great politician nor a strong candidate. Is she qualified? Absolutely. Would she make a good president? Most likely. But it's columns like these that make me less and less interested in what Krugman has to say
2
What I see in play with Mrs. Clinton is the sexism that is endemic in North American society. If a woman is calm, she's cold; if she gets upset, then she's weak. If a woman wants to aspire to higher office, then she's blind ambitious. I could go on and on and on. Mrs. Clinton's biggest problem is that she is a woman AND that she aspires to be more than first lady. I am sick and tired of seeing her pilloried in the media and online, of having her disgustingly amoral opponent be given the by time and time again. Of the ridiculous equivalency that the media - yes, the media - has employed throughout this campaign. Fie and for shame!!!!! If Mrs. Clinton were a man, it would be a different story. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is she up on rape charges? Fraud? Does she use the Clinton Foundation to pay personal expenses? Is the Clinton Foundation subject to an order from the NY Attorney General because it isn't actually a charity? Is every second word out of her mouth a lie? Is she completely unqualified for the job? Have a host of men appeared to say that she's sexually assaulted them? I could go on and on. As a woman, I am DISGUSTED with this whole charade. We should be celebrating the fact that a WOMAN is likely to be the next President of the United States!!! Instead, she is constantly brought down.
14
"You have to go back to Al Gore in 2000 to find a politician who faced as much jeering from the news media, over everything from claims of dishonesty (which usually turn out to be based on nothing) to matters of personal style."
You've got some nerve. The newspaper that pays you handsomely characterized Bernie Sanders, once it deigned to even recognize his candidacy, as a "yelling rumpled unelectable socialist." Of course, the Times didn't string those four words together as a single quote, but every one of those full or partial mischaracterizations appeared in the Times with regularity.
And you, sir, rejected the one candidate whose policies actually resemble the positions you yourself espouse as an economist, if not as a political pundit.
If Clinton starts with more misbegotten wars in the middle east, I will find you, as her chief apologist on these pages, eminently culpable.
You've got some nerve. The newspaper that pays you handsomely characterized Bernie Sanders, once it deigned to even recognize his candidacy, as a "yelling rumpled unelectable socialist." Of course, the Times didn't string those four words together as a single quote, but every one of those full or partial mischaracterizations appeared in the Times with regularity.
And you, sir, rejected the one candidate whose policies actually resemble the positions you yourself espouse as an economist, if not as a political pundit.
If Clinton starts with more misbegotten wars in the middle east, I will find you, as her chief apologist on these pages, eminently culpable.
7
Underestimating Hillary Clinton is a great tradition. Face it, she's sharp, she has heart, she is determined. She does her homework and rises above a modest ability on the stump to move people to her side. She has a command of the facts where her opponent has a command of whatever rubbish has bobbed to the surface on the internet.
Face it, her "reputation" is the result of 30+ years of consistent PR efforts from people who realized early, she's a woman who is on her way to the top.
Face it, her "reputation" is the result of 30+ years of consistent PR efforts from people who realized early, she's a woman who is on her way to the top.
6
I was not a Clinton supporter at the start of this long journey—originally wanting Biden at the helm, but have come to love the grit and compassion of the Lady in White.
4
Enjoy drinking the Kool Aide Professor!
6
What pummeling are you talking about Dr. Krugman? You liberals live in your own fantasy world. Why would anyone want to vote for a candidate who possesses a combination of ambition and incompetence? This is putting aside her other issues, which is a big put aside. Please don't get sick on the kool aid. I have only a 2 yr college degree; got out before the liberal brainwashing took hold!
4
Women, you may have noticed, are quite different than men. We see, feel and think differently. You have never before seen a female presidential candidate; but when you do, you unconsciously expect her to fit previous--male--molds. When she doesn't, it makes you uncomfortable. When she does--by a little political duplicity, economic savvy, oratory fierceness--it makes you uncomfortable. What you don't like about HRC might be your own subterranean sexism at play.
7
"Women, you may have noticed, are quite different than men. We see, feel and think differently."
Ok, cool. Why should women then get equal pay for equal work? Maybe women should get more, but why equal?
Ok, cool. Why should women then get equal pay for equal work? Maybe women should get more, but why equal?
1
I'm sure you also supported Sarah Palin and Carly Fiorina. If not, was that sexist?
2
I think I will never understand Americans.
Half of the Democrats hate the thought of Hillary Clinton as president because she is not a saint.
Half of the Republicans love the thought of Donald Trump as president because they think he is a saint.
Why do Americans need saints to lead them?
In Europe we have come to terms with the fact that no president is or can be saint.
Half of the Democrats hate the thought of Hillary Clinton as president because she is not a saint.
Half of the Republicans love the thought of Donald Trump as president because they think he is a saint.
Why do Americans need saints to lead them?
In Europe we have come to terms with the fact that no president is or can be saint.
10
It would be great if all those raising a stink about Clinton accepting money from special interests (as all presidential candidates have done since time immemorial) would focus their energies on campaign finance reform and overturning the Citizens UNited decision - voting for her and holding her feet to the fire to deliver on it rather than levelling a charge that applies to a rotten system more than a candidate and then voting third party out of spite.
5
If only we “hadn’t nominated Donald Trump” is the crux of their post-mortem analyses after Nov 8th, then the GOP is going to be hibernating in the wilderness for a long time. Trump put a raw face on an inherently flawed GOP vision that is out of sync with 21st century America. Removing that face and replacing it with a Mike Pence or a Ted Cruz will simply amount to “putting lipstick on a pig.”
The GOP needs to look deeper because Hillary Clinton might turn out to be a great leader for the United States, just like in their heydays, Margaret Thatcher was for the U.K. and Indira Gandhi was for India. So however tempted Senate Majority Leader (if he remains so after November 8th) Mitch McConnell might be, let’s hope he puts country before his decimated party and does not make his organizing principle, “ensuring that Hillary Clinton is a one-term president.” Then we will know for sure that nothing has changed within the GOP and the rot is way too deep.
The GOP needs to look deeper because Hillary Clinton might turn out to be a great leader for the United States, just like in their heydays, Margaret Thatcher was for the U.K. and Indira Gandhi was for India. So however tempted Senate Majority Leader (if he remains so after November 8th) Mitch McConnell might be, let’s hope he puts country before his decimated party and does not make his organizing principle, “ensuring that Hillary Clinton is a one-term president.” Then we will know for sure that nothing has changed within the GOP and the rot is way too deep.
8
they should erect a monument to Trump in every town square in the nation. he has ripped the vernier off the republicans, exposing them for what they are, amoral money grubbers.
1
"Mrs. Clinton won the Democratic nomination fairly easily..."
The truth is, she had quite a bit of help. The liberal media, the portion of the media that the Dem electorate listens to, pummeled Sanders' platform - even taking a page from the right wing media and calling it "socialist".
Krugman, for his part, had nothing good to say about Sanders' ideas, although these ideas were basically New Deal proposals, which, up until Hillary's husband moved the party into moderate Republican territory, were the mainstay of the Dem platform.
Ever since the Democratic party tacked rightward, Krugman has sought to provide intellectual cover for an ideological shift that was essentially a betrayal of the working class - even going so far as penning an ode to sweatshop labor and cherry picking statistics to support the onerous trade deals that lacked any of the worker protections that permitted Germany to retain over 20% of its work force in production jobs (the US is down to 8.6%).
Krugman is a "neoliberal without a conscience" who mainly spends his time refuting the easily refutable ridiculous arguments of the Fox News bunch. When it comes to refuting the arguments of the left, he resorts to intellectual dishonesty, cherry-picking statistics and resorting to ad hominem attacks against politicians and voters seeking a return to New Deal compassion for the working class, with sophomoric insults such as belief in "fairy dust and unicorns".
The truth is, she had quite a bit of help. The liberal media, the portion of the media that the Dem electorate listens to, pummeled Sanders' platform - even taking a page from the right wing media and calling it "socialist".
Krugman, for his part, had nothing good to say about Sanders' ideas, although these ideas were basically New Deal proposals, which, up until Hillary's husband moved the party into moderate Republican territory, were the mainstay of the Dem platform.
Ever since the Democratic party tacked rightward, Krugman has sought to provide intellectual cover for an ideological shift that was essentially a betrayal of the working class - even going so far as penning an ode to sweatshop labor and cherry picking statistics to support the onerous trade deals that lacked any of the worker protections that permitted Germany to retain over 20% of its work force in production jobs (the US is down to 8.6%).
Krugman is a "neoliberal without a conscience" who mainly spends his time refuting the easily refutable ridiculous arguments of the Fox News bunch. When it comes to refuting the arguments of the left, he resorts to intellectual dishonesty, cherry-picking statistics and resorting to ad hominem attacks against politicians and voters seeking a return to New Deal compassion for the working class, with sophomoric insults such as belief in "fairy dust and unicorns".
9
Ed
Perhaps you should read a bit more.
The person who called Bernie a socialist earliest and most often was Bernie.
Because that's what he is.
That's not necessarily a bad thing by any means, and he has the grit and integrity to wear the label proudly.
You may believe its a pejorative, but you can''t deny that Bernie applied the term to himself first.
Perhaps you should read a bit more.
The person who called Bernie a socialist earliest and most often was Bernie.
Because that's what he is.
That's not necessarily a bad thing by any means, and he has the grit and integrity to wear the label proudly.
You may believe its a pejorative, but you can''t deny that Bernie applied the term to himself first.
1
Thank you and yes!
3
Trump followers say Hillary is a liar and cannot be trusted. And yet, when you press them to come up with hard evidence to back up their claims, they cannot. Instead, they say the FBI director said she lied, even though he did not. They say she lied about Benghazi, even though there is no proof of that. They say she intentionally sent out classified e-mails, although their is no evidence of that either.
Instead, their real bottom line does seem to be racial antagonism.
Let's hope this election sends a clear message to the Republicans that they must take a new path.
Only in America.
Instead, their real bottom line does seem to be racial antagonism.
Let's hope this election sends a clear message to the Republicans that they must take a new path.
Only in America.
3
I will vote for her but to quote Marx (Groucho that is) who am I going to believe, my own eyes that deceive me or Mr. Krugman. No one doubts that she is superior to any of the Republican circus we saw in the primaries and of course the carnival barker. And yes she has many good qualities and has done good work.
But while she is winning her negatives are also very high. And they have nothing to do with punditry or what she has been through by the conservative media and Republican Congress. If anything they make her look good and a sympathetic figure. She simply lacks conviction and she cannot fake it like Bill. It's important to a leader like a compass to a ship.
But while she is winning her negatives are also very high. And they have nothing to do with punditry or what she has been through by the conservative media and Republican Congress. If anything they make her look good and a sympathetic figure. She simply lacks conviction and she cannot fake it like Bill. It's important to a leader like a compass to a ship.
4
So now we're left with the "reasonable GOP" voters promoting a counter-factual argument that goes something like " If only HRC had to face Bush, Kasich or Rubio (pick your favorite) then this election would be different."
So we can give them the benefit of the argument that if their primary voters selected someone (anyone) different, the outcome would not be the same. But this argument fails (stupendously IMO) that the GOP primary voters DID select the least possible qualified candidate. That's what the GOP establishment needs to figure out - to wit, how is that their candidate bench is so weak that a TV pitchman can win their internal beauty contest.
So we can give them the benefit of the argument that if their primary voters selected someone (anyone) different, the outcome would not be the same. But this argument fails (stupendously IMO) that the GOP primary voters DID select the least possible qualified candidate. That's what the GOP establishment needs to figure out - to wit, how is that their candidate bench is so weak that a TV pitchman can win their internal beauty contest.
3
Paul,
Hil is the only Democratic candidate, that I know of, who has vaunted being an admirer of & mentee to Henry Kissinger. I'm 61, and had moved to France in 1977. I knew many refugees from Kissinger's Operation Condor.
Outside of "our shining city upon a hill" he is universally known as a war criminal. You may as well suggest that I vote for an devotee of Heinrich Himmler.
Jill Stein is the only "non-toxic" candidate.
You could have written about the Secretary Hill's dirty works in Honduras; ditto for her involvement in the botched attempt of Regime Change in Libya (w/ Obama "leading from behind". You could also have commented on her defense of the $3 Haitian work day and her anti-BDS stance. (aside, our cluster bombs harming Yemeni children.)
You should be concerned with Hill and Obama's Red-Baiting and (her "Putin's Puppet" slander of Trump. When direct conflict starts with Russia, I'm certain that you'll remain a "good soldier" a support our military adventurism without question.
Hil is the only Democratic candidate, that I know of, who has vaunted being an admirer of & mentee to Henry Kissinger. I'm 61, and had moved to France in 1977. I knew many refugees from Kissinger's Operation Condor.
Outside of "our shining city upon a hill" he is universally known as a war criminal. You may as well suggest that I vote for an devotee of Heinrich Himmler.
Jill Stein is the only "non-toxic" candidate.
You could have written about the Secretary Hill's dirty works in Honduras; ditto for her involvement in the botched attempt of Regime Change in Libya (w/ Obama "leading from behind". You could also have commented on her defense of the $3 Haitian work day and her anti-BDS stance. (aside, our cluster bombs harming Yemeni children.)
You should be concerned with Hill and Obama's Red-Baiting and (her "Putin's Puppet" slander of Trump. When direct conflict starts with Russia, I'm certain that you'll remain a "good soldier" a support our military adventurism without question.
6
Let us remember that Trump IS the Republican party. The entire party is ideologically bankrupt. All it has left is the politics of obstruction. People still have loyalty to their GOP team. Thus, if We the People want better government and policies that will move the entire country forward, we ought to vote against ALL Republicans.
15
She's a great Presidential candidate, and I'm delighted to support her. She is smart, thoughtful, fair, level headed - and kind. She knows how to get along with others and build teams, but she also knows when to roll over the last critics. I expect great things from her Presidency.
I notice, once again, that virtually all of the green-checked "certified commenters" here are Bernie misogynists. Like Dave, who thinks "keeping her pneumonia a secret" is a big deal. (Dave, have you ever had that thing called a job? Probably not. Well, for those of us who do - working while a bit sick is often required.) And who seems to think we started the war in Syria (Earth to Dave - read a little more than the Opinion pages). As well as that her staff (not CLinton) discussed in Wikileaks emails some private opinions different from her political positions - DUH.
Wow. That's all her critics have. Nothing.
I notice, once again, that virtually all of the green-checked "certified commenters" here are Bernie misogynists. Like Dave, who thinks "keeping her pneumonia a secret" is a big deal. (Dave, have you ever had that thing called a job? Probably not. Well, for those of us who do - working while a bit sick is often required.) And who seems to think we started the war in Syria (Earth to Dave - read a little more than the Opinion pages). As well as that her staff (not CLinton) discussed in Wikileaks emails some private opinions different from her political positions - DUH.
Wow. That's all her critics have. Nothing.
5
Or Ms Clinton sailed to the nomination because while the GOP had 16 candidates, Clinton was opposed by some guy named O'Malley and a Socialist from Vermont.
Everyone else had been scared off by the DNC obviously having its thumb on the scale, going back to Aug. 2015 when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz conspired with the heads of the Democratic Party in 32 states to ensure Clinton got the nomination.
Love Krugman but let's not lose sight of how closed this nomination process actually was.
Everyone else had been scared off by the DNC obviously having its thumb on the scale, going back to Aug. 2015 when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz conspired with the heads of the Democratic Party in 32 states to ensure Clinton got the nomination.
Love Krugman but let's not lose sight of how closed this nomination process actually was.
4
It's called politics, Ken, and every President from the founding heroes to the present had to run that gauntlet.
Just as there are many world class players who never saw the green grass of Yankee Stadium because they got their girlfriends pregnant, or their moms got sick, or they missed the bus to their tryout, there many brilliant and forceful men (forget the women, they were officially excluded so...) who never got the chance to show what they could do.
That's life. To somehow blame Hillary for the way world works is just mean. And not so very generous or smart.
Just as there are many world class players who never saw the green grass of Yankee Stadium because they got their girlfriends pregnant, or their moms got sick, or they missed the bus to their tryout, there many brilliant and forceful men (forget the women, they were officially excluded so...) who never got the chance to show what they could do.
That's life. To somehow blame Hillary for the way world works is just mean. And not so very generous or smart.
1
We know from the New York Times that Mrs. Clinton feels most at ease with the Wall Street bankers who fueled her fortune after she left the
White House "flat broke."
No, she does not care about racial justice. She does not support poor families. She does not care about the sick people whose medicines will be financially out of reach once TPP gets rammed through in a lame duck Congress (which she was for before she was against it).
She is genuine in wanting to be president.
White House "flat broke."
No, she does not care about racial justice. She does not support poor families. She does not care about the sick people whose medicines will be financially out of reach once TPP gets rammed through in a lame duck Congress (which she was for before she was against it).
She is genuine in wanting to be president.
6
Let Republicans believe they lost 2016 because Trump is a deeply flawed candidate who was not a 'true conservative' and 2020 will go so much easier.
2
"So let’s dispel with this fiction that Hillary Clinton is only where she is through a random stroke of good luck. She’s a formidable figure, and has been all along."
Your final and best paragraph.
Mr T's consistent complaint wearies one. " She hasn't DONE anything". She hasn't been President before, Mr. T. She will amaze you.
Your final and best paragraph.
Mr T's consistent complaint wearies one. " She hasn't DONE anything". She hasn't been President before, Mr. T. She will amaze you.
8
Mr. Krugman: For years I enjoyed reading your hard-hitting critiques of policy failures and your even-handed criticisms of the Obama administration's timid economic policies during his first term. But ever since you began to bang the drum for Mrs. Clinton I have been wondering what's up--it's fine to use every single column to proclaim your affection for Hillary, but do you even believe the stuff you write?
Do you honesty think that an intelligent person who has followed the news carefully and who doesn't suffer from American amnesia couldn't come up with a single reason to doubt Clinton's competency for the presidency? Did you happen to take a peek at the Goldman-Sachs speeches whose content the Times ignored for as long as possible? Her dishonesty, which "usually turns out to be based on nothing" but not always, as your comment implies, that doesn't bother you? How much dishonesty is okay in your book?
Her vote for the Iraq war, which by itself disqualifies her for people who would prefer a president less eager to spill more blood--that's cool with you? But really, what do facts mean nowadays? She'll win, and within a few months the bankers and corporate mavens will be comfortably ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania while the rest of us saps will be standing out in the cold--again.
Do you honesty think that an intelligent person who has followed the news carefully and who doesn't suffer from American amnesia couldn't come up with a single reason to doubt Clinton's competency for the presidency? Did you happen to take a peek at the Goldman-Sachs speeches whose content the Times ignored for as long as possible? Her dishonesty, which "usually turns out to be based on nothing" but not always, as your comment implies, that doesn't bother you? How much dishonesty is okay in your book?
Her vote for the Iraq war, which by itself disqualifies her for people who would prefer a president less eager to spill more blood--that's cool with you? But really, what do facts mean nowadays? She'll win, and within a few months the bankers and corporate mavens will be comfortably ensconced at 1600 Pennsylvania while the rest of us saps will be standing out in the cold--again.
3
Hillary voted for the AUMF as did Kerry and McCain. Bush decided to abuse that authority. Tarring Hillary with the supporting the Iraq war after 9/11 is getting very old.
1
That was a terrible first sentence, but thanks for everything else you said! Her performance in those debates, building up to the third one, was indeed formidable. She'll be able to do a great job as president. Even after all the crazy negatives this campaign has taken, I'm happy to say that I'm voting for her not because she's female, not because she's not Donald Trump, but because she's clearly the best candidate for the job.
2
Right on, Paul Krugman! Hillary is the real Change candidate, and was all along, duh, while the creepy white men who have had their fingers on "wherever." from in women's faces/crotches to down their own pants and up their snorting noses, have been horrible to her. Women and children and other living creatures, even the pigs who tortured her, will benefit from the change.
7
Reading some of the comments here from left wing Democrats, disgruntled Bernie Bros etc. (the Republican voters are ipso facto Clinton haters) one does have to wonder how well equipped these folks are to cope with the messes that constitute real life. This is not Narnia or some other fairly land of idealized heroes and demonized villains. FDR was not Aslan. Lincoln not Siegfried. High politics and governance is an endless game of compromise, double talk, influence peddling, back scratching, deal making and rat ********. Bismarck's famous sausage making. It's the subject of endless novels from Phineas Finn to Primary Colors. You cannot have a practiced it for 40 years without having entered into this process. Every great Democratic leader (Washington, Lincoln, Gladstone, Wilson, Churchill, FDR, Johnson et al) carried a lot of baggage and/or was flawed to some degree. If you don't understand this you don't understand what politics is about or even human nature. As Chief Executive of the US we want some one who is competent and seasoned (and nasty when necessary). St Francis of Assisi would be a lousy president.
9
We don't want or need St. Francis. Isn't there a bit of room between him and Evil Personified? The usual false choice ... a HRC supporter specialty ....
2
I think Sec. Clinton is sort of an "old school" centrist politician at heart- When the Clintons were in the White House there seemed to be less antagonism and more deal cutting. Perhaps even to the extent that it infuriated Progressives- like welfare reform in 1994. Right now we are recovering from a horrific economic period, where in the left and the right there is more passion just because of all the problems due to the financial crisis- Sanders rightly wanted to reform the inequality and banking system, while the Republicans just have a lot of frustrated workers that the world has left behind (which fuels some of the intolerance).
A centrist like Sec Clinton is behind the times (the 90's seem so long ago), but also perhaps ahead of the times. As the economy recovers, some of the bitterness that fueled Trump will hopefully pass, and also if she fights for the middle class, with the help of a Democratic Congress, she can hopefully also stand up for some of the issues that Sen. Sanders believes in, and that made him so popular- banking reform and raising taxes on the upper class. Also reaching across the aisle and cooperating is something that I think is in her blood, unlike Trump.
The country needs to heal, and I think she is the right person for the Presidency at the right time.
A centrist like Sec Clinton is behind the times (the 90's seem so long ago), but also perhaps ahead of the times. As the economy recovers, some of the bitterness that fueled Trump will hopefully pass, and also if she fights for the middle class, with the help of a Democratic Congress, she can hopefully also stand up for some of the issues that Sen. Sanders believes in, and that made him so popular- banking reform and raising taxes on the upper class. Also reaching across the aisle and cooperating is something that I think is in her blood, unlike Trump.
The country needs to heal, and I think she is the right person for the Presidency at the right time.
4
In describing Hillary's gifts we should add her balance and judgement in handling the Wikileaks material which her critics continue to "tar" her with, in spite of the fact that these releases were "cherry-picked" and misleadingly fragmentary. Frankly I see nothing objectionable about a Western Hemisphere Common Market--think all of North and South America united in genuinely favorable trade agreements with borders managed but not closed to one another. Hillary pointed to energy exchange as the gist of her "open borders" position. But frankly I could see intelligent but heavy investment in the Western Hemisphere as yielding huge growth potential for the US and North America especially as a source of capital and expertise. It would probably require a kiind of Marshall Plan and adopting features of Northern European Social Democracy to get it done--given the challenges of illiteracy, etc. As these under-served populations finally acquire purchasing power there's no telling how much wealth could be generated and shared. Look at SE Asia two decades ago and look at it now. A working model exists. There are a lot of customers down there as well as up here. Ignoring the reactionary politics we'd have to overcome; but guess it's a "vision thing."
2
I agree.
While everyone has been attacking her for 'open borders', it seems as if they're not paying attention to the exact wording.
""My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere,” "
It's her DREAM. Not a plan. A Dream, which unlike the common use of 'dream pregnancy', dream house, or dream wedding, won't necessarily become actual. A dream is equally as unsubstantial as a wish. It's more likely to remain a wisp of a thought than to become reality.
MLK said in his famous speech, "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal." "
It was HIS dream which still hasn't become an actual fact throughout our entire nation.
So this constant accusation that Clinton will immediately open our borders based on her speech, is yet another extreme exaggeration used as a weapon against her. It's a lie for those willing to be duped yet again that Trump = truth & honesty, but Clinton is the worst of everything humanity has ever done.
Clinton is a decent, honorable woman who will help our nation. I'm with her.
While everyone has been attacking her for 'open borders', it seems as if they're not paying attention to the exact wording.
""My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere,” "
It's her DREAM. Not a plan. A Dream, which unlike the common use of 'dream pregnancy', dream house, or dream wedding, won't necessarily become actual. A dream is equally as unsubstantial as a wish. It's more likely to remain a wisp of a thought than to become reality.
MLK said in his famous speech, "I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal." "
It was HIS dream which still hasn't become an actual fact throughout our entire nation.
So this constant accusation that Clinton will immediately open our borders based on her speech, is yet another extreme exaggeration used as a weapon against her. It's a lie for those willing to be duped yet again that Trump = truth & honesty, but Clinton is the worst of everything humanity has ever done.
Clinton is a decent, honorable woman who will help our nation. I'm with her.
2
In full concurrence of Hillary's assessment. But perhaps not enough emphasis in a chronic American perception, that a Woman cannot possibly be as capable, as calm, and forthcoming than a man. We have a gender problem that needs to be eliminated by looking at ourselves, and hope to remove that whiff of hypocrisy and certain air of superiority, at odds with reality. Trump, a most vulgar bully, is the classic macho-man that is so puffed-up about his 'virtues' that he is a lost case. But the rest of us, tamer, still hang on to our ridiculous prejudices...while still hoping to be breast-fed by the same individual object of our disdain. Hillary must be celebrated, and welcomed, to save the Nation from itself.
6
I'm for almost anyone for president other than Trump, but Hillary Clinton is a more than acceptable option. The only other Democrat I would have preferred is Elizabeth Warren.
But let's keep any celebration until after the election. After all, Donald still is not sure how democracy works. And if he loses, he may yet have some of his storm troopers surrounding the White House on Nov. 9.
But let's keep any celebration until after the election. After all, Donald still is not sure how democracy works. And if he loses, he may yet have some of his storm troopers surrounding the White House on Nov. 9.
5
Thanks for writing this. Speaking as a woman who is fully supportive of Secretary Clinton, I am sooooooo tired of hearing her referred to as- the most untrustworthy & disliked candidate- ever!, cold and calculating, evil incarnate. You name it, she's been called it. If you repeats lies long enough and often enough, many will assume those lies are truths. Has she made mistakes? Yes. After more than 30 years in the political spot light her weaknesses are well known. But, those weaknesses do not cancel out all of the strengths she brings.
Clinton is smart, prepared, has policy proposals in place, is strategic and calm under pressure and is, without a doubt the most experienced candidate for president in modern history. It most certainly is not through a simple stroke of luck that she is poised to win on November 8.
Clinton is smart, prepared, has policy proposals in place, is strategic and calm under pressure and is, without a doubt the most experienced candidate for president in modern history. It most certainly is not through a simple stroke of luck that she is poised to win on November 8.
20
I agree about her strengths 100%. In 2008 when she was running against Obama I had the thought that were she running after 8 solid years of a Gore presidency she would have been a really great manager to finish the job. But after 8 years of bumbling actions and incoherent rhetoric from bush ii we definitely needed the soaring rhetoric, competence and vision that Barack Obama offered.
Now, we really can use her steady, if plodding,wonkishness and competence with the daily grind of government.
Now if We the People will just give her the rest of a government that will work at governing we might be able to get on with the 21st Century.
And she can put Obama on the Supreme Court.
Now, we really can use her steady, if plodding,wonkishness and competence with the daily grind of government.
Now if We the People will just give her the rest of a government that will work at governing we might be able to get on with the 21st Century.
And she can put Obama on the Supreme Court.
14
I wish the Democrats has picked someone else, and I wish HRC had looked into the future to see how much the stink of countless episodes, from cattle futures to Goldman Sachs speeches, would occupy the imagination of her opponents, (and privately worried even her supporters) and decided not to take the country through all that. I will awake relieved on November 9 that she is president, but deeply sad to say goodbye to the "no drama" years of Obama. I hope she turns over a new leaf -- listens more to Elizabeth Warren than to her husband's economic stable, and pledges herself internally to steer clear of anything, anything, that could feed her already shaky reputation. We need a boring, competent, president.
7
Sorry Mr. Krugman but there are a few of us who still remember what a fantastic job Mrs. Clinton's husband did as president, including presiding over the greatest expansion of middle class wealth in US history and were rooting for her to gain the white House under her own auspices. We felt like this knowing full well that Bill Clinton has always acknowledged that as far as their political partnership went, Hillary was the stronger, more tenacious of the pair and time again managed to refocus their efforts to create a workable Progressive agenda when things got rough. So as far as I'm concerned we in the 21st Century are about to experience the strongest, most intelligent, morally consistent and focused President we have had in many, many years.
9
Another grand slam by Krugtron at the bat.
4
Maybe it's time America grew up and stopped electing Hollywood heroes. Let's get someone in office who can do the job. Who cares if they fit some movie-land archetype.
And let's just have a moment of unbridled honesty. In my lifetime there has never been a President that lived up to his "image" with the possible exception of Barack Obama. They all have feet of clay. Because they are all human.
And let's just have a moment of unbridled honesty. In my lifetime there has never been a President that lived up to his "image" with the possible exception of Barack Obama. They all have feet of clay. Because they are all human.
6
The near-universal chant this year is "Trump is awful but I don't like Hillary either." This is evidence of years of underground Republican propaganda that have spread throughout the electorate that millions now believe. One example is the rumor that Hillary sits on the board of Monsanto, which is a flat-out lie, she has no ties to them. But the Repubs know what liberal America detests and they are adept at using submarine tactics and lies. Despite the fact that Benghazi and emails are chimeras, the rumors and propaganda have turned an honorable candidate into "we don't like her either," even among so-called thinking liberals.
8
HRC is battle-tested and eminently qualified to begin her job as our nation's next Commander-in-Chief on Jan. 20, 2017. Millions of Americans, myself included, are rooting hard for her to be successful.
8
Thank you for this column. I, and many women of my generation, see Hillary Clinton as a hero. She's smart, hardworking, experienced, and self-disciplined - also flawed and scarred, like the rest of us. She's tougher and better qualified than any of the other candidates we've seen in this endless election cycle. She is being treated differently, and judged differently than she would be if she were a man, and for many of us it's frustrating (but not surprising). Like Barack Obama, her presidency will be historic and I'm going to celebrate it.
7
In short, THANK YOU, Mr. Krugman. Some of us have known this all along.
7
We have to give credit where credit is due, and that is the tea party. They helped Hillary get to this point but kneecapping all the moderate republicans and driving the GOP so far to the right that moderate voters are afraid of Trump.
1
Mr. Krugman picked one of the weakest GOP hopefuls for his article. Suppose it had been Jeb Bush or John Kasich? I stopped reading when I couldn't get past his preference for low hanging fruit.
Oh, please. Are you totally ignoring Hillary's general approval numbers? She's the [I]second most disliked candidate[/I] since...well, ever, right?
I'm voting for her, of course, but we'll remind you of this column when she gets crushed in 2020.
Your column would be so much more interesting if you talked about economics, which rumor has it you know something about, instead of spouting political propaganda even you don't believe.
I'm voting for her, of course, but we'll remind you of this column when she gets crushed in 2020.
Your column would be so much more interesting if you talked about economics, which rumor has it you know something about, instead of spouting political propaganda even you don't believe.
3
Amen
3
Clinton is qualified.
Intelligent, hard-working, down to earth, experienced, knowledgeable, tough as nails, etc, etc
Trump is not.
I have never seen a sorrier excuse for a man in all my life.
Is this really that hard to see? Geez !!!
Intelligent, hard-working, down to earth, experienced, knowledgeable, tough as nails, etc, etc
Trump is not.
I have never seen a sorrier excuse for a man in all my life.
Is this really that hard to see? Geez !!!
13
That needed to said, and said eloquently. Let us hope that all of the vitriol she has had to put up with over the last 30 years has not made her so vindictive that she is unable to see a calm path forward. Obama, as did her husband, has righted a severely listing ship of state. We are poised to begin another rise on that path to a higher society, let us hope we take the high road.
7
I forget….when was it that the major stories about a candidate involved the sartorial...or stamina? When was it that "prepared" and, heaven forbid, "ambitious" became negative attributes in a presidential candidate?
Oh, right…when the candidate is a woman.
Oh, right…when the candidate is a woman.
13
Early on in the campaign Hillary did a media interview in her hometown of Park Ridge, Illinois. She sat in the town's lovely public library ( my aunt and uncle lived in Park Ridge for 10 years) in a chair where she had done homework assignments and read copiously. Hillary is not crooked but Homework Hillary. She comes prepared and is wicked smart. Women can't fall back on debate tactics where you drown out your opponent with bluster, deep-voiced interruptions, physical presence, etc. You have to know your facts cold, better than anyone else in the room and look for the perfect time to interject. It is hard work and difficult to pull off. Hillary is a master.
The GOP stopped believing or even valuing facts decades ago. It has placed an anchor around our country's ability to function or make rational decisions. Hopefully Hillary, the homework candidate, can bring back the value of facts to the governments's hallways.
The GOP stopped believing or even valuing facts decades ago. It has placed an anchor around our country's ability to function or make rational decisions. Hopefully Hillary, the homework candidate, can bring back the value of facts to the governments's hallways.
14
As K. points ot, Republicanism has been reduced to a few verbal tics and couple cliches. Sad. Truly sad.
4
Thank you Dr Krugman - please keep fact based columns such as this. I am tired of the media brain washing and drum beats, even at the NYT.
4
Amazing all the so-called progresses, Who believe the same for profit right wing propaganda machine that has been making lots of money telling lies about Hillary Clinton for the last 20 years - as do the ignorant ignoramuses in the conservative movement- it was originally marketed for- also believe- just amazing .
4
Hillary did not beat Bernie by cheating. She beat him because people liked her better, and enthusiastically voted for her, by a margin of about 4 million. She's beating Trump the same way, because she speaks to the best in us, not the worst. The posters to this thread who claim they will either "hold their noses" or vote Trump or third party justify their choices by repeating, ad nauseam, the same accusations made against her by opponents on both the left and the right, in almost literally the same language, as if memorized by rote. They take out-of-context statements, emails, and other tidbits from Wikileaks, and assume they're the gospel because of course, if it's on the Internet, it must be true. (As a librarian, I look forward to the day when the word "Internet" becomes synonymous with "unreliable source.")
So, as someone who, as a board member of my condominium, has stood for election every year for the past fifteen years, I offer one observation. Our association is small, but you can find there every shade of opinion, from Bernie Sanders leftist all the way to Trumpian right winger. Most of our discourse has nothing to do with national politics, but sometimes our arguments about the best way forward for us can be just as contentious. I began to realize something, after my eighth or ninth time standing for election, and this, I think, is just as true for the American people as a whole as it is for our building. People do not vote for people they don't like. Period.
So, as someone who, as a board member of my condominium, has stood for election every year for the past fifteen years, I offer one observation. Our association is small, but you can find there every shade of opinion, from Bernie Sanders leftist all the way to Trumpian right winger. Most of our discourse has nothing to do with national politics, but sometimes our arguments about the best way forward for us can be just as contentious. I began to realize something, after my eighth or ninth time standing for election, and this, I think, is just as true for the American people as a whole as it is for our building. People do not vote for people they don't like. Period.
2
"Hillary did not beat Bernie by cheating. She beat him because people liked her better, and enthusiastically voted for her, by a margin of about 4 million."
There was blatant anti semitism in the south where African Americans voters asked, who Bernie? Does he even believe in Jesus Christ? Don't believe, ask the Black Congressional Caucus.
There was blatant anti semitism in the south where African Americans voters asked, who Bernie? Does he even believe in Jesus Christ? Don't believe, ask the Black Congressional Caucus.
2
Secretary Hillary Clinton does have the national security bona fides that any of the GOP Cast of Characters the were trumped by Trump. None of them could cite specifics about Obama's Economic , Health Care or other Plans, or cited specific facts as to why Global Warming is a hoax.
While Clinton is planning to continue a continuation of the Economic Recovery, using both fiscal and monetary tools. Back in 1980, when he debated Ronald Reagan, he suggested that Supply Side Economics--actually Mythology--was really Voodoo Economics. Bush 41 nailed it.
And free college or vo tech is the best investment that a nation can make. Prepare our youth for tomorrow's jobs, not those of the 1980s. And unburden them from being tied to repaying v voluminous debt.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
While Clinton is planning to continue a continuation of the Economic Recovery, using both fiscal and monetary tools. Back in 1980, when he debated Ronald Reagan, he suggested that Supply Side Economics--actually Mythology--was really Voodoo Economics. Bush 41 nailed it.
And free college or vo tech is the best investment that a nation can make. Prepare our youth for tomorrow's jobs, not those of the 1980s. And unburden them from being tied to repaying v voluminous debt.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
4
For those who are not predisposed to hate Hillary Clinton, her speech at the Alfred E. Smith dinner Thursday night highlighted another of her political assets: a fine sense of humor and the ability to deliver a joke. Contrast her delivery--the casual shrugs, the finessed pauses, the changes in facial expressions and inflection---with Donald Trump's stiff style--a monotone delivered mostly with his head looking down, reading from a script--and you can see why she is pulling ahead in the final weeks of the campaign.
Similarly, Clinton showed an ability to laugh at herself, unlike Trump who sat coiled up through most of Clinton's speech at the Smith dinner, and who has complained about his portrayal on Saturday Night Live. For a man who starred in a television show and who prides himself on his celebrity status, Trump displays no sense of humor. Then again, that is a common failing among those who lack thoughtfulness and empathy.
Similarly, Clinton showed an ability to laugh at herself, unlike Trump who sat coiled up through most of Clinton's speech at the Smith dinner, and who has complained about his portrayal on Saturday Night Live. For a man who starred in a television show and who prides himself on his celebrity status, Trump displays no sense of humor. Then again, that is a common failing among those who lack thoughtfulness and empathy.
6
I think she would have had a harder time against Kasich if he were nominated. She might even lose against Kasich.
Alas, the ignorance of the GOP and their supporters have prevented that possibility from happening.
Alas, the ignorance of the GOP and their supporters have prevented that possibility from happening.
I can't wait for the real Hillary Clinton to be more in evidence once she wins the election. Right now she knows there are packs of press, right and left, just waiting for words they can twist, or call her on. The NYT over a year and a half ago assigned a "gotcha" person, someone full time to follow her and take any word that may be slightly out of place and blow it up into a story. Then they criticize her for being "scripted."
The picking apart of the un-vetted Russian e-mails printed and quoted out of context show it is still going on. Random thoughts of campaign workers she probably doesn't even know are assigned to her. As are DNC workers she has no control over.
I believe Hillary will be a fabulous president. She may be one term, because the "Progressives" (these are the kids who couldn't figure out how to register for their primary but are now lecturing everyone on world trade policy) are planning for her demise. Thank you Bernie for creating a group of people who talk of voting for Johnson, 180 degrees from everything you believe in. This would be on "principle."
But I can't wait to see her unfettered. November 8 can't come soon enough!
The picking apart of the un-vetted Russian e-mails printed and quoted out of context show it is still going on. Random thoughts of campaign workers she probably doesn't even know are assigned to her. As are DNC workers she has no control over.
I believe Hillary will be a fabulous president. She may be one term, because the "Progressives" (these are the kids who couldn't figure out how to register for their primary but are now lecturing everyone on world trade policy) are planning for her demise. Thank you Bernie for creating a group of people who talk of voting for Johnson, 180 degrees from everything you believe in. This would be on "principle."
But I can't wait to see her unfettered. November 8 can't come soon enough!
7
Lost in all this commentary is the fact that the Donald performed a public and patriotic service in demolishing the Republicans' mediocre slate of candidates. In particular, he dismissed the dangerous and thoroughly mediocre Bush clan from the stage of Presidential aspirants. Now, he is completing his patriotic tour of duty by destroying himself as a candidate. Now we'll see whether the Republican Party can implode and turn itself into something worthwhile.
2
HRC at the wealthy Catholic bash in NYC, the Al Smith dinner/fundraiser! A master-class in poise in the face of a demented loser. So self-confident she has no problem making fun of herself. Trump, not so much. Indeed his joke about being like the carpenter from Bethlehem sounded more like a boast than a self-roast.
4
To the Trumpies, I must say: This is America, it may not be the white America that you want to live in, but this is America, SO LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!!
To the Clinton Crew: I will vote democratic down the line this year, but it is conditional on your follow up to campaign pledges. If your tone favors big money over the middle class after the election, I will withdraw support. This means I will support Elizabeth Warren or her like in 2020.
To the Clinton Crew: I will vote democratic down the line this year, but it is conditional on your follow up to campaign pledges. If your tone favors big money over the middle class after the election, I will withdraw support. This means I will support Elizabeth Warren or her like in 2020.
2
We watched during the Republican primary as Trump knocked, belittled, mocked and worse all of his 17 opponents. Lucky for us, Hillary is as strong and brilliant as they come. Unlike the 17 men, she was able to get it done. He is finally being seen for who he is and what he's done. HRC stands tall as she is bullied by this world class bully, then seemingly with ease, takes him down. Thank God.
12
I've been waiting to vote for this formidable, hugely talented woman for 12 years. I can't wait for November 8th - the moment it's announced: Hillary Clinton, Madam President!
If those who oppose her will simply give her a chance, she can help us to heal the very deep divisions in our country.
If those who oppose her will simply give her a chance, she can help us to heal the very deep divisions in our country.
3
I voted for Bernie in the primary but I can say, well said, Mr. Krugman.
3
I adore HRC and always have, but I believe she would be losing to any conventional male Republican. Most people vote to confirm their biases, and most people are a bit sexist--it's just that this year, there's no rationalization available for a fairly conscientious (but slightly sexist) person to vote against her. People can't just tell themselves, "I can't stand her, and anyway I'm sure this guy will do a decent job."
3
Mrs. Clinton is not perfect and indeed most politicians have some kind of negative characteristics, but for what counts, she has the important qualities to make an outstanding president. Now is not the time to judge her abilities. After her likely victory in the election, it is how she acts in office that is important, and I share Mr. Krugman's high esteem and hopes for a stellar, fiscally responsible, ethically grounded, patriotic administration.
6
Watching her talk to people in the room after the Al Smith dinner last night you could just see how engaged she was with each and every person. Just like after the last debate. The body language compared to Trump's quick exits says a lot. Again, not to be overconfident, but, she already is growing in the job as President and this is what the country needs and not "Trump TV".
3
I disagree with Hillary Clinton on Donald Trump's signature issues: immigration, and crime. Nevertheless I see in her characteristics I do not see in Trump: intellect, maturity, knowledge, and experience.
I also agree with her on a whole lot of other issues, like raising taxes on the rich.
Vote for Hillary. We need an adult in the White House, not a randy, old adolescent.
I also agree with her on a whole lot of other issues, like raising taxes on the rich.
Vote for Hillary. We need an adult in the White House, not a randy, old adolescent.
7
Remember, back in 1992, during Bill Clinton's campaign for President, many said that due to Hiillary's impressive resume, we would be getting "two for one"?
Well, now we can get the other side of that two-fer.
And that's a GOOD thing.
Well, now we can get the other side of that two-fer.
And that's a GOOD thing.
6
Thank you for acknowledging that those of us who like Hillary aren't out of our minds! I was a huge Obama supporter and adored everything about him. But I like Hillary for a different reason -- she is a nose-to-the-grindstone policy wonk who loves to engage in the back-slapping work of politics, which is what gets things done. Obama wasn't into that, but it's necessary in Washington. I like that she knows how politics works (it's all about people). And I like that her candidacy hasn't been a swirl of emotion and hope. We needed that 8 years ago, but today we need pragmatism and political realism.
8
Just imagine Prime Minister Theresa May, Chancellor Angela Merkel and Predident Hillary Clinton sitting st a table together sorting out world affairs. Yes, Clinton is formidable and thank goodness she has had the fortitude and persistence to get to the White House. We need her.
7
Yes. Thank you.
4
Same pattern of Republican disingenuous behavior holds for Trump's rejection of the tradition of peaceful transition of power--Republican party leaders did everything they could to de-legitimize Obama's presidency from its start. Trump is just doing the same thing publicly and even before losing the election.
3
Yes, Clinton has been impressive at the debates. It has done a lot to counteract the negative image in the media. After every debate (including with Sanders) my esteem of her has increased.
BUT, I don't think this statement is correct: "She truly cares about her signature issues, and believes in the solutions she’s pushing."
That would be a correct statement about Sanders. My impression is still that she is more calculating and pragmatic. Case in point: here sudden flip-flop on trade. This is where the 'lying' part comes in: a career of changing opinions -- not because of getting wiser, but because of changing winds. This is not unusual for politicians, but is perhaps ill-fitting for the current times.
BUT, I don't think this statement is correct: "She truly cares about her signature issues, and believes in the solutions she’s pushing."
That would be a correct statement about Sanders. My impression is still that she is more calculating and pragmatic. Case in point: here sudden flip-flop on trade. This is where the 'lying' part comes in: a career of changing opinions -- not because of getting wiser, but because of changing winds. This is not unusual for politicians, but is perhaps ill-fitting for the current times.
1
I started out being lukewarm about Hillary. My biggest problem was, and I have to admit still is, the intimations of dynasty. Twenty-four years, so far, of a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. And then there is the unsettling idea of a former president becoming, for the lack of a better term, presidential consort.
But, all of that said, this process has revealed a candidate more qualified than any of her dynastic predecessors. I was absolutely in awe of her testimony before the Benghazi investigation committee, Her steely demeanor, her almost unfathomable control of facts, her brilliant resistance to all the attempts to bait her all combined to reveal a woman (yes, a woman!) who could be the equal or superior of any current actor on the world stage.
This campaign has been devastating and it will take a long time for the Republic to recover, but it would take much longer without such a formidable leader picking up the pieces and putting us back together.
But, all of that said, this process has revealed a candidate more qualified than any of her dynastic predecessors. I was absolutely in awe of her testimony before the Benghazi investigation committee, Her steely demeanor, her almost unfathomable control of facts, her brilliant resistance to all the attempts to bait her all combined to reveal a woman (yes, a woman!) who could be the equal or superior of any current actor on the world stage.
This campaign has been devastating and it will take a long time for the Republic to recover, but it would take much longer without such a formidable leader picking up the pieces and putting us back together.
2
I totally agree. I watched most of that 11-hr Benghazi hearing and came away with the knowledge that Mrs. Clinton has the experience, skills, and temperament to be the President of the United States. As you note, her authenticity and passion are also key qualifications. I am looking forward to 4, perhaps 8 years of her leadership.
5
Trump triumphed over his Republican rivals by beating them at their own game (clarified to its crudest elements.) He freely highlighted the hypocrisies of Rubio and Cruz and the rest of the crowd who adorned themselves with a veneer of optimism to conceal their darker undercurrents... except Kasich who held to his own quixotic path.
Trump could not beat Hilary at her own game because he can't play her game. Like any politician Clinton has her own share of hypocrisies, yet they pale in scale compared to remarkably consistent positions held over her lifetime (some of which I disagree with or I feel need to be realigned to new priorities.)
It is not written of, or talked of much - yet third party candidates may garner a historically sizable share of the popular vote this election. Between support for Trump, 3rd parties, and Sanders voters who sit this round out, Clinton must know there is work to do - the centrist paradigm of the Democratic Party needs updating.
If there is a silver lining to this election spectacle - it is that Clinton will have learned better to outmaneuver those darker, less rational forces out there.
Trump could not beat Hilary at her own game because he can't play her game. Like any politician Clinton has her own share of hypocrisies, yet they pale in scale compared to remarkably consistent positions held over her lifetime (some of which I disagree with or I feel need to be realigned to new priorities.)
It is not written of, or talked of much - yet third party candidates may garner a historically sizable share of the popular vote this election. Between support for Trump, 3rd parties, and Sanders voters who sit this round out, Clinton must know there is work to do - the centrist paradigm of the Democratic Party needs updating.
If there is a silver lining to this election spectacle - it is that Clinton will have learned better to outmaneuver those darker, less rational forces out there.
1
I think Jon Stewart said that he wants a President who is embarrassing superior. So we have our choice, one who is embarrassingly superior or one that is just embarrassing.
3
I agree. Also, I think she shares similar traits to Margret Thatcher at times ; strong, smart and focused.
I agree. Thank you.
2
She has really won me over. I did not like her at all as FLOTUS. I guess we all thought she was just a little too much. But she has really impressed me during this vicious, horrible, draining election cycle. Put up against a raving lunatic, attacked every single day by his despicable campaign surrogates and the Breitbart press, she has remained calm, cool, and collected while still showing signs that yes, there is a human being under that Hillary Clinton persona we've seen for years. I still go back to that second debate where her terribly weak Strongman (ha!) opponent lined up her husband's mistresses in front of her. She showed enormous strength and proved to me that she really can do this job. I'm With Her.
6
I have been puzzled by the vehemence of the hatred of Mrs. Clinton from the left and the right. Thank you for writing this piece. I thought I was missing something but maybe it is the other way around!
5
Hillary Clinton is only where she is through a random stroke of bad luck for the country.
The Clintons back in the White House is a film noir version of "Back To The Future" without the humor delivered by eccentric scientist friend Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd).
The Clintons back in the White House is a film noir version of "Back To The Future" without the humor delivered by eccentric scientist friend Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd).
1
she wins because americans do not realize or close their eyes to the fact that the the US is insolvent. Trump is the perfect example of killing the messenger, although he did a miserable job of presenting the message.
3
If the US in insolvent, why elect a president who filed for bankruptcy six times? And if all the rumors have any credibility, he is personally in debt to a tune of around $650 million, and to some very dubious business partners...Russian energy oligarchs.
One mustn't forget that the DNC threw Bernie Sanders under the bus, so Hillary's "coronation" is not without proverbial Democratic blood spilled. And Trump is what he is. We do have the bottom of the barrel from both Parties. And that's the challenge of our time: to find people for whom the expression "honest politician" is not an oxymoron. But the way the whole system is financed, perhaps corruption is inevitable. That's the real travesty.
3
Bernie lost because millions of us who knew Hillary for decades absolutely support her. It is delusional to think that the DNC had anything to do with that. I don't think you will hear that rationale from progressives who have been around for years. They are aware of, what a rep from Texas just said on TV, "campaign chatter." Hopefully you younger voters will stay involved and continue to learn and grow. But honestly, you have a long way to go. A couple of slogans about billionaires and learning a few terms like "republican lite, and triangulate" does not mark you as having a real sense of what is happening in this country. Please stay involved.
1
And for anyone who thinks Paul Ryan is a possible "other, stronger candidate", never forget how this so-called "deficit hawk" has voted for trillions in deficit spending in the Bush years.
Mr. Krugman always seems to forget this. He's not a fan of Mr. Ryan, but an economist should cite Mr. Ryan's votes on spending as fact number one when discussing Mr. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan has said that he was pressured into those votes so how much of a deficit hawk is he, or is that only when there's a Democratic president?
Mr. Krugman always seems to forget this. He's not a fan of Mr. Ryan, but an economist should cite Mr. Ryan's votes on spending as fact number one when discussing Mr. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan has said that he was pressured into those votes so how much of a deficit hawk is he, or is that only when there's a Democratic president?
1
I've already discounted voting for Trump, and neither of the 3rd party candidates are capable of being president, but something about Hillary and Clinton Inc. holds me back from feeling good about finally deciding to vote for her. And while we may dodge a bullet by electing her president, I don't hold out much hope for changing the things that must be changed.
HRC is the better candidate. BUT the good people of the US should not hold out hopes for anything good to happen during her the Presidency. While Professor K. waxes eloquent in many of his blogs about the virtues of HRC, she is never to be trusted.
I shall today vote for her as early voting started yesterday for my district. I do so believing that the evil side of the Clintons will be ever present on 9th November, nothing HRC has said during the campaign will matter, the private versus public will ring true. Bankers, big pharma, the frackers, and lobbyists will all pop the champagne corks. The latter just saw income opportunities go through the roof. There will be a lot of public talk but behind the scenes much catering to special interests will rule the day. Clinton Foundation donors, as the Donald has said will call in the favors their donations have purchased. On this front there was no pre-election chicanery, it begins on 9th November, money saved for their rainy day.
I fervently hope I am wrong and Professor K is the wiser of the two of us. As always time will tell.
I shall today vote for her as early voting started yesterday for my district. I do so believing that the evil side of the Clintons will be ever present on 9th November, nothing HRC has said during the campaign will matter, the private versus public will ring true. Bankers, big pharma, the frackers, and lobbyists will all pop the champagne corks. The latter just saw income opportunities go through the roof. There will be a lot of public talk but behind the scenes much catering to special interests will rule the day. Clinton Foundation donors, as the Donald has said will call in the favors their donations have purchased. On this front there was no pre-election chicanery, it begins on 9th November, money saved for their rainy day.
I fervently hope I am wrong and Professor K is the wiser of the two of us. As always time will tell.
Hillary wins only because she is the lesser evil. That is her whole campaign, that the other guy is awful.
That means we elect an evil, merely lesser than "Putin, Russia Is Coming, Hitler, fascist, wannabe dictator, enemy of democracy" all of which has been said repeatedly, not an exaggeration, and which many of her supporters genuinely believe is true.
Even if it is true, many of them are holding their noses to do something they know will turn out badly, just less badly.
Some "win." For her, but not for us.
That means we elect an evil, merely lesser than "Putin, Russia Is Coming, Hitler, fascist, wannabe dictator, enemy of democracy" all of which has been said repeatedly, not an exaggeration, and which many of her supporters genuinely believe is true.
Even if it is true, many of them are holding their noses to do something they know will turn out badly, just less badly.
Some "win." For her, but not for us.
9
Amen, Mr. Krugman. Among the many sobering aspects of this election is the startlingly high percentage of women inclined to vote for Mr. Trump. Nevertheless, I'm optimistic that more women in the halls of congress - as well as the White House - can begin to heal the divide in the US, and move us forward.
3
Thanks for your sanity and common sense. Now if you could just fix the rest of your profession, my friends who support Trump out desperation might be swayed. REH
Paul, it's just a shame she hasn't won yet. The Pundits have been wrong so many times, let's hope they are right on Hillary winning.
1
Thanks, Mr. Krugman, for saying some positive - and true - things about Hillary. I'm so tired of hearing or reading comments that start with mentioning her negatives: "She's not trustworthy," or "She's not well liked." I see a flawed candidate, too, but I also see a hard worker, a good listener, and a brilliant mind, someone who wants to put her energies into helping our country.
Maybe the tail end of this grueling campaign will allow us to finally focus on Hillary's strengths, for a change.
Maybe the tail end of this grueling campaign will allow us to finally focus on Hillary's strengths, for a change.
6
people say she delivered memorized lines during the debate like a robot... maybe they were memorized, but let me ask you, could you commit to memory so much, to fill a 90 minute debate with plenty left over, and deliver it seamlessly like that? she was ready for everything! her intellect is impressive to me. i don't care if she's not an impassioned speaker. i want a leader who can bring that much knowing and ingenuity to decision-making. i would be so proud to have her be my President!
7
Let's not overlook the great debt Mrs. Clinton owes to the New York Times and the unwavering support of it's Editorial Board and "news" desks. The Times has succumbed to partisanship over journalism in it's failure to hold her accountable. No doubt Mr. Trump's short political career is thankfully almost over but sadly, so is the Time's reputation as any kind of reliable source of responsible journalism.
4
Thank you for saying what needed to be said. Secretary Clinton is a strong leader.
And, although never discussed openly, as it isn't politically correct or politically expedient, this election is about gender...first female candidate from a major party vs. a change candidate who is losing, for the most part, by how he views and treats women.
Now that's karma in action.
And, although never discussed openly, as it isn't politically correct or politically expedient, this election is about gender...first female candidate from a major party vs. a change candidate who is losing, for the most part, by how he views and treats women.
Now that's karma in action.
3
In 1992, my brother, who is a Little Rock lawyer, opined that "down here we think the wrong Clinton is running." It appears that we are about to see whether he was correct.
6
A 25 year smear campaign will do that.
5
Thank you for so cogently saying what has needed to be said for a very long time. Hillary Clinton is not just the lesser of two evils. She is more knowledgeable, capable and competent than any other candidate running this year or for many years. And, she cares passionately about issues that matter or should matter to all of us if we care about our children's and grandchildren's future. I'm with the "nasty woman."
6
Mr. Krugman touches on something important here, the idea that any other Republican who was running against Trump would have been a better choice. Not true, as Eliot Weinberger pointed out in a piece in the London Review of Books in July. All of these numerous contestants in the primary were equally unsatisfactory in many ways, from Rick Santorum to Jen Bush, from Ted Cruz to Dr. Ben Carson, from Marco Rubio to Mike Huckabee. Just cast your mind back in time, and recall the absurdity of it.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked
3
Why is Hillary winning? Because she is a fearless, sharp, devoted, capable patriot who has not only survived but flourished despite decades of Republicans hitting her with every charge possible, no matter how outrageous or half-baked the accusations.
9
I've said from the beginning of Trump's ascendancy over his Republican competitors that he is a trickster figure and you can't defeat a trickster figure with logic or facts or gravitas. The only way you can defeat a trickster figure is by out-tricking him. In three triumphal debates, Hillary Clinton followed my advice and out-tricked Donald Trump.
3
Nailed it -- she's winning because she's the best candidate and no matter who the Republicans chose to run, she'd still be the winner.
4
Amen.
amen
Because Americans don't want to become a fascist dictatorship!
4
Thanks for this column. I so appreciate people who do their homework and are prepared, more so than the orators and crowd pleasers. The debates have really allowed this quality of Clinton to shine through. Let's hope everybody shows up at the polls and gives her a big margin.
4
Yes! Hillary Clinton is sui generis. We have pundits with teacups trying to take the measure of this woman. They mostly fail spectacularly. Paul Krugman understands. Given sufficient congressional support, and she is likely to have it for at least her first two years, Hillary Clinton will be a marvelous president.
3
Hillary has endured much, much more than any candidate I can remember. The concept of false equivalence really does apply to Hilary's candidacy. If anyone wants to check her level of honesty against Donald Trump's, for example, the appropriate comparison would be to have a left-leaning computer geek hack and release the last fifteen months of emails among The Trump political brain trust. Let's see if that turns up anything Donald might wish to retract.
10
The CBS News last night featured an interview with seven women after the debate, three supporters of each candidate and one undecided.
It was a telling, and frightful, exercise, as all seven appeared reasonably well educated and intelligent.
When the moderator asked for opinions about some idiotic statement Trump made, the Trumpistas said "Oh, that's just Donald being Donald."
Finally the undecided voter said she had decided: Trump. Moderator: "Why" "Oh, I can't trust Hillary"
The obvious next question wasn't asked: "But you can trust Trump?"
It will be very difficult to draw back from the abyss when the 40% or so of Americans justify their vote for Trump based on the logic seen here.
It was a telling, and frightful, exercise, as all seven appeared reasonably well educated and intelligent.
When the moderator asked for opinions about some idiotic statement Trump made, the Trumpistas said "Oh, that's just Donald being Donald."
Finally the undecided voter said she had decided: Trump. Moderator: "Why" "Oh, I can't trust Hillary"
The obvious next question wasn't asked: "But you can trust Trump?"
It will be very difficult to draw back from the abyss when the 40% or so of Americans justify their vote for Trump based on the logic seen here.
10
Trump routinely says things that get him into trouble. Hillary is circumspect and realizes that spontaneous utterances ("basket of deplorables") can get her into trouble.
Thus it's easier to believe Trump is saying what he actually believes, and in that sense, is more trustworthy. This is very important to people who feel they've been lied to by politicians. I'm not saying Trump's words make sense, just that he's not parsing them.
Thus it's easier to believe Trump is saying what he actually believes, and in that sense, is more trustworthy. This is very important to people who feel they've been lied to by politicians. I'm not saying Trump's words make sense, just that he's not parsing them.
Wait, why didn't she win in 2008? Why did she lose to an inexperienced 1st term senator? She wasn't a strong candidate then, and she only looks strong now because Trump is without a doubt, the worst candidate in the history of, well, ever.
8
I do think that the press (I speak as an alumnus) just gets sicks of a candidate. We're tired of Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton, and we surely do have a herd instinct as to piling on when "wisdom" about a person is received. However, the pundits did not make people distrust and dislike her. It might be unreasonable, and it certainly is unfair and probably misogynistic, but it is a fact.
3
Last night, to a room full of Catholic Republicans, Hillary quoted Pope Francis whose phrases resonated petitions and platforms from her own campaign. I may be a Methodist, she said, but I am actually putting into action the teachings of your Pope. She wins because because beyond all the noise used to drown her out, she can articulate a core philosophy of service and morality: a politics for the People.
13
Hear, hear. Well put Mr. Krugman
7
Hillary has shown that she is a brilliant strategist. These 3 Presidential debate will be required study for many women candidate and young debaters for years if not decades to come. I hope that she and her team already have a strategy in place to win the Senate, the House, and other down ballot races.
7
Thank you, Paul, for getting around to the fact that none of the other potential Republican nominees would have fared much better against HRC than Trump.
Can't you just see the negative ads that would have been run against Rubio -- where he gets called out by Christie for his endlessly looping rote speech? How about his zero accomplishments in the Senate? Or even showing up to do his Senate job? Then there's lying Christie -- BridgeGate, anyone? Creating fiscal catastrophe in NJ? Now move on to Cruz -- with his fellow Republicans calling him the most reviled person in the Senate and swearing they wouldn't give him a hand if he were prostrate and bleeding in the street? How about Fiorina -- killing jobs by the thousands? Destroying her company and getting fired? Or Ben Carson -- who lied about his accomplishments in his autobiography? Knows nothing about foreign or domestic policy? The list goes on . . .
HRC would have won this election regardless of which of the 17 other pathetic or just plain strange Republican candidates would have been chosen to run against her.
I'm with her.
Can't you just see the negative ads that would have been run against Rubio -- where he gets called out by Christie for his endlessly looping rote speech? How about his zero accomplishments in the Senate? Or even showing up to do his Senate job? Then there's lying Christie -- BridgeGate, anyone? Creating fiscal catastrophe in NJ? Now move on to Cruz -- with his fellow Republicans calling him the most reviled person in the Senate and swearing they wouldn't give him a hand if he were prostrate and bleeding in the street? How about Fiorina -- killing jobs by the thousands? Destroying her company and getting fired? Or Ben Carson -- who lied about his accomplishments in his autobiography? Knows nothing about foreign or domestic policy? The list goes on . . .
HRC would have won this election regardless of which of the 17 other pathetic or just plain strange Republican candidates would have been chosen to run against her.
I'm with her.
7
(Borrowing from an old Steve Martin routine:)
Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you.
Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you.
Hillary Clinton a formidable figure?
No doubt.
She, like her husband, excels at the back room politics game. Thats how she sewed up the vast majority of Democratic superdelegates before a vote was cast.
That's not a criticism! If a candidate I liked excelled at that, I would be thrilled.
But she's a formidable figure that's been wrong a lot.
I don't want a hawk for President- she is one. Her support of the Iraq war was a colossal error and her performance as SOS demonstrate that she didn't learn a lot from that.
Her economic proposals are exactly what you would expect to get from a moderate Republican pre-Reagan. Fantastic. Extraordinary economic inequality and anemic growth and her solution is a very reluctant 12 dollar an hour minimum wage.
Is anyone convinced that she cares about the non-Wall Street set? Not I.
Clinton spent the summer fundraising with billionaires in the Hamptons. They gave her lots of money so that she could win and help the middle class and poor. Ha! Want to buy a bridge?
24 years of Bush/Clinton coming right up!
Just what America needs...
No doubt.
She, like her husband, excels at the back room politics game. Thats how she sewed up the vast majority of Democratic superdelegates before a vote was cast.
That's not a criticism! If a candidate I liked excelled at that, I would be thrilled.
But she's a formidable figure that's been wrong a lot.
I don't want a hawk for President- she is one. Her support of the Iraq war was a colossal error and her performance as SOS demonstrate that she didn't learn a lot from that.
Her economic proposals are exactly what you would expect to get from a moderate Republican pre-Reagan. Fantastic. Extraordinary economic inequality and anemic growth and her solution is a very reluctant 12 dollar an hour minimum wage.
Is anyone convinced that she cares about the non-Wall Street set? Not I.
Clinton spent the summer fundraising with billionaires in the Hamptons. They gave her lots of money so that she could win and help the middle class and poor. Ha! Want to buy a bridge?
24 years of Bush/Clinton coming right up!
Just what America needs...
6
Things were pretty good during moderate pre Reagan republican rule. I think I'd take Ike
As odious are Trump's comments on rigged elections, it was the Bernie supporters who began this meme. A solid majority of Democrats voting in the primaries wanted Hillary, yet many Bernie supporters had it during the primaries, and some would still have it, that she stole the nomination. Now, with Trump's gutter politics, these supporters have a new champion in the persona of the Republican nominee.
3
Sure, Hillary is "genuine".
A genuine bonanza for the .1% and the globalist agenda (and a few favored sycophants).
And a genuine disaster for what remains of the constitutional republic and the rest of us.
A genuine bonanza for the .1% and the globalist agenda (and a few favored sycophants).
And a genuine disaster for what remains of the constitutional republic and the rest of us.
7
I didn't know Secretary Clinton in college, but we were in the same Wellesley dorm for a year. She graduated with all kinds of honors and I moved on to a co-ed university in California that suited me better. Every one of my classmates from that year there has achieved wonderful things--they are doctors and lawyers and professors and CEOs. So it's no surprise to me that she is smart and capable and able to think on her feet.
What I wasn't expecting was how well she performed at last night's Al Smith event in New York. She was charming and refreshing and, yes, Presidential.
I hope that--beyond the debate videos--everyone has a chance to compare the candidates' performances at that event. Clinton made me proud.
What I wasn't expecting was how well she performed at last night's Al Smith event in New York. She was charming and refreshing and, yes, Presidential.
I hope that--beyond the debate videos--everyone has a chance to compare the candidates' performances at that event. Clinton made me proud.
10
The dimension I like most about Hillary is her capacity to wax all the way up to something like a genuine spiritual mode. You saw this last night at the Smith dinner. She cut across to the Catholics in attendance, made a bridge, and saturated viewers with the ideal of bonding over shared ideals. Religion became, thanks to her own spirituality, an exemplar of peaceful, constructive harmony. Coupled with a maternal, biological instinct and perspective there is some chance that human kind will begin a necessary transition to science based husbandry of the planet. It might prove to be ultimately a lot more fun to be in love with one another than at war.
5
I would like HRC to defeat Trump decisively.
But it is important the Dems do not be overconfident.
TRump has a 40% hard core support that has not seemed to decrease despite current revelations about TRump's sexual misconduct.
Turnout is important.
Lack of Dem turnout in 2014 led to the GOP victories.
There are many Dems who are disillusioned with HRC and and may either not vote or might vote for Stein and or Johnson.
Whether Nader should have run in 2000 is a separate discussion.
Nader received about 97,000 votes in Florida in 2000 which was much more than the amount about 550 votes by which Bush beat Gore in Florida in 2000.
Protest vote at the LOCAL level but this PRESIDENTIAL election [given the terrible nature of TRump] is too important to risk a Trump victory.
Dems must come out and vote.
But it is important the Dems do not be overconfident.
TRump has a 40% hard core support that has not seemed to decrease despite current revelations about TRump's sexual misconduct.
Turnout is important.
Lack of Dem turnout in 2014 led to the GOP victories.
There are many Dems who are disillusioned with HRC and and may either not vote or might vote for Stein and or Johnson.
Whether Nader should have run in 2000 is a separate discussion.
Nader received about 97,000 votes in Florida in 2000 which was much more than the amount about 550 votes by which Bush beat Gore in Florida in 2000.
Protest vote at the LOCAL level but this PRESIDENTIAL election [given the terrible nature of TRump] is too important to risk a Trump victory.
Dems must come out and vote.
6
Bravo, Mr. Krugman. Finally an article lauding Mrs. Clinton's obvious strengths, rather than focusing obsessively on her failings. I am voting for Mrs. Clinton because she is the strongest candidate and not because she is the lesser of two evils. I am tired of the incredible amount of negativity that has been deployed against her during this very strange campaign by both the left and the right, and I firmly believe that she is the type of centrist candidate the country needs. To my thinking, she represents some of the best America has to offer-- strength, obvious political skills, and a focused determination. I am proud to be with her.
5
Amen
Once again this column, like many others, highlights a fundamental truth when it comes to Hillary Clinton. Because she is a woman, she is being held to a different standard. And to her credit, she has risen to that standard. More power to her and all other women, whether in politics or not, who face the same un-level playing field.
6
Hear Hear Paul!!!
1
But she is where she is because of random stroke of her good luck: Trump! She will be the first presidential candidate sworn in by backing up to the inaugural rostrum, and reacing backwards to put her hand on the bible.
If she were a formidable figure, why has Bill continued his dallying and assignations these many years? She blusters, but she doesn't make sense. She is like a small tornado, a dust devil, full of sound and fury, and signfiyting nothing.
Nothing is what we are going to get. Four years of it and ample opportunity to wonder what in the world were we thinking.
If she were a formidable figure, why has Bill continued his dallying and assignations these many years? She blusters, but she doesn't make sense. She is like a small tornado, a dust devil, full of sound and fury, and signfiyting nothing.
Nothing is what we are going to get. Four years of it and ample opportunity to wonder what in the world were we thinking.
5
Clinton lost to Barack Obama in 2008 and she almost lost to a socialist this year. She's so brilliant that she used an email server in her garage.
Krugman wants a cabinet position, it is clear.
Krugman wants a cabinet position, it is clear.
5
Great column, as always- You need to articulate this on "This Week with George" when you get invited back!
The Obama election begat the Tea Party..........If/when Clinton wins I shudder to think what that election results in.........as the Captain says "fasten your seat belts for the rest of the flight".
1
The only real problem with Hillary is that she is a strong woman in a world of entitled boy-men who despise strong women. She shows them up every time. Her strength shows up their weaknesses and immaturity. IN other words, her strength makes them look bad. Her strength calls into question their maturity and their fitness to do the job that because of their manliness they are entitled to do and have always done, mostly through denigrating women to "keep in their place."
Bottom line, the boy-men can't really compete with Hillary on any substantive level, and Hillary won't stoop to their level, so they have instead fomented a decades long smear campaign. They throw everything that they can at Hillary, hoping that most or all of it will stick in the public consciousness. It probably does at least stick in the male public consciousness.
But here's Hillary's real strength, and the reason she is more fit than most men out there to be President - she has taken their jabs and mud, and continues to stand up to it (and them) after these long decades.
If that's not strength, I don't know what is.
Bottom line, the boy-men can't really compete with Hillary on any substantive level, and Hillary won't stoop to their level, so they have instead fomented a decades long smear campaign. They throw everything that they can at Hillary, hoping that most or all of it will stick in the public consciousness. It probably does at least stick in the male public consciousness.
But here's Hillary's real strength, and the reason she is more fit than most men out there to be President - she has taken their jabs and mud, and continues to stand up to it (and them) after these long decades.
If that's not strength, I don't know what is.
8
I am no longer voting against Mr. Trump, I am now voting for Mrs. Clinton because she is the best choice for President of the United States of America. And that includes all those republicans that ran for president.
Are we going to call her Madame President? Or what is the correct protocol?
Are we going to call her Madame President? Or what is the correct protocol?
7
Paul,
I disagree. Not the part about her potentially being a very great president - I think she will be - but about her beating others in the Republican party.
Take your example of Marco Rubio. Can you imagine Mr. Rubio's party deserting him the way they did with Trump? Can you imagine Rubio getting distracted and missing opportunities to hit Clinton on issues like the various email leaks? I know there are probably skeletons in his closet that would have come to light if he were the nominee, but can you imagine Rubio calling attention to them the way Trump has to his?
Truth is, Mrs.Clinton got lucky. She was blessed with her enemies. The GOP picked the only candidate she could beat. I don't understand it, but I'll take it. In future elections, however, the Dems need to figure out how to appeal to an electorate that is basically conservative.
I disagree. Not the part about her potentially being a very great president - I think she will be - but about her beating others in the Republican party.
Take your example of Marco Rubio. Can you imagine Mr. Rubio's party deserting him the way they did with Trump? Can you imagine Rubio getting distracted and missing opportunities to hit Clinton on issues like the various email leaks? I know there are probably skeletons in his closet that would have come to light if he were the nominee, but can you imagine Rubio calling attention to them the way Trump has to his?
Truth is, Mrs.Clinton got lucky. She was blessed with her enemies. The GOP picked the only candidate she could beat. I don't understand it, but I'll take it. In future elections, however, the Dems need to figure out how to appeal to an electorate that is basically conservative.
2
OK, Hillary is best for the office but isn't there some way we could get Michelle Obama for 4 more years?
1
From afar, Clinton's run parallels Gore's run and Kerry's run. The biggest difference is that she is running against a candidate who is imploding, while Gore/Kerry ran against professional campaigns that focused on winning.
Many wonder what would have happened if Kasich had been nominated . . .I think that Bernie might has gotten the Dem nomination instead of Hillary. Hillary got nominated, not only because of her expertise, but because many of us thought the Republicans were completely unfit, Kasich being the exception. With Kasich as the nominee, many would have taken a second look at Bernie. He might not have gotten the nomination, but it would have been a much closer race.
Many wonder what would have happened if Kasich had been nominated . . .I think that Bernie might has gotten the Dem nomination instead of Hillary. Hillary got nominated, not only because of her expertise, but because many of us thought the Republicans were completely unfit, Kasich being the exception. With Kasich as the nominee, many would have taken a second look at Bernie. He might not have gotten the nomination, but it would have been a much closer race.
1
Watching Trump and Clinton debate was like watching a feisty, mean-spirited 13-year-old debate his teacher. Trump out-shouted and managed to intimidate his way through all the 2016 Republican candidates for president. I really don’t see how any of the losing candidates would fare any better in a contest with Hillary Clinton when they couldn’t even beat such an obviously uninformed bully.
The saddest most alarming part about the Trump supporters is that they are basically his main prey. They can't or just won't see behind the super hero status they have placed on him. They have completely fallen for his con and have rolled over to become willing victims. They are from the same place in life where most of his past victims live and work. It’s a very sad thing to witness in our country in what we like to think is our advanced society in 2016.
The saddest most alarming part about the Trump supporters is that they are basically his main prey. They can't or just won't see behind the super hero status they have placed on him. They have completely fallen for his con and have rolled over to become willing victims. They are from the same place in life where most of his past victims live and work. It’s a very sad thing to witness in our country in what we like to think is our advanced society in 2016.
1
People seem to think in terms of Trump lost the debate rather then Hillary won the debate. Hillary played him like fiddle, masterfully manipulating Trump so completely it almost seemed effortless.
Sixteen Republican candidates - supposedly the best they had - could not lay a finger on Trump but Hillary took him down as if it were child's play. Who doubts she wouldn't have taken the rest of them down just as easily.
Sixteen Republican candidates - supposedly the best they had - could not lay a finger on Trump but Hillary took him down as if it were child's play. Who doubts she wouldn't have taken the rest of them down just as easily.
1
HRC certainly does care about "signature issues". She cares for even more war in the Middle East and perhaps even with Russia. She cares for fracking and the fossil fuel cartels. She cares for the TPP and every other trade deal that decimates the American worker. She cares about the security surveillance state and the persecution of whistle blowers such as Snowden and Assange. She cares for her Wall St. buddies and basically their ability to self-regulate. She cares for super predator men of color by incarcerating them for marijuana possession. Why do you think so many Republicans support her Mr Krugman?
3
Thank you, Dr. Krugman, this statement was long overdue. To qualify further, much of her "unpopularity" no doubt stems from the sexism that pervades our culture. Many men and women run a range of discomfort to fear to anger when they consider a woman holding the most powerful position in our land, even if they're not fully cognizant of their own response.
1
"Maybe obvious competence and poise in stressful situations can add up to a kind of star quality, even if it doesn’t fit conventional notions of charisma."
I loved this article and the points it made. But why stop short of calling her charismatic? Someone for whom millions of people voted in the democratic primary—soundly defeating "rock star" Bernie Sanders—lacks charisma? The irony here is that, despite his obvious praise for Hillary, and admonishment of the sexist way the public appraises her, Krugman still succumbs to the gendered notion that a woman like Hilary cannot truly inspire.
I loved this article and the points it made. But why stop short of calling her charismatic? Someone for whom millions of people voted in the democratic primary—soundly defeating "rock star" Bernie Sanders—lacks charisma? The irony here is that, despite his obvious praise for Hillary, and admonishment of the sexist way the public appraises her, Krugman still succumbs to the gendered notion that a woman like Hilary cannot truly inspire.
1
If there is anything this election has taught us, it's 'Don't listen to pundits'.
They got it wrong with Trump. They got it wrong with Clinton.
The only difference is, they REALLY got it wrong with Trump.
First and foremost by underestimating his particular populist style of poison, and taking him no more seriously than a joke.
Too bad the joke ended up being on us.
And when these same so-called and self-appointed pundits, overwhelmingly male, cast their sexist eyes on Clinton -- they were often blinded by the same brand of Republican negativity that has become the lingua franca of any discussion involving anything and everything she does.
The pundits went missing as half of an easily-led American public fell over themselves to eat corn-dogs at State Fairs to meet Trump, riled up by cheap hats and the promise to "Make America Great Again".
The pundits forgot to ask "HOW?"
The pundits didn't warn the other half of Americans left out of the Dream that they'd be banished or incarcerated without due process.
The pundits missed the clues of Trump's increasingly vindictive and demeaning style during the Primaries, by not seeing past the malignant aura of his shine. It provided great copy.
Only recently, as it has become abundantly clear that Trump is now on his final lap toward self-destruction, have the pundits become aware that Clinton just may win, and they've gotten it wrong all along.
It's about time, pundits.
They got it wrong with Trump. They got it wrong with Clinton.
The only difference is, they REALLY got it wrong with Trump.
First and foremost by underestimating his particular populist style of poison, and taking him no more seriously than a joke.
Too bad the joke ended up being on us.
And when these same so-called and self-appointed pundits, overwhelmingly male, cast their sexist eyes on Clinton -- they were often blinded by the same brand of Republican negativity that has become the lingua franca of any discussion involving anything and everything she does.
The pundits went missing as half of an easily-led American public fell over themselves to eat corn-dogs at State Fairs to meet Trump, riled up by cheap hats and the promise to "Make America Great Again".
The pundits forgot to ask "HOW?"
The pundits didn't warn the other half of Americans left out of the Dream that they'd be banished or incarcerated without due process.
The pundits missed the clues of Trump's increasingly vindictive and demeaning style during the Primaries, by not seeing past the malignant aura of his shine. It provided great copy.
Only recently, as it has become abundantly clear that Trump is now on his final lap toward self-destruction, have the pundits become aware that Clinton just may win, and they've gotten it wrong all along.
It's about time, pundits.
2
The GOP has spent 25 years creating the straw-(wo)man that most people know as Hillary Clinton. The debates showed millions of people that she is nothing like the caricature. And that's why the GOP will lose this election. Instead of fighting the real Hillary, they've spent their time fighting against an imaginary version, one where she is corrupt, power-hungry and inept. The truth is that she's wicked smart and incredibly formidable, which is why I've been supporting her for president since 2008. We can only hope that the voting public penalizes the GOP for weaving this particular web of lies come election day, and down-ticket republicans pay a price for their party's policy of lies and obstruction. Lets retake the Senate, and the House!
6
This high tide of misogyny is getting old fast. With Obama, GOP leaders, Trump plus hate talk radio, gave deplorables permission to revive the glory days of segregation with a fusillade of racist hate of a decent man, our first Black president.
With Hillary, targeted by GOP for 20+ years, no one needed permission to pile on. She's a woman. With a bullseye painted on her back like all uppity woman. Like Trump we don't need permission. Just pile on. The autopilot is "lesser of two evils," a sexist brain worm that's as ubiquitous as saying hello. We know about her -- she's a girl.
Not many national political figure on the left have authentic working class cred like Michael Moore. He's been railing against the system for a long time, not as some pose but as real life. He backed Sanders big time.
Go see his new film, Michael Moore in Trumpland. Moore doesn't do hedges or half measures. He's with Hillary like he was with Sanders. On her own merits, her proven commitment, her experience, her worker bee politics. Her heartland good neighbor persona is who she really is.
Moore makes the case for Hillary, not against Trump. He knows the system is rigged -- against women. By what she's done with her life, she's the equal if not better than any other presidential candidate. There's no lesser of anything. Unless you're blind, we're blessed by a genuinely heroic woman aspiring to be our president.
They hold up half-the-sky. Hillary is the reason why. It's time.
With Hillary, targeted by GOP for 20+ years, no one needed permission to pile on. She's a woman. With a bullseye painted on her back like all uppity woman. Like Trump we don't need permission. Just pile on. The autopilot is "lesser of two evils," a sexist brain worm that's as ubiquitous as saying hello. We know about her -- she's a girl.
Not many national political figure on the left have authentic working class cred like Michael Moore. He's been railing against the system for a long time, not as some pose but as real life. He backed Sanders big time.
Go see his new film, Michael Moore in Trumpland. Moore doesn't do hedges or half measures. He's with Hillary like he was with Sanders. On her own merits, her proven commitment, her experience, her worker bee politics. Her heartland good neighbor persona is who she really is.
Moore makes the case for Hillary, not against Trump. He knows the system is rigged -- against women. By what she's done with her life, she's the equal if not better than any other presidential candidate. There's no lesser of anything. Unless you're blind, we're blessed by a genuinely heroic woman aspiring to be our president.
They hold up half-the-sky. Hillary is the reason why. It's time.
10
Exactly right! And two more points --
1) Trump is a demagogue and his more conventional, civilized opponents during the Republican primary as well as the media did not have a playbook to deal with him. They seemed to think that by forming Survivor style temporary alliances, they could avoid being voted off the island.
2) Misogyny is the norm in politics. Basically Sec. Clinton is not someone Americans want to have a beer with. Good thing too-the world is no more your neighborhood bar than it is your business incubator.
1) Trump is a demagogue and his more conventional, civilized opponents during the Republican primary as well as the media did not have a playbook to deal with him. They seemed to think that by forming Survivor style temporary alliances, they could avoid being voted off the island.
2) Misogyny is the norm in politics. Basically Sec. Clinton is not someone Americans want to have a beer with. Good thing too-the world is no more your neighborhood bar than it is your business incubator.
3
Hear, hear! This is what I see also and I have such a hard time understanding the willful blinders that people put on. I get that they may not agree with the policy, but she is no more dishonest (and less so by some measures) than other politicians. We truly live in a bizarre time.
1
It's already Republican orthodoxy that any of the other candidates would've shellacked Clinton. Mr. Krugman has already addressed the jejune Rubio. Then there's Ted Cruz -- brilliant but far too conservative for most Americans, and roundly despised. He would not have worn well in a GE campaign. Jeb would've most easily tacked to the middle, but he proved to be a terrible retail politician. Remember his struggles to answer what he thought of his brother's invasion of Iraq? Stunningly inept, given it was the question we all knew was coming. Who else? Who else could have matched Clinton's preparation, or fundraising, or organization, or stamina? Rubio or Bush would have made for close races, to be sure.
And this little parlor game ignores the reality of the Republican base, which wanted this Trump dumpster fire. We're left asking, "What if we had run a different candidate, with a different base, against Clinton?"
And this little parlor game ignores the reality of the Republican base, which wanted this Trump dumpster fire. We're left asking, "What if we had run a different candidate, with a different base, against Clinton?"
I have been dismayed that pundits have robotically assumed all the operating assumptions about this woman which have largely been created during decades of right wing nutter attacks. Trump is having a negative impact by constantly using the corrupt Hillary slogan. It is shameful,
2
I am particularly impressed by Sec. Clinton's ability to lead small groups which I think is essential to the working duties of a President. Her campaign is well organized and flexible, which indicates that her White House will be the same. I pray we can win the Senate she needs to change the Supreme Court for the better. Vote, people!
3
Hillary Clinton has been selected to be the President by the Wall Street bankers who have her in their pockets. They know she will be obedient to their demands, while they could not be sure about Donald Trump. Clinton will continue to divide the people with her promises of correcting income inequality for the working people and placing higher taxes on the wealthiest people, and bringing hundreds of millions of jobs back to the U.S. The saddest thing is, the people are ignorant and believe all of her lies.
2
Mrs. Clinton is far too hawkish for me to be an enthusiastic supporter. But, there's no question that she's whip smart and highly capable. She has my vote because her values and goals more closely align with my own than anybody in the GOP. I've always believed that her main "fault" was that she was "too" ambitious. Always wanting to be president is a flaw in a woman, somehow. I think, at some level, I might have found that unseemly myself. (Sexism is gender-neutral.)
I'm looking forward to hearing "Madam President". And I hope her formidable skills are enough in these very perilous times.
I'm looking forward to hearing "Madam President". And I hope her formidable skills are enough in these very perilous times.
Yes, Paul is right - the pundits who would have been glad to continue the inaccurate Clinton 'corrupt' narrative had there been a more sanitized, dog-whistling GOP candidate were apparently also clueless enough to fail to see that the GOP was destined to nominate a Trump-like candidate this time around. Their party simply became what it pretended to be: an almost entirely white club of reactionary zealots who don't make a lot of sense.
1
When the vitriol of anti-Clinton sentiment is captured on the pages and screens of the news media on a daily basis, and support for other candidates is the sine qua non for why she should not be in her current position, many, obviously most of us, hunker down and keep quiet. So, yes, we, the silent majority see in her what decades of disparagement fail to see - a strong, trustworthy and superbly competent candidate.
1
Hillary Clinton is the first candidate in my lifetime who can walk into the Oval Office on day one and do the job. No learning curve, no finding her feet, she will hit the ground running from word go. Who else can we say that about? And how lucky are we to have someone with that level of competence, preparation, intelligence, and understanding of our government and its workings?
For decades, we've been hearing nonsense, innuendo, and outright lies from the Republican party and its media outlets when it comes to Hillary Clinton. I honestly think they saw her competence and were deeply afraid at her accomplishments, and even more, at what improvements she could make to our nation. Accordingly, the GOP has spent decades trying to stymie and defeat her. They have failed. And it is beautiful.
Beyond the incredible (and overdue) historical accomplishment of our first female President, perhaps we can re-calibrate our expectations of the Presidency. For too many years, we've worried about how "telegenic" someone was, or how much of a beer-buddy they could be, and look where that got us. I'd rather we put our focus toward candidates who are intelligent, knowledgeable, and experienced. That is what we have had in Obama and what we will have with Clinton. We should be so lucky.
For decades, we've been hearing nonsense, innuendo, and outright lies from the Republican party and its media outlets when it comes to Hillary Clinton. I honestly think they saw her competence and were deeply afraid at her accomplishments, and even more, at what improvements she could make to our nation. Accordingly, the GOP has spent decades trying to stymie and defeat her. They have failed. And it is beautiful.
Beyond the incredible (and overdue) historical accomplishment of our first female President, perhaps we can re-calibrate our expectations of the Presidency. For too many years, we've worried about how "telegenic" someone was, or how much of a beer-buddy they could be, and look where that got us. I'd rather we put our focus toward candidates who are intelligent, knowledgeable, and experienced. That is what we have had in Obama and what we will have with Clinton. We should be so lucky.
23
Ms. Clinton is an extremely competent, hard working, pro-business centrist. She is what used to be called a "Republican." She did NOT win nomination easily. The DNC had it's thumb on the scales in a multitude of ways, and still Sen. Sanders came very close to overturning the script.
The media helped as well. When Sanders nearly tied Clinton in Nevada, they ignored the story, reporting the outcome as a "win", rather than a disaster for Clinton. They were too busy writing about Trump's latest shenanigans.
To this day, the media portray Sanders' supporters as uninformed male millennials. I am a retired female math instructor, not a "bro", but I and every one of my liberal friends voted for and supported the Sanders campaign.
The right wing of the party succeeded this time, but I am greatly encouraged by the activity of the millennials. Hopefully, Clinton will decide to retire after one term and Elizabeth Warren will run in 2020.
The media helped as well. When Sanders nearly tied Clinton in Nevada, they ignored the story, reporting the outcome as a "win", rather than a disaster for Clinton. They were too busy writing about Trump's latest shenanigans.
To this day, the media portray Sanders' supporters as uninformed male millennials. I am a retired female math instructor, not a "bro", but I and every one of my liberal friends voted for and supported the Sanders campaign.
The right wing of the party succeeded this time, but I am greatly encouraged by the activity of the millennials. Hopefully, Clinton will decide to retire after one term and Elizabeth Warren will run in 2020.
7
Interesting commentary. You are correct that Mrs. Clinton did not win the nomination easily, but she did win it decisively. Bernie ran a great campaign, but he did not win the hearts and minds of the majority of Democrats.
1
But she is so "unpopular" etc., etc. How many times do the pundits repeat this refrain? In fact, during Clinton's tenure as First Lady, Senator from New York, and Secretary of State, she was vastly popular, as these things are measured by the MSM. And, despite her current popularity numbers, she is decisively winning the only poll that really counts (except with the pundits). They now predict the worst of outcomes for her presidency -- the Republicans will tie her up in knots and she will accomplish little or nothing. Accurate? Very likely the Democrats win the Senate, so all of her judicial appointments are confirmed. At a minimum, the Democrats reduce the Republicans' majority in the House. The House GOP may obstruct, unless she backs them into corners and forces their action, but they can otherwise do nothing. What is more likely to happen is that the executive, in these circumstances, uses its "inherent" powers to a larger degree than we have come to expect to pursue its goals. With a judiciary now populated by more progressive judges, such use of executive powers may find a more favorable review. After all, if the Republicans refuse to allow the government to function by crippling the Congress, power and the authority to act will go elsewhere. As it must.
14
When Hillary wins and the Republicans begin accusing each other of being the cause ,they should look back in history.
After the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg many in the South were bewildered. How could their "clearly superior army", have been so decisively defeated. They concluded it could only have been due to deficient generalship or some other source of internal egregious errors.
General Picket (CSA) had a simpler explanation , saying: "I always thought the Yankees had something to do with it."
After the Confederate defeat at Gettysburg many in the South were bewildered. How could their "clearly superior army", have been so decisively defeated. They concluded it could only have been due to deficient generalship or some other source of internal egregious errors.
General Picket (CSA) had a simpler explanation , saying: "I always thought the Yankees had something to do with it."
9
During the primaries I initially cheered for Bernie because of his passion and direction. But he wasn't the complete package with notable gaps in foreign policy especially and a bit too ambitious and lacking key details in his economic plan. On the other hand Hillary seemed more calculating than passionate and without clear direction. In the end I voted unenthusiastically for Hillary in the primary. Now, especially after this last debate, she is the complete package. I will enthusiatically vote for her in November.
19
I didn't like Hillary Cinton before, but after watching her during the recent three debates with Donald Trump, I have no doubt that she is much more qualified to be president than he is. She may not be the ideal candidate, but the alternative would be a complete disaster for the nation.
371
My mother's family is from Arkansas, and late in life spent summers there with her elderly sisters. When Bill began his campaign for president, all of her very smart women friends said to her: The wrong Clinton is running. Rumor has it that some list of the top 100 lawyers in the US from the 1980's includes Hillary but not Bill. Notwithstanding his famous brain and his Rhodes scholarship, I have little doubt that she's even smarter. She has the stuff to be among our very greatest presidents, Lincoln and FDR. I am really looking forward to the next four years
7
Yes, yes, yes.
And let's dispense with the idea that the Clinton haters hate Hillary because of any misdeeds they claim she committed.
We should remember that the right-wing went after Bill Clinton not because of his extramarital affairs. They didn't even know about those when they organized their witch hunt. And besides, so many of them were guilty of the same kind of behavior.
No, they went after Bill Clinton because he was so successful. The economy was humming along, the budget deficits were turning into surpluses, and their trickle down economics and budget busting tax cuts (designed to make social programs unaffordable) were being proven to the fraud they were and still are.
That's why they tried to destroy the Clintons.
And let's not be foolish enough to believe they will ever stop.
And let's dispense with the idea that the Clinton haters hate Hillary because of any misdeeds they claim she committed.
We should remember that the right-wing went after Bill Clinton not because of his extramarital affairs. They didn't even know about those when they organized their witch hunt. And besides, so many of them were guilty of the same kind of behavior.
No, they went after Bill Clinton because he was so successful. The economy was humming along, the budget deficits were turning into surpluses, and their trickle down economics and budget busting tax cuts (designed to make social programs unaffordable) were being proven to the fraud they were and still are.
That's why they tried to destroy the Clintons.
And let's not be foolish enough to believe they will ever stop.
6
And let's contemplate, how would all our politicians look if we saw what they said to each other and what their staffs said in private moments? Sort of like watching your favorite hot dog being made. Perhaps we should all start talking in private with the self-restraint of our public persona. It would also be interesting to hear what Hillary actually meant by her hacked comments. Don't we all in fact look forward to a world without borders? Without such a goal we would not be motivated to take the steps we are taking now to protect our borders and then ease them up as the world settles into a humane state of being. I'm afraid too many in the public do not want to hear about the realities we face and the limited avenues we have of acting to make things better. They want the fluff of the advertisers with the solutions of the wonks. It just doesn't work that way.
1
Instead of following the philosophy that people, and especially elected leaders, can and must work together, the Republican party has adopted the 'I am right and if you don't agree you're an idiot' attitude. It's hostile and destructive, but they seem to see damage as a means to their desired end. Lower level power that should be used as a counter-balance becomes dangerous instead of ensuring that the government is able to do its job smoothly. The wedge keeps digging deeper as people move around and local populations become less homogeneous, and the world changes.
Trump is the ultimate symbol of Republican mindset. The kind of people who are drawn to Trump are inflexible in their thinking and see no reason to adapt to the will of the majority, so they lash out at those they hate and fear.
The majority can elect the president of their choice, but that president cannot do their job effectively without support. Clinton will face the same obstructionist behavior as Barack Obama.
Trump is the ultimate symbol of Republican mindset. The kind of people who are drawn to Trump are inflexible in their thinking and see no reason to adapt to the will of the majority, so they lash out at those they hate and fear.
The majority can elect the president of their choice, but that president cannot do their job effectively without support. Clinton will face the same obstructionist behavior as Barack Obama.
2
Neither Clinton nor Trump have any interest whatsoever, in representing the American people, and carrying out any meaningful reforms that will level the playing field and even begin in the smallest way to address the crippling inequality that has beggared the people of the United States of America, and successfully exported the same corporate dogma to the rest of the planet, resulting in a massive decrease in living standards, conflict, and discontent the likes of which has not been seen in decades.
In other words, a Clinton or Trump presidency will continue the status quo, and slowly but surely reduce the masses to near penury and economic slavery, all the while adding to the obscene wealth and power of the corporate world and the .01%ters.
You, Paul, may trot out your manipulated managed statistics all you want, statistics which when subject to non-biased analysis, fall apart, and know this, the last year of desperate perception management that you, and your once venerated employer have engaged in, is also falling apart.
Bernie was the only, and the last, honorable candidate to offer salvation to the American people, since FDR, and the New Deal, and you know it.
In other words, a Clinton or Trump presidency will continue the status quo, and slowly but surely reduce the masses to near penury and economic slavery, all the while adding to the obscene wealth and power of the corporate world and the .01%ters.
You, Paul, may trot out your manipulated managed statistics all you want, statistics which when subject to non-biased analysis, fall apart, and know this, the last year of desperate perception management that you, and your once venerated employer have engaged in, is also falling apart.
Bernie was the only, and the last, honorable candidate to offer salvation to the American people, since FDR, and the New Deal, and you know it.
3
Well, there are a lot of us out here who are struggling mightily with our choice this election cycle. Just because the other main candidate is running for second place, that doesn't negate the fact that Hillary Clinton will almost certainly be another war monger after taking office, someone who will probably never stand in front of the Military Industrial Complex and shout..."Enough death, enough blood, enough with bankrupting America in insane Middle East wars...".
We need to suck it up and bring our military home and spend our remaining money on our infrastructure, our needs and stop playing the fool internationally. Trump was right about that, though I doubt even America is nuts enough to elect a totally ignorant pilot to fly its national plane.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
We need to suck it up and bring our military home and spend our remaining money on our infrastructure, our needs and stop playing the fool internationally. Trump was right about that, though I doubt even America is nuts enough to elect a totally ignorant pilot to fly its national plane.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
1
"the fact that Hillary Clinton will almost certainly be another war monger after taking office, someone who will probably never stand in front of the Military Industrial Complex and shout..."Enough death, enough blood, enough with bankrupting America in insane Middle East wars..."."
How do you make leap from an assumption to a "fact"?
THAT is one of the problems we keep facing in our politics: Assumptions are being translated into "facts."
How do you make leap from an assumption to a "fact"?
THAT is one of the problems we keep facing in our politics: Assumptions are being translated into "facts."
1
Trump "won" the Republican debates only because they were being judged by the same people who thought he had beaten Clinton in the presidential debates, i.e. people who value insults and bluster over content. But the Republican candidate who presented as the only adult in the room for those debates was Kasich.
Of course, very few people read newspapers to truly get to know the candidates and all they know is what they see and hear in debates. I would never want the "real" Kasich to be President. But given his performance in the debates and the Clinton hate factor, can you be sure about the outcome of a Clinton-Kasich election, Dr. Krugman?
Of course, very few people read newspapers to truly get to know the candidates and all they know is what they see and hear in debates. I would never want the "real" Kasich to be President. But given his performance in the debates and the Clinton hate factor, can you be sure about the outcome of a Clinton-Kasich election, Dr. Krugman?
There's non-pundit critique of Clinton that does bear considering: She's a bit too pragmatic, she's too tied to financial and her support is a bit shallow. This comes from people like me whose politics are a bit further to the left than hers. The one plus Isaw with her has been the likelihood she will bring strong technocratic managers into government with experienced, mostly liberal people at the top. My concern with Sanders was that he didn't clearly have a strong shadow government and he easily could disappoint like Carter or perhaps Obama in his first term. Clinton needs to make sure that her support becomes truly deep among the Dem base and creates a record that is more than just technocratic gradualism. The remains much uneasiness about the future which is why a non-traditional candidate like Trump has done so well. Yes, he's just another example of the worst instincts of the GOP, but a better organized candidate could do better in the future. As for Clinton herself, she's done everything she needed to do in the debates and has gotten zero credit for it, while Trump gets the headlines. Her next step is to make sure that she can get credit for what she does well and not just attract more of the same scandal mongering we've endured for 25 years.
3
The conduct of our trade policy has been immoral, the enforcement of immigration law has been a joke, the theft of money from citizens and doubling of the deficit is criminal, the deceptions foisted upon the citizens and the opinion that our leaders have the right to lie to people to further their socialist agenda, and the shameful conduct of foreign policy assuring the world is more dangerous are all characteristics of the state of government today. The main stream media is no reporting news, but attempting to elect politicians in line with it ideas. I personally believe that the National Inquirer has more voracity than the NYT on most subjects. With uniformed alternative universe university professors writing articles this , chapter 9 is not far away.
I have always felt that HRC was the best most experienced candidate I've had the opportunity to vote for since 1980. I thought it was a mistake Dems put Obama in - had he been VP these past 8 years, he could have stepped into the presidency with the experience he needed and been even more impressive than he has been.
I hope for our country that people can put down the attitudes about her that have been deliberately cultivated by the so-called "justice foundation" and other conservative groups. We need to come together, and it would be nice if people stopped believing all the lies about Clinton they've swallowed all these years. Cynicism is getting us nowhere.
I hope for our country that people can put down the attitudes about her that have been deliberately cultivated by the so-called "justice foundation" and other conservative groups. We need to come together, and it would be nice if people stopped believing all the lies about Clinton they've swallowed all these years. Cynicism is getting us nowhere.
10
Hillary Clinton is slowly, inevitably heading towards the attainment of a goal she has cradled her entire life. Sometimes wanting something so badly can pull a person from their most genuine self; I think this helps account for so many people's sense of inauthenticity about Mrs. Clinton. In a few weeks she will likely be President-Elect, she will have attained that goal. It is likely Americans will finally get to see the authentic Hillary Clinton, the one guided by an incisive intellect, a passion for hard work, and an honest desire to do good things for Americans who are unable to do those things for themselves. I have no doubts that she will be a hard working and empathetic President. No one disliked Hillary Clinton more than I did when she was First Lady...and no one more enthusiastically looks forward to her leading our nation as Chief Executive.
6
Please don't take offense, but "No one dislike Hillary Clinton more than I did when she was First Lady..." sounds like something Trump would say. ("No one [fill in the blank] more than me!)
I have the feeling there were plenty of people who absolutely loathed Hillary in the 1990s with less rationality than you clearly show!
I have the feeling there were plenty of people who absolutely loathed Hillary in the 1990s with less rationality than you clearly show!
I totally agree with Mr. Krugman.
When I saw the third debate with my wife here in Mexico City... she was so emotional hearing Hillary talking with passion about women rights and children.
My wife mentioned how lucky USA women are for having such and advocate for them as an aspiring president.
I also watched on PBS a documentary about Hillary's history... and its undeniable her profound and long-life involvement with social issues.
Clearly she is exceptional and very superior to many candidates... and its sad how manipulation its so effective among the deplorable citizens... because they are easy pray due to their ignorance.
When I saw the third debate with my wife here in Mexico City... she was so emotional hearing Hillary talking with passion about women rights and children.
My wife mentioned how lucky USA women are for having such and advocate for them as an aspiring president.
I also watched on PBS a documentary about Hillary's history... and its undeniable her profound and long-life involvement with social issues.
Clearly she is exceptional and very superior to many candidates... and its sad how manipulation its so effective among the deplorable citizens... because they are easy pray due to their ignorance.
14
Why Hillary Wins?
Because double digit Republican men standing on a stage debating with Donald Trump could not even beat him for their party's nomination. But Hillary Clinton did and more.
Those Republican men were cowards. They backed off. They allowed themselves to be bullied by Donald Trump - and therefore they showed that they could be bullied by others as well - like national untoward leaders.
What, they were afraid because Donald Trump called them "low on energy", ones with "little hands", captured, which he doesn't like?
No, Hillary Clinton stood right next to this man (sometimes as he stalked around and creeped around the stage as she was speaking) and went forward, to tell her plans of what she was going to do for this country. She told what she has already done for this country. She plowed right through the theatrics Donald Trump pulled and tried to pull.
To me, Hillary joins spirit hands with Eleanor Roosevelt, another woman who was criticized and wrongfully sneered, but who held her head up high and made life better for so many others. A best day: going to Eleanor's homestead near Hyde Park and seeing a photo of her and John Kennedy on an end table. Hillary Clinton has Eleanor's drive and the ability to disallow negativity to do better.
Believe it or not, I just bought a "Nasty Woman" sweatshirt and will wear it all this cold winter. Each time I put it on - I will be glad that a so-called nasty woman will be leading my country.
Because double digit Republican men standing on a stage debating with Donald Trump could not even beat him for their party's nomination. But Hillary Clinton did and more.
Those Republican men were cowards. They backed off. They allowed themselves to be bullied by Donald Trump - and therefore they showed that they could be bullied by others as well - like national untoward leaders.
What, they were afraid because Donald Trump called them "low on energy", ones with "little hands", captured, which he doesn't like?
No, Hillary Clinton stood right next to this man (sometimes as he stalked around and creeped around the stage as she was speaking) and went forward, to tell her plans of what she was going to do for this country. She told what she has already done for this country. She plowed right through the theatrics Donald Trump pulled and tried to pull.
To me, Hillary joins spirit hands with Eleanor Roosevelt, another woman who was criticized and wrongfully sneered, but who held her head up high and made life better for so many others. A best day: going to Eleanor's homestead near Hyde Park and seeing a photo of her and John Kennedy on an end table. Hillary Clinton has Eleanor's drive and the ability to disallow negativity to do better.
Believe it or not, I just bought a "Nasty Woman" sweatshirt and will wear it all this cold winter. Each time I put it on - I will be glad that a so-called nasty woman will be leading my country.
13
Yes, neo-liberals the world-over love Hillary, because she supports everything they desire: Social Security and Medicare cuts (read the speeches), continued world-wide fossil fuel exploitation (read the speeches), a full-strength national security state (vast spying networks, a government backdoor to encryption and jail the whistle-blowers) and perpetual warfare.
Who could hate such a program, when the right people benefit so handsomely from it??
Who could hate such a program, when the right people benefit so handsomely from it??
3
Oh, for Heaven's sake, history is full of "formidable" figures who were also not wonderful people. Hillary can join that bunch in my book.
I'm sixty-four, a lifelong liberal Democrat, and have been following our politics closely since my first experience as a voter, which was in 1972.
Mrs. Clinton may well be formidable, but she was helped in securing the Democratic nomination through the disgraceful conduct of the DNC and her "good friend", Debbie Wasserman Schultz. When Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign in what should have been well deserved disgrace, she immediately became Hillary's "honorary chairperson" for the campaign.
Mrs. Clinton's foreign policy judgement might well get us into a war with Russia, and her honesty is more than questionable. She is a "New Democrat" of the sort so eloquently and thoroughly investigated by Thomas Frank in his indispensable book, "Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People". In a nutshell, it was taken over by people such as Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to the detriment of the working and middle classes.
Mrs. Clinton is blessed to be running against the worst and most unsuitable candidate in our History, but that doesn't make her anyone I'm happy to cast my vote for.
I'm sixty-four, a lifelong liberal Democrat, and have been following our politics closely since my first experience as a voter, which was in 1972.
Mrs. Clinton may well be formidable, but she was helped in securing the Democratic nomination through the disgraceful conduct of the DNC and her "good friend", Debbie Wasserman Schultz. When Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign in what should have been well deserved disgrace, she immediately became Hillary's "honorary chairperson" for the campaign.
Mrs. Clinton's foreign policy judgement might well get us into a war with Russia, and her honesty is more than questionable. She is a "New Democrat" of the sort so eloquently and thoroughly investigated by Thomas Frank in his indispensable book, "Listen Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People". In a nutshell, it was taken over by people such as Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to the detriment of the working and middle classes.
Mrs. Clinton is blessed to be running against the worst and most unsuitable candidate in our History, but that doesn't make her anyone I'm happy to cast my vote for.
3
Frank "blames" the Clintons for turning to the corporate professionals rather than the traditional union base of the Democratic party. When I asked the "historian" Frank to recall what state the unions were in by the 1980s...well it was like deer in the headlights. The truth is that the unions were decimated by the time they took office, and it wasn't just Reagan's fault. Google "UMW Tony Boyle". Union corruption and lack of democracy play a large part in where we are: as of 2011, 12% of the workforce. So is the Dem establishment really to blame for looking for other groups to add to the coalition? Frank, the non-politician thinks so. I guess it helps sell books.
1
Hi, sprachnroll -
The unions were indeed in bad shape, but the Democrats in my view should have worked to restore them, rather than turn away from them. The Democrats didn't "add" to the coalition. Rather, they assumed that working-class people had no choice but to vote for them, and felt free to turn their backs on them as a consequence.
And then came Obama, whose populist rhetoric was inspiring, but totally false. I doubt that Hillary's platform would be so progressive if Sanders' challenge hadn't made it necessary.
Cheers.
The unions were indeed in bad shape, but the Democrats in my view should have worked to restore them, rather than turn away from them. The Democrats didn't "add" to the coalition. Rather, they assumed that working-class people had no choice but to vote for them, and felt free to turn their backs on them as a consequence.
And then came Obama, whose populist rhetoric was inspiring, but totally false. I doubt that Hillary's platform would be so progressive if Sanders' challenge hadn't made it necessary.
Cheers.
1
Thanks for pointing out that Rubio's "glitch" was taken straight out of the wingnut playbook -- that President Obama is deliberately making our country worse (because of course, he is not "one of us"). None of the Republican candidates outright refuted the lies and conspiracy theories on the alt-right. That's why Hillary will be president. The question is: After the coming bloodbath in November, will the Republicans continue to tread water in the alt-right's cesspool of lies, or not?
13
The generalship of U.S. Grant has frequently been reviled in popular culture in just this same way. Grant won because he didn't care about the lives of his men -- yet General Lee lost a higher percentage of the lives of his men. Grant won because he had more men and charged straight ahead -- yet both times a Confederate army was maneuvered out of its pants, Grant was the man who did it. And Hillary Clinton faces this same sort of disdain -- mostly because she's a woman, but also because she's seen, even by many on the left, as not coming from the proper background, as not being one of "us."
7
To say "Grant won because he didn't care about the lives of his men" is a gross oversimplification and, quite frankly, flatly wrong. Grant had industry and numbers on his side and fought an offensive war, even though all wars are "offensive". He and Lincoln both knew the type of ugly approach that was necessary to defeat the Confederates and fought it knowing full well the cost. But they both also knew the benefit of "The Union Forever" was worth the price.
1
I agree! This came out clearly to me listening to televised commentary before the vice-presidential debate. The commentators noted that the two parties probably wished the vice presidents were the ones running. That makes sense for Trump, but not for Clinton. Her strength and experience were all the more apparent to me when Kaine showed less comfort in the debate.
The Frontline documentary on Trump and Clinton reveals that she was a political celebrity in her own right well before she got married. She would have had a great political career no matter what.
The Frontline documentary on Trump and Clinton reveals that she was a political celebrity in her own right well before she got married. She would have had a great political career no matter what.
14
You compare Hillary to a bunch of stupid, racist, dimwit creeps, and
seem to imply that the contrast makes her worthy. I' be voting for her, of course, but I am aware that she is an opportunistic, crass, hypocritical politician who will protect the wealthy. Despite all her wonderful education and experience, she has made terrible policy and accomplished little. It is hard to have confidence in someone who claims to have been under gunfire when she was actually being greeted with flowers by a child.
seem to imply that the contrast makes her worthy. I' be voting for her, of course, but I am aware that she is an opportunistic, crass, hypocritical politician who will protect the wealthy. Despite all her wonderful education and experience, she has made terrible policy and accomplished little. It is hard to have confidence in someone who claims to have been under gunfire when she was actually being greeted with flowers by a child.
1
Dr. Krugman makes a great point when he judges many Republicans to not truly believe the garbage policies they spew. How can intelligent people actually support ideas that do not make sense? The only answer can be that they want to be in office much more than they want to stand by evidence based policies.
3
Clinton is where she is because she was married to the President. Otherwise she wouldn't have been elected Senator, run for President in 2008, or been appointed Secretary of State. Her tenure as First Lady was a disaster, she set the goal of universal national health insurance back nearly 20 years (her work in 1993, passage of ACA 2010, but still not universal). Her stand by your man position in the face of marital difficulties was a personal compromise that's hard to reconcile with any notion of a woman's independence. Worse still, her center right policies that favor globalization, increased immigration with exploitation, and letting the banks stay too big to fail, allow the economy to languish, and fuel the desperation of Trump supporters. She offers them, the deplorables, nothing. It's the DLC strategy that Clinton already knew as a Democrat in a Southern state, the Southern strategy, move just to the left of the Republicans. It allows the Republicans to move constantly rightward, and prevents any meaningful progressive reforms. Four years from now Republicans won't nominate a Trump. The Supreme Court will have been secured, but everything else will be left in jeapordy. Clinton is not smart enough to understand the New Deal, how it was gutted, or how to restore it.
2
This is an intelligent but deeply mistaken critique of Hillary Clinton. I agree that she would not be running for President if she had not been married to Bill. But Bill would not have been President without marriage to her. Trump wouldn't be rich if he hadn't been his father's son. Etc. Chance plays a huge role in everyone's success--or failure. Why blame her, or any Democrat, for the Republican blockade on health insurance, medicare drug negotiations, and other fairly obvious enactments in the public interest? And as to your claim that she offers "the deplorables" nothing, nothing could be farther from the truth. Unlike decades of Republican candidates, she champions a whole raft of proposals that would greatly improve their lives. The only program Republicans ever offer to the unfortunate is unleashing the rich and powerful. And unlike the good prophet Bernie, she can actually get stuff done.
1
There is a big difference between luck, and getting ahead through marriage, with it's Victorian, Jane Austen, anti-feminist connotations. Clinton's run is a quasi third term which perhaps should necessitate another constitutional amendment. I would further draw attention to Bush and Bush, father son, king prince, reign, how did that work out for the country? It simulates monarchy, or worse, don't cry for me, Argentina.
Clinton finds it hard to run against Trump's wealth because she is very wealthy, took huge fees from Wall Street, and relies on rich donors. We blame Clinton for delaying health care legislation because she took control of it in 1993 and her political ineptness set progress back and also aided the Gingrich 1994 midterm victory.
Clinton's proposals for greater globalization, her previous support of TPP, her desire for greater immigration with a reform bill that increases exploitation, her reliance on Wall Street, her modest centrist proposals that fail to counter an already lost decade in economic terms, don't help the angry white males, and 40% of the country still voting for Trump.
The worst part of Clinton is that she fails to move the country left, back towards the new deal, change the conversation, be transformative in a way Reagan was for the right, and Obama wanted to be, but failed. America can't help lower and middle class while 1% take 20% of national income instead of 10%. Clinton's tax rates reduce it to 19%.
Clinton finds it hard to run against Trump's wealth because she is very wealthy, took huge fees from Wall Street, and relies on rich donors. We blame Clinton for delaying health care legislation because she took control of it in 1993 and her political ineptness set progress back and also aided the Gingrich 1994 midterm victory.
Clinton's proposals for greater globalization, her previous support of TPP, her desire for greater immigration with a reform bill that increases exploitation, her reliance on Wall Street, her modest centrist proposals that fail to counter an already lost decade in economic terms, don't help the angry white males, and 40% of the country still voting for Trump.
The worst part of Clinton is that she fails to move the country left, back towards the new deal, change the conversation, be transformative in a way Reagan was for the right, and Obama wanted to be, but failed. America can't help lower and middle class while 1% take 20% of national income instead of 10%. Clinton's tax rates reduce it to 19%.
Saying Hillary Clinton is an unexceptional politician and acknowledging that she most likely still would have trounced the entire Republican field is not mutually exclusive.
Hillary Clinton is a reasonable and professional standard barrer for a platform that a majority of American voters happen to agree with and incidentally the preponderance of the facts happen to support. Republicans, no matter who they nominate, have to carry an absurd grab bag of ill conceived, racist and preposterous positions that simply can not win on the merits.
It would take an exceptional Republican leader who by force of charisma alone or an uncanny ability to convince the entire base of their profoundly incorrect notions for the GOP to beat even an average Democratic nominee.
Hillary Clinton is a reasonable and professional standard barrer for a platform that a majority of American voters happen to agree with and incidentally the preponderance of the facts happen to support. Republicans, no matter who they nominate, have to carry an absurd grab bag of ill conceived, racist and preposterous positions that simply can not win on the merits.
It would take an exceptional Republican leader who by force of charisma alone or an uncanny ability to convince the entire base of their profoundly incorrect notions for the GOP to beat even an average Democratic nominee.
2
"She’s a formidable figure, and has been all along."
While teaching, I invited an older woman from the Onondaga Nation reservation south of Syracuse to speak to my developmental psychology classes.
She often told the students about how the chiefs were chosen and the importance of the life story or narrative in selecting a chief, which was done by the clan mothers. She said men didn't choose because they get too wrapped up in power. The older women know you need a chief who will look out for the people and for Mother Earth.
A facet of the selection process is to tell the life story of each chief candidate. What the clan mothers look for is a narrative that demonstrates the candidate has overcome great obstacles and grown in strength and wisdom due to his experiences. Momentum also plays a role in the narrative--usually some tragedy or series of tragedies--some "overcoming"--that produces not weakness but strength.
This is Hillary's narrative, as Krugman points out. Continually and brutally singled out and maligned by the right & media for decades, treated as "inferior" because she is a woman, told she has no business playing "a man's game" and insulted for doing so.
"Like the female protagonist of a quest narrative--or, perhaps of a dystopian fantasy--Clinton has made it through all her challenges to face the bull-headed Minotaur of sexism at the end of the maze." (Margaret Talbot, New Yorker, 10/24/16, p. 20).
Clinton strengthens; Trump weakens, & destroys.
While teaching, I invited an older woman from the Onondaga Nation reservation south of Syracuse to speak to my developmental psychology classes.
She often told the students about how the chiefs were chosen and the importance of the life story or narrative in selecting a chief, which was done by the clan mothers. She said men didn't choose because they get too wrapped up in power. The older women know you need a chief who will look out for the people and for Mother Earth.
A facet of the selection process is to tell the life story of each chief candidate. What the clan mothers look for is a narrative that demonstrates the candidate has overcome great obstacles and grown in strength and wisdom due to his experiences. Momentum also plays a role in the narrative--usually some tragedy or series of tragedies--some "overcoming"--that produces not weakness but strength.
This is Hillary's narrative, as Krugman points out. Continually and brutally singled out and maligned by the right & media for decades, treated as "inferior" because she is a woman, told she has no business playing "a man's game" and insulted for doing so.
"Like the female protagonist of a quest narrative--or, perhaps of a dystopian fantasy--Clinton has made it through all her challenges to face the bull-headed Minotaur of sexism at the end of the maze." (Margaret Talbot, New Yorker, 10/24/16, p. 20).
Clinton strengthens; Trump weakens, & destroys.
3
Hillary Clinton will not be a wonderful President until 4 years is over and she has rid our country of corporate controlled healthcare and replaces it with single-payer healthcare, gets us out of the Middle Eastern conflicts, doesn't start more wars, rids the world skies of U.S. sponsored drone warfare which causes the world to disdain us, rids the world of nuclear weapons, puts the brakes on the Wall Street casino train by breaking up the large banks which threaten our citizens hard-earned money, raises the minimal wage to at least $15/hr, rids the country of dependency on fossil fuels, empties our prisons filled by minorities for non-violent crimes, overturns Citizens United, changes the tax code so that businesses and the rich pay up fairly in taxes, rebuilds our public school education infrastructure, and gets Americans to like each other again. There are others, but I have to get to work, and thinking about it, maybe all Americans can also get to work to help Hillary accomplish these things.
2
Yes! Mrs. Clinton is genuine and formidable and has ridden her life-long luck and brilliance to its apex, the Presidency of the United States. Compared
to Marco Rubio's sadly laughable figure during the Primary debates, that went on from here to eternity and only selected Donald Trump out of the 17 candidates (including a third Bush) who were vying for the nod from the RNC, there was no other GOP candidate of Mrs. Clinton's caliber and character and experience. But if change happens every 8 years (two terms and the candidate from the opposition party is elected - Truman/Ike, Ike/JFK, Johnson/Nixon, Reagan/Clinton, Bush/Obama) then maybe Mrs. Clinton's election in 2 weeks is not graven in stone. The establishment GOP is now represented by the worst candidate in their history, Donald Trump. If he wins because change comes after 8 years of one party's President, "a new broom sweeps clean", then we the people are in for a ride of unfathomable and unforeseen consequences with a Clinton loss, unbelievable and terrible to contemplate. If she wins because she is the overwhelming favorite, then we will - all of us who sing "my country tis of thee, sweet land of liberty" - be happy folks.
to Marco Rubio's sadly laughable figure during the Primary debates, that went on from here to eternity and only selected Donald Trump out of the 17 candidates (including a third Bush) who were vying for the nod from the RNC, there was no other GOP candidate of Mrs. Clinton's caliber and character and experience. But if change happens every 8 years (two terms and the candidate from the opposition party is elected - Truman/Ike, Ike/JFK, Johnson/Nixon, Reagan/Clinton, Bush/Obama) then maybe Mrs. Clinton's election in 2 weeks is not graven in stone. The establishment GOP is now represented by the worst candidate in their history, Donald Trump. If he wins because change comes after 8 years of one party's President, "a new broom sweeps clean", then we the people are in for a ride of unfathomable and unforeseen consequences with a Clinton loss, unbelievable and terrible to contemplate. If she wins because she is the overwhelming favorite, then we will - all of us who sing "my country tis of thee, sweet land of liberty" - be happy folks.
I have a thing on my wall at work titled: 10 things that require zero talent.
1. Being on Time
2. Work Ethic
3. Effort
4. Body Language
5. Energy
6. Attitude
7. Passion
8. Being Coachable
9. Doing Extra
10. Being Prepared.
I think Hillary demonstrated all of these during her career and certainly over the last grueling year. Trump failed on all accounts. And I'd like to add:
11. Bulletproof. She's been the target of the right wing and it's media (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly) since 1991. And the best they can come up with are e-mails and Benghazi, over and over and over ad nauseum.
'nuff said.
1. Being on Time
2. Work Ethic
3. Effort
4. Body Language
5. Energy
6. Attitude
7. Passion
8. Being Coachable
9. Doing Extra
10. Being Prepared.
I think Hillary demonstrated all of these during her career and certainly over the last grueling year. Trump failed on all accounts. And I'd like to add:
11. Bulletproof. She's been the target of the right wing and it's media (Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly) since 1991. And the best they can come up with are e-mails and Benghazi, over and over and over ad nauseum.
'nuff said.
1
I just finished watching Hillary's remarks at last night's Al Smith Dinner. Although she kidded that "it takes a village" to write her jokes, Clinton's composed facade combined with an twinkling ironic smile reminded me of no one more than President Obama, who endures the nonsense maelstrom that assails him, only occasionally conveying through humor his disdain for an entire covey of clowns.
George W. Bush v. Al Gore
George W. Bush v. John Kerry
John McCain v. Barack Obama
Mitt Romney v. Barack Obama
Donald Trump v. Hillary Clinton
As we anticipate the invasion of Mosul, I imagine that there are Republicans who rue their support for the man who invaded the wrong country, not cognizant that Islam might be riven into sects that would fight to the death as soon as the authoritarian leader was removed.
2004 was the uplifting "vote Republicans to keep gay people in their place" election, because nothing says "the fiscally responsible party" like starting and then escalating two land wars in Asia.
In 2008, we had to look back only six weeks to see the results of fiduciary imprudence presided over by Alan Greenspan, a disciple of Ayn Rand.
In 2012, President Obama had to best a Republican impersonator, a former Governor of Massachusetts who had implemented the obscure Romneycare, which might be good for Concord and Acton but poison for Kentucky.
So, now in 2016, the Dems have another stellar candidate. Let's not underrate her virtues because her competition is, as usual, weak.
George W. Bush v. Al Gore
George W. Bush v. John Kerry
John McCain v. Barack Obama
Mitt Romney v. Barack Obama
Donald Trump v. Hillary Clinton
As we anticipate the invasion of Mosul, I imagine that there are Republicans who rue their support for the man who invaded the wrong country, not cognizant that Islam might be riven into sects that would fight to the death as soon as the authoritarian leader was removed.
2004 was the uplifting "vote Republicans to keep gay people in their place" election, because nothing says "the fiscally responsible party" like starting and then escalating two land wars in Asia.
In 2008, we had to look back only six weeks to see the results of fiduciary imprudence presided over by Alan Greenspan, a disciple of Ayn Rand.
In 2012, President Obama had to best a Republican impersonator, a former Governor of Massachusetts who had implemented the obscure Romneycare, which might be good for Concord and Acton but poison for Kentucky.
So, now in 2016, the Dems have another stellar candidate. Let's not underrate her virtues because her competition is, as usual, weak.
3
Hillary Wins because the people have been lobotomized by the controlled media and press, and by "experts" like Krugman who support destructive Wall Street economic policy, that is bail outs, quantitative easing, austerity, etc., Krugman never demands any bank executives go to jail. There also used to be a time where people could live off their savings, but the big banks don't encourage people to save with the near zero interest rates, Krugman never talks about this either.
I'm so tired of all the gullible, dumbed down Americans ignoring/tolerating the Bush Jr., Hillary and Obama crimes!
-Major crime no. 1- In bed with the Saudi's, covering up their crimes, not holding them accountable for financing 9/11 terrorist attacks-worthy of impeachment.
-Major crime no. 2- Violating the general welfare of the American people by allowing the too big to fail and jail banks on Wall Street to be bailed out and propping them up with trillions of dollars of Federal Reserve money, money which should have gone towards getting a real economic recovery going but instead has been used to try to prop up zombie banks bloated with derivatives, there's estimated to be around 4 Quadrillion toxic derivatives, this dwarfs the real GDP of the world's economy and can never be bailed out, yet Wall Street along with it's it's "experts" such as Krugman support the bail outs and bail-ins and disastrous quantitative easing money printing schemes.-worthy of impeachment.
I'm so tired of all the gullible, dumbed down Americans ignoring/tolerating the Bush Jr., Hillary and Obama crimes!
-Major crime no. 1- In bed with the Saudi's, covering up their crimes, not holding them accountable for financing 9/11 terrorist attacks-worthy of impeachment.
-Major crime no. 2- Violating the general welfare of the American people by allowing the too big to fail and jail banks on Wall Street to be bailed out and propping them up with trillions of dollars of Federal Reserve money, money which should have gone towards getting a real economic recovery going but instead has been used to try to prop up zombie banks bloated with derivatives, there's estimated to be around 4 Quadrillion toxic derivatives, this dwarfs the real GDP of the world's economy and can never be bailed out, yet Wall Street along with it's it's "experts" such as Krugman support the bail outs and bail-ins and disastrous quantitative easing money printing schemes.-worthy of impeachment.
During successive electoral cycles the Democratic party has shattered two political taboos that had denied America access to the full range of its governing talent. Our first black president approaches the completion of his historic tenure, while next month we will almost certainly choose the first woman to grace the Oval Office.
The very identity of these two chief executives represents real progress for America, but in normal times their exceptional qualifications would also have guaranteed a political balance sheet dominated by major achievements. Mr. Obama, despite the mindless opposition of a GOP which confused obstruction with governing, did help rescue the country from a severe recession, while also restoring America's relations with its allies. But a more responsible opposition party would have worked with him to address some of the other major challenges confronting this country.
In like manner, Hillary Clinton's proven ability to craft bipartisan compromises will empower her to tackle successfully some of the issues which trouble us. But the absurd hostility of Republicans to any proposal that originates with a Democratic president will prevent her presidency from achieving its full potential.
Historians may remember our age as a time of signal breakthroughs, undermined by missed opportunities. A GOP paralyzed by ideological rigidity and weak leadership will feature as the opponent of diversity and the champion of stagnation. What a legacy!
The very identity of these two chief executives represents real progress for America, but in normal times their exceptional qualifications would also have guaranteed a political balance sheet dominated by major achievements. Mr. Obama, despite the mindless opposition of a GOP which confused obstruction with governing, did help rescue the country from a severe recession, while also restoring America's relations with its allies. But a more responsible opposition party would have worked with him to address some of the other major challenges confronting this country.
In like manner, Hillary Clinton's proven ability to craft bipartisan compromises will empower her to tackle successfully some of the issues which trouble us. But the absurd hostility of Republicans to any proposal that originates with a Democratic president will prevent her presidency from achieving its full potential.
Historians may remember our age as a time of signal breakthroughs, undermined by missed opportunities. A GOP paralyzed by ideological rigidity and weak leadership will feature as the opponent of diversity and the champion of stagnation. What a legacy!
1
For 25 years the republican media and much of the liberal media has repeatedly lied and exaggerated any slight fault that Hillary might have shown. And the people that only read headlines, listen to Fox, get their news from Facebook or tweets actually believe it. There has probably never been a more prepared president in our lifetime (or ever). We pretty much know she will be elected. Now we need to elect a congress that is willing to work with her to fix the problems that began in the Bush years. We need to rid the republican haters, get some old fashioned republican moderates in there who care about the country, not just the rich. Go vote America, vote your conscience and please vote with your children and grandchildren in mind. Climate change is real, as shown by the severity of storms, the melting icebergs, every year being the hottest on record. We need to act now and Hillary will do it, hopefully with a congress that is also thinking of their children, grandchildren and future generations.
4
If we were a small country, say like Denmark, then passion for women's rights, healthcare, families, all very good things, might be all that mattered. But we are the United States of America, a very large and important country on the international stage. So our President is charged with making decisions that affect us and the world in matters of war and peace; financial, trade and economic regulation that support a world economy; worldwide cyber security and espionage; and such. It's in such grand areas that we find HRC's judgement called into question. So it was the Clintons who deregulated the banks, reappointed Alan Greenspan as Fed Chief, had a former Chairman of Goldman Sachs as Treasury Secretary, refused to regulate financial derivatives that caused the financial crisis, supported the war in Iraq (a bad idea even if we had found some poison gas), supported the attack on Libya. I understand some of these decisions were Bill's, but they at least claimed they were a pair, both politically savvy and simpatico. HRC wasn't just baking cookies in the White House. It's not as if the Clintons set out to make bad decisions. They just didn't see the long term consequences. And that's what judgement is. Trump is unacceptable. I hope HRC's judgement has improved.
"Mr. Trump won the nomination because he gave his party's base what it wanted, channeling the racial antagonism that has been the driving force for Republican electoral success for decades."
What a beautifully crafted sentence, especially that last clause. It is not often that our language can so precisely and elegantly encapsulate such an analysis, and while we have heard it already, it is lent additional authority when rendered in such brilliant prose.
What a beautifully crafted sentence, especially that last clause. It is not often that our language can so precisely and elegantly encapsulate such an analysis, and while we have heard it already, it is lent additional authority when rendered in such brilliant prose.
One can't deny that both Hillary Clinton and Trump are smart and intelligent. However, where Hillary has scored over Trump is her leadership qualities she has honed after being associated with two US presidents -Clinton and Obama. It is for this reason that she was leagues ahead of Trump when asked to articulate her views on critical issues affecting the US foreign policy in the middle east. She minced no words when she refused to commit the US troops in Syria or Iraq. On the other hand, trump apart from blaming Obama had nothing to offer on how he intended to solve the Syrian crisis.
Moreover, Hillary strength comes from her strong conviction on matters relating to women's rights, especially when it came to equal pay for equal work, family leave, work and family balance and last but the least the welfare of children.
On whether she is the right choice, it is debatable. Unfortunately, voters all over the world are enamoured by the oratorical skills of a leader rather than one's sound knowledge on public policy. It is, for this reason, the US voters are left with a Hobson's choice in this election.
Moreover, Hillary strength comes from her strong conviction on matters relating to women's rights, especially when it came to equal pay for equal work, family leave, work and family balance and last but the least the welfare of children.
On whether she is the right choice, it is debatable. Unfortunately, voters all over the world are enamoured by the oratorical skills of a leader rather than one's sound knowledge on public policy. It is, for this reason, the US voters are left with a Hobson's choice in this election.
I know I am repetitive, but...
To come back to Reagan's tripartite alliance:
The one faction in it we have to be careful Ms. Hillary doesn't fall in line with again is that of the neo-conservative interventionist history re-writers.
Very dangerous people who serve the military-industrial complex in their desire to preserve some sort of proxy-war relationship with other major arms manufacturers/exporters, to have battlefield-condition test benches (live ammo, real dead, destroyed cities) to maintain their competitive edges.
Neocons (Left or Right) do not want to change History for the better.
They want to improve and bring profit home to the one industrial base they really count on: weaponry, military logistics, combat, command-control-communications.
Ms. Hillary now seems beyond the pull of either born-again Christian or die-anew "Muslim" religious reaction.
That's good.
She will not put up with narrow bigots denying people human rights to "protect" their freedom.
And she at last seems turning from neoliberal economic extremism, too.
I think she will be a good cart-horse, so long as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and a few others, driving, riding shotgun, keep her on a tight rein.
Of course you need entrepreneurial capitalism, and "growth", but you also need balanced trade that takes into account individuals' needs.
We are herd animals. We have to stick together.
Market forces, blind statistical aggregates, are not sentient! She's getting that.
No?
To come back to Reagan's tripartite alliance:
The one faction in it we have to be careful Ms. Hillary doesn't fall in line with again is that of the neo-conservative interventionist history re-writers.
Very dangerous people who serve the military-industrial complex in their desire to preserve some sort of proxy-war relationship with other major arms manufacturers/exporters, to have battlefield-condition test benches (live ammo, real dead, destroyed cities) to maintain their competitive edges.
Neocons (Left or Right) do not want to change History for the better.
They want to improve and bring profit home to the one industrial base they really count on: weaponry, military logistics, combat, command-control-communications.
Ms. Hillary now seems beyond the pull of either born-again Christian or die-anew "Muslim" religious reaction.
That's good.
She will not put up with narrow bigots denying people human rights to "protect" their freedom.
And she at last seems turning from neoliberal economic extremism, too.
I think she will be a good cart-horse, so long as Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and a few others, driving, riding shotgun, keep her on a tight rein.
Of course you need entrepreneurial capitalism, and "growth", but you also need balanced trade that takes into account individuals' needs.
We are herd animals. We have to stick together.
Market forces, blind statistical aggregates, are not sentient! She's getting that.
No?
1
Clinton has emerged victorious from the debates with Trump because she was able to do something that Trump's primary opponents could not do. She was able not to wilt under the full bombardment of Trump's imperious, pathological, and hateful bullying. Instead, Clinton employed verbal jujitsu against Trump. She did not respond to his attacks; she either ignored, side-stepped, or deftly parried them. And then when Trump was least expecting it, she attacked at his most vulnerable part - his over inflated but frail ego. In each case, doing so led to a breakdown of what little self control Trump possesses, leaving America to see the weakling that Trump truly is.
Clinton has not been unnerved by Trump and will not be unnerved by Putin or anyone else. Her combination of intelligence, knowledge, and mental discipline will serve us all very well. I don't care whether I would enjoy having a beer with her. I do not need her to be my friend; I need her to be my President.
Clinton has not been unnerved by Trump and will not be unnerved by Putin or anyone else. Her combination of intelligence, knowledge, and mental discipline will serve us all very well. I don't care whether I would enjoy having a beer with her. I do not need her to be my friend; I need her to be my President.
1
To the litany of Hillary's strengths as a politician and leader, I'd add one more: adaptability. During the primaries, Bernie Sanders said many good things, and rightfully inspired a wide following. But he never learned to broaden his appeal to many groups beyond his original, loyal base. Hillary did, perhaps not dramatically in one swoop, but methodically and strategically, more than enough to ensure a insurmountable lead in votes and to win support during the convention from most of the more progressive delegates. And now, during the general election, her message has continued to evolve and sharpen in a way that, remarkably, is both more progressive in focus and more welcoming in reach.
1
Paul, in many ways your description of Hillary Clinton put me in mind of those offered up last year on the occasion of the death of Yogi Berra. He didn't look or act like a star in the classic sense: short in stature; a face that was in no way movie-star handsome; self-deprecating by nature, not by design; hardly a riveting speaker despite a unique way with the English language; except for a devotion to family and baseball in equal measure, an average Joe with a black lunch pail in hand.
I'm not suggesting these attributes all apply to Hillary, but the parallels are there. The devotion to family, concern for the less fortunate of America, and to career, quite obviously, is; the ease with which she inhabits her own skin and sensible shoes, not intimidated into donning stiletto heels or applying layers of eye shadow; hardly a riveting speaker but worth paying attention to all the same.
Yogi was universally loved. One needn't be a Yankees fan to recognize his greatness and his innate humanity. It is here the comparison breaks down: unlike Hillary, Yogi wasn't viscerally hated by essentially every member of the opposing team.
I'm not suggesting these attributes all apply to Hillary, but the parallels are there. The devotion to family, concern for the less fortunate of America, and to career, quite obviously, is; the ease with which she inhabits her own skin and sensible shoes, not intimidated into donning stiletto heels or applying layers of eye shadow; hardly a riveting speaker but worth paying attention to all the same.
Yogi was universally loved. One needn't be a Yankees fan to recognize his greatness and his innate humanity. It is here the comparison breaks down: unlike Hillary, Yogi wasn't viscerally hated by essentially every member of the opposing team.
1
Indeed. In fact, I would go a little further to add that Hillary Clinton presents poise and intelligence in a society that all too often seems to prize superficial "performance" qualities and banal "sound bites" over reason and rational argument. Her triumph in the election will be a much needed correction to the misguided "values" of TV celebrity culture.
2
When are we going to wake up to the fact that there is a vast Republican bureaucracy in Washington whose sole mission it is to tear down Democratic candidates? Look at the impeachment effort turned against Bill Clinton. The "Swift boating" of John Kerry. In this bureaucracy, is a special division that has been devoted to Hillary Clinton for almost twenty-five years. The surprising thing is how successful they have been. A generation that never knew the Clintons has been saturated in their accusations and lies and accepts them unquestioningly. Even her good points are made to seem liabilities. Will the news media and researchers ever fully expose the existence and work of this character destruction machine?
2
"She's genuine, in a way nobody in the other party can be." Indeed! The "other party" in their desire to shrink government and lower taxes has no "genuine" plans to do anything that will benefit the lower and middle classes of America. Hillary does want to use the power and large size of government to influence for the common good. With her many years in government we know she is "genuinely" interested in providing AFFORDABLE health care, preschool/nursery care and college tuition assistance. She does want to use government to provide jobs through infrastructure work - desperately needed - and continued job development through technology and renewable energy sources. She "genuinely" wants to improve the finances of social security rather than dismantling the system and harming the lives of millions. She can be a positive influence for our nation. However, she needs the support of Congress. We need to vote for a Democratic majority at the very least in the Senate. The "other party" says "no" and promotes fear. Hillary offers possibilities, hope and wants our diversity to provide a healthy national unity.
5
I am a Hillary supporter - and not in the "anyone but Trump" sense. I have struggled to understand the deep seated mistrust of HRC. I pay attention to the news so I certainly understand (to the extent someone with a job and life can) the email scandal, the politicized Benghazi issue, the Foundation issue, etc. But somehow I fail to see how any of those elements form a cogent and credible argument against her qualifications as President. Do we want someone we can like? Sure. Do we want someone who we can trust? Absolutely. But these are not, in my mind, qualities that are absolutes, either met or failed, possessed or lacking wholly. What candidate in recent memory - or distant, hazy memory - was so squeaky clean as to not have a blemish on his record that his opponent could point to and say "He's a cheat! He's a liar! He won't serve your interests as well as I will!" Isn't that what our political system - and all free systems - is based on? Make your arguments, ground them in facts, and allow the populace to vote on their preference, hopefully with some degree of understanding of the issues. HRC has a level of public service which, as near as I can tell, is unrivaled in any Presidential candidate. There's simply no question that she is qualified for the position. And while the "right wing conspiracy" has painted HRC as a villain of the sort of comic books, the reality is she is a highly qualified candidate who is also human. I hope she gets a chance to actually govern
6
"She’s genuine, in a way nobody in the other party can be."
I'd say that's an understatement. Rubio's an ambitious kid- in over his head. Ted Cruz is too mean. Bush- too much family history. Kasich comes closest.
These debates show how tough she can be, all the while remaining calm and unrattled. That's a presidential look few of the others can match.
I just imagine all those presidential duties; addressing families of fallen servicemen, providing some comfort in the face of tragedies; awarding presidential medals with sincerity and having detailed knowledge about the recipients. All things Hillary would be a natural at. Then imagine Donald doing those things.
" from claims of dishonesty (which usually turn out to be based on nothing)"
Yes indeed, The right has been tacking the word scandal onto everything she's done for years. Congressmen like Chaffetz simply can't wait to schedule more hearings. Seems that's his purpose in life.
Wikileaks shows Hillary to be, horror of horrors, a politician. Once again, imagine if some Putinlike character had stolen GOP emails. Hateful, racist, misogynist. It would be what the crowd surrounding Donald really thinks, conspiracies, promoting phony videos, Newsmax stuff. Maybe even connecting Donald to the Russians.
She may have been lucky- getting Trump. And I'm sure in that basket she talks about, are the people who couldn't stand a black man being president, and now they're gonna have to endure a woman. Such is life in 2016.
I'd say that's an understatement. Rubio's an ambitious kid- in over his head. Ted Cruz is too mean. Bush- too much family history. Kasich comes closest.
These debates show how tough she can be, all the while remaining calm and unrattled. That's a presidential look few of the others can match.
I just imagine all those presidential duties; addressing families of fallen servicemen, providing some comfort in the face of tragedies; awarding presidential medals with sincerity and having detailed knowledge about the recipients. All things Hillary would be a natural at. Then imagine Donald doing those things.
" from claims of dishonesty (which usually turn out to be based on nothing)"
Yes indeed, The right has been tacking the word scandal onto everything she's done for years. Congressmen like Chaffetz simply can't wait to schedule more hearings. Seems that's his purpose in life.
Wikileaks shows Hillary to be, horror of horrors, a politician. Once again, imagine if some Putinlike character had stolen GOP emails. Hateful, racist, misogynist. It would be what the crowd surrounding Donald really thinks, conspiracies, promoting phony videos, Newsmax stuff. Maybe even connecting Donald to the Russians.
She may have been lucky- getting Trump. And I'm sure in that basket she talks about, are the people who couldn't stand a black man being president, and now they're gonna have to endure a woman. Such is life in 2016.
2
Why is it we only get to see Clinton's emails and not the Rice and Powel emails; or the Russian hacked NDC emails but not RNC emails? And what about the Bush-Cheney administration's "lost" 22 MILLION emails!! Many of which had to do with the invasion of Iraq, which is the actual genesis of so many of the problems that are happening in the Middle East today, including the Islamic State. There's something terribly out of whack here.
1
I am confident that Hillary will serve us well.
I am not so confident that the Republican Party will emerge from the election to become the conservative party America needs. To make that happen the entire party, in addition to Trump, needs to lose this election bigtime.
I am not so confident that the Republican Party will emerge from the election to become the conservative party America needs. To make that happen the entire party, in addition to Trump, needs to lose this election bigtime.
6
A telling moment on Morning Joe was the question to a Republican operative asking him if he thought Sec. Clinton is qualified to be President. He said, "yes." Then all the Republicans around the table chimed in and said, no, they can't vote for Trump and cannot vote for Sec. Clinton, because, you know, that Clinton, she may be the most qualified, but no, they would leave that line blank. I know, I am in a favorable position---liberal democrat---but I would hope that in an election between a candidate that would undeniably do some real damage, I mean real damage to the economic and foreign policy structures of this country and a candidate who will not do any damage and might get this country moving again I would not leave a line blank.
7
She would of won against any of the candidates running in the GOP primary. There are plenty of skeletons rattling in many closets besides Trump's closet. She is competent obviously but also deeply popular. She polled high before she became a presidential candidate. We are so polarized no matter who is running that person would get their hard core base. About 40% each of the population. The battle is over the 20% remaining. She was going to win the majority of that no matter who won. Some of the best leaders I have ever followed have been woman. I suspect Madam President will be another one.
2
Let's not forget Wikileaks, the formidable secret force that was going to give us the smoking gun that would drive Mrs. Clinton in ignominy and the dustbin of history. Yeah, there were some questionable things. But what it actually gave was a picture of a candidate, or at least a candidate's staff, that considered all angles of issues, debated them thought things out and arrived at competent conclusions. Hopefully, Hillary will win and will have a dull administration.
10
The root of the overwrought animosity to Hillary Clinton comes down to the fact that she's a woman capable of showing some very "masculine" strengths. Any male candidate who showed the same fortitude, the same competence, the same grace under pressure would have his path to the presidency strewn with roses.
13
The spectacle of Trump bullying the clown car of GOP nominees during the primaries and succeeding in cowing them into defeat, and now failing miserably in the debates when trying the same with Clinton is a real testament to her leadership strength and her presidential qualifications ... no question about it. This Clinton lady is tough. Her debating performance pushed me from just voting for her to actually being excited about the prospect of her presidency.
35
Hillary is certainly the best of the establishment candidates - those who accept the current corporate/financial structure and work with it - and the anti-establishment voters, split between parties, come up short again. But even as horrible as Trump is, it is unlikely that there will be a landslide that would break the hold of Republicans on Congress, so it looks like there will be another eight years of stalemate. To break the stalemate would probably require either a different kind of candidate or a major party realignment. Let's hope that the next financial crisis does not lead to the empowerment of a right-wing demagogue who lacks Trump's shortcomings.
7
I disagree. Hillary Clinton's longcomings will serve this country well when her negotiating with Congress will show just how experienced-based savvy about government she is and the soundness of her intended legislation.
Correct. Hillary is both a formidable figure, and one quite unlike the 30-year evil caricature drawn up by her opponents.
However, even more correct is the proposition that "establishment" (and other) Republicans need a reformation. On the one hand they've spawned a dangerous alt-right and a no-too-everything tea party and, on the other, settled into an intellectual and practical irrelevance. The latter condition does little more than simply and perpetually offer up bumper stickers about such as Big Government, excessive regulation, tax cuts, trickle-down economics, all of which contributes nothing to the national conversation. They need to make themselves (again? It's been so long) useful to the nation.
So, while one hopes, and perhaps expect, that Hillary can provide effective and wise (and progressive) leadership, even more important is that her opposition get busy with a Republican Reformation. The Republican problem is not government, it's that current Republicanism has failed.
However, even more correct is the proposition that "establishment" (and other) Republicans need a reformation. On the one hand they've spawned a dangerous alt-right and a no-too-everything tea party and, on the other, settled into an intellectual and practical irrelevance. The latter condition does little more than simply and perpetually offer up bumper stickers about such as Big Government, excessive regulation, tax cuts, trickle-down economics, all of which contributes nothing to the national conversation. They need to make themselves (again? It's been so long) useful to the nation.
So, while one hopes, and perhaps expect, that Hillary can provide effective and wise (and progressive) leadership, even more important is that her opposition get busy with a Republican Reformation. The Republican problem is not government, it's that current Republicanism has failed.
15
Although we still have a little time before election day it seems safe to be looking ahead to a Clinton presidency. What we need to wonder about is the future. How will President Clinton deal with the Republican hard right in Congress? How will she bring the American people together? Will Bill be a help or a hindrance? And, of course, there is the ACA, the Middle East, Russia, and other national security problems such as cyber security and other forms of terrorism. But we should have confidence that she is much better equipped to deal with these problems than any of twenty or so men she was up against.
7
The combination of an incredibly qualified woman and an incredibly successful mixed race man just may be the 1-2 punch that takes out this far-right incarnation of the Republican Party.
19
No one wants 4 more years of blocked legislation, threats to shut down government, and bratty protests from the likes of Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. These two co called "leaders" are constructing for themselves an enduring legacy of shame. They are both cowardly and craven in their continuing indefensible endorsements of Trump as the GOP presidential nominee even as the GOP is cratering in the polls and Trump's campaign management is flailing into disarray. The voyage of the rest of their political lives will be bound in shallows and in miseries.
1
Part of the answer to the questions posed by Dr. Krugman relates, in my view, to a more fundamental phenomenon, which is rarely addressed by the media (let alone explained):
Why Hillary Clinton is not supported by 80% of the electorate?
Even after acknowledging her weaknesses, she is still light years ahead of her opponent who is an inconceivable bad candidate and will certainly be a catastrophic failure as a president.
I guess part of the answer is that the Republican party, for some reason, gets a gigantic free ride every election. They can select the worst of the worst (Sarah Palin and Donald Trump come to my mind) --people who can say or do outlandish things-- and yet they pay no political price.
So no matter how good Hillary Clinton is or how bad Donald Trump is, the vote will split about 50/50.
More generally, no matter how good the Democrat candidate is or how bad Republican candidate is, the vote will still split about 50/50.
Isn't this odd? Aren't people supposed to evaluate both candidates and come to a (more or less) rational choice. This is obviously not the case in USA in 2016. Perhaps in this era of instant communications, TV 24/7, Fox News, frantic tweeting and so on, substance is not longer relevant.
Why Hillary Clinton is not supported by 80% of the electorate?
Even after acknowledging her weaknesses, she is still light years ahead of her opponent who is an inconceivable bad candidate and will certainly be a catastrophic failure as a president.
I guess part of the answer is that the Republican party, for some reason, gets a gigantic free ride every election. They can select the worst of the worst (Sarah Palin and Donald Trump come to my mind) --people who can say or do outlandish things-- and yet they pay no political price.
So no matter how good Hillary Clinton is or how bad Donald Trump is, the vote will split about 50/50.
More generally, no matter how good the Democrat candidate is or how bad Republican candidate is, the vote will still split about 50/50.
Isn't this odd? Aren't people supposed to evaluate both candidates and come to a (more or less) rational choice. This is obviously not the case in USA in 2016. Perhaps in this era of instant communications, TV 24/7, Fox News, frantic tweeting and so on, substance is not longer relevant.
5
@Maximum_Sequitur
USA
Nothing odd about it. It's tribalism. Alf Landon got 36.5% of the vote in 1936. Who in their right minds was going vote for Alf Landon in 1936. Dorothy Parker said if Landon made another speech Roosevelt would have carried Canada.
USA
Nothing odd about it. It's tribalism. Alf Landon got 36.5% of the vote in 1936. Who in their right minds was going vote for Alf Landon in 1936. Dorothy Parker said if Landon made another speech Roosevelt would have carried Canada.
5
Hi! You're assessment of the popular vote is not accurate. 80% don't support Mrs. Clinton? I wonder where this statistic comes from?
Also I think the republicans do pay a price for nominating idiots for the office of president. After all, the McCain/Palin ticket, and the Romney/Ryan ticket were soundly defeated. The Trump/Putin ticket has no chance at all and may result in more democrats gaining seats in congress. Definitely a price being paid.
Also I think the republicans do pay a price for nominating idiots for the office of president. After all, the McCain/Palin ticket, and the Romney/Ryan ticket were soundly defeated. The Trump/Putin ticket has no chance at all and may result in more democrats gaining seats in congress. Definitely a price being paid.
As A Canadian observer of the US political scene, I have never understood Hilllay's negative press - more so the negative characterizations of her on the cable shows than in the actual print media. Unfortunately the cable media is all about form over substance. Good luck tuning into either CNN or MSNBC expecting to ever listen to a policy debate contrasting the two presidential platforms. The daily narrative is generally wall to wall coverage of Trump's latest outrage and the persistent cable media band wagon narrative that Clinton and Trump are the two most unpopular candidates in the history of American politics. It's no really obvious that the cable networks really do serve the best interests of American democracy. I'm with President Obama suggesting she is the most qualified person to ever run for Presidential office. I wish we had someone like Hillary as the Prime Minister of Canada.
20
We have one better than Hillary - Pierre Trudeau the current Prime Minister of Canada. That being said, the cable networks have become enemies of political literacy and hence anti-democratic organizations.
Hillary's negative press has been a pure invention of the right wing media. Never any substance behind it. I'm so glad you and others notice!
Yours is the most insightful and well-explained reasons and most appreciated. I've felt exactly the same way about CNN and MSNBC! I find I have to turn off the TV for a few hours in the morning and often until after the narcissist Chris Matthews! until the more nervous Chris Hayes comes on the broadcast who at least gives a less personal opinionated view. Rachel Maddow is most investigative but lately has sounded screechy and gets in the ultra-soprano superfast speaking voice that is awfully distracting. Only Lawrence O'Donnell is cogent and rational! Or did I just write a tautology? At any rate, I think Paul Krugman is shrewdly astute in his perception of the actuality of Hillary Clinton. Just listening this a.m. to the news description of the chafing and suspiciously faked Wikileaks is amazing in how implications are ensconced in order to detonate more minutes of a report. It is a travesty and we the public need to be ever more vigilant to how our thinking is being manipulated by what I've intuited as the news media self-provisionism, providing for itself.
To me the key point is that polls show that Trump led the Republican field as soon as he announced..ie..his popularity was based on his tv show.
Can someone explain to me how being a star of a cheesy comedy has led to his position of candidate for POTUS?
Can someone explain to me how being a star of a cheesy comedy has led to his position of candidate for POTUS?
4
"Mrs. Clinton won the Democratic nomination [because] she just got lucky".
Well, one might think that both Clinton and Trump won their parties' nominations because the public is a fool, "Wisdom is too high for a fool" (Proverbs 24:7), and the voters do not see far ahead, but are swept into the logorrheic stream of the campaigning politicians.
Well, one might think that both Clinton and Trump won their parties' nominations because the public is a fool, "Wisdom is too high for a fool" (Proverbs 24:7), and the voters do not see far ahead, but are swept into the logorrheic stream of the campaigning politicians.
I disagree. Somebody has to.
1
She easily won the Democratic nomination?
Have you been asleep?
A 75 year old, angry, yelling, Senator from Vermont, that most people knew nothing about, won 22 states.
Wasserman-Schultz, the head of the DNC was fired for unethical tactics trying to fight him off. And now we learn the second in command, Donna Brasile was feeding HRC Town Hall questions, pre-game.
Did I miss anything? Oh right, there's a video of people being paid by the DNC to carry pre-printed signs, and start fights at Trump rallies. All for the benefit of the people at the NYT.
And that was just this week. I know, I know, you've never heard of Robert Creamer, his name doesn't make it into the NYT.
Here's an oddity, why don't the Republicans get hacked? Wait, I know the answer: The Russians. Are they also writing the content of these e-mails? They were obtained illegally, therefore the content is fake? That is what Ms. Brasile said, and that is what Hillary implied.
Here's a hint to Podesta, when you get an e-mail from a domain you don't recognize, don't hit the link. And, don't hire thugs that love to brag on camera that they are the next James Bond.
And despite all these underhanded and dirty tactics, despite the media trying their hardest, Trump and Clinton are tied. What does that tell you?
And here 's the thing Dr. Krugman, you don't want to vote for Hillary either, you want to vote for Obama.
How do I know that? Because she would already be President.
Have you been asleep?
A 75 year old, angry, yelling, Senator from Vermont, that most people knew nothing about, won 22 states.
Wasserman-Schultz, the head of the DNC was fired for unethical tactics trying to fight him off. And now we learn the second in command, Donna Brasile was feeding HRC Town Hall questions, pre-game.
Did I miss anything? Oh right, there's a video of people being paid by the DNC to carry pre-printed signs, and start fights at Trump rallies. All for the benefit of the people at the NYT.
And that was just this week. I know, I know, you've never heard of Robert Creamer, his name doesn't make it into the NYT.
Here's an oddity, why don't the Republicans get hacked? Wait, I know the answer: The Russians. Are they also writing the content of these e-mails? They were obtained illegally, therefore the content is fake? That is what Ms. Brasile said, and that is what Hillary implied.
Here's a hint to Podesta, when you get an e-mail from a domain you don't recognize, don't hit the link. And, don't hire thugs that love to brag on camera that they are the next James Bond.
And despite all these underhanded and dirty tactics, despite the media trying their hardest, Trump and Clinton are tied. What does that tell you?
And here 's the thing Dr. Krugman, you don't want to vote for Hillary either, you want to vote for Obama.
How do I know that? Because she would already be President.
2
And by the way, Donald, bieng Presidetnt of the United States is just not a seat-of-your-pants kind of job!
3
Let's keep up the myth that she's there through a random stroke of good luck. That way, in four years, she'll once more be underestimated and discounted, and stumble her way into two terms.
12
Did I miss the election? Hillary won, huh? So, America does want war and triangulation. I'm glad that's settled.
It was four short years ago that Romney was a shoe in. Polling in the bubble told us so. Karl Rove lost his mind on TV denying his loss.
The only defining characteristic for being president is managing to divvy up the cash garnered from the suckers (voters) and reward the most diligent lobbyists for arms, pharmaceuticals, loan sharking, et. al. Mrs. Clinton rules in that regard.
The media gave us Mr. Trump and now they are trying to take him away. In the meantime, profits soared and democracy became a sham. The manipulation is complete.
Now we're expecting a "massive" victory for Mrs. Clinton because . . . why? Because 51% of 40% of the electorate may hold their nose and vote against their interests. Looks like a slam dunk to me.
It was four short years ago that Romney was a shoe in. Polling in the bubble told us so. Karl Rove lost his mind on TV denying his loss.
The only defining characteristic for being president is managing to divvy up the cash garnered from the suckers (voters) and reward the most diligent lobbyists for arms, pharmaceuticals, loan sharking, et. al. Mrs. Clinton rules in that regard.
The media gave us Mr. Trump and now they are trying to take him away. In the meantime, profits soared and democracy became a sham. The manipulation is complete.
Now we're expecting a "massive" victory for Mrs. Clinton because . . . why? Because 51% of 40% of the electorate may hold their nose and vote against their interests. Looks like a slam dunk to me.
Absolutely correct! We are still in the territory of predicting the election - not announcing the winner.
I love your Karl Rove analogy. What a complete fool he made republican hopefuls out to be - they actually believed his projections of victory! But he was working with exclusively his own and other right wing media sites. Not looking at realistic and varied polls.
Yes, it is too early to call a winner for this year. But I have to say that considering a wide array of political polls, not just right wing Karl Rove and Fox News polls, my prediction is that Clinton will win by a landslide. Not that puny landslide that Obama had over Romney, but a real landslide. There's your slam dunk.
I love your Karl Rove analogy. What a complete fool he made republican hopefuls out to be - they actually believed his projections of victory! But he was working with exclusively his own and other right wing media sites. Not looking at realistic and varied polls.
Yes, it is too early to call a winner for this year. But I have to say that considering a wide array of political polls, not just right wing Karl Rove and Fox News polls, my prediction is that Clinton will win by a landslide. Not that puny landslide that Obama had over Romney, but a real landslide. There's your slam dunk.
When the right discusses the Clinton's I immediately think why the hate? Why the animosity?
My explanation is simple. The Clinton's have been centrist perhaps even center-right on many issues over the years. They have always been willing compromise so you would think that a president of Mr Clinton's and perhaps Mrs Clintons ilk would be able to hammer out needed legislation and have good relations with Congress and the opposition.
Obviously that hasn't been the case. I think the Clinton hate stems from the simple fact that the Clinton's are better at the GOPs own game than they are. They are better fund raisers, have a broader circle of "insiders", have a better sense of the peoples desires on specific issues. Their foundation leaves GOP counterparts in the dust. As an orator and "explainer" Bill Clinton is second to none eclipsing even the much revered Ronald Reagan. Measure by measure Bill and to a lesser extent Hillary are better at "Republican" politics than many who actually are Republicans.
That makes them angry and seething with resentment.
My explanation is simple. The Clinton's have been centrist perhaps even center-right on many issues over the years. They have always been willing compromise so you would think that a president of Mr Clinton's and perhaps Mrs Clintons ilk would be able to hammer out needed legislation and have good relations with Congress and the opposition.
Obviously that hasn't been the case. I think the Clinton hate stems from the simple fact that the Clinton's are better at the GOPs own game than they are. They are better fund raisers, have a broader circle of "insiders", have a better sense of the peoples desires on specific issues. Their foundation leaves GOP counterparts in the dust. As an orator and "explainer" Bill Clinton is second to none eclipsing even the much revered Ronald Reagan. Measure by measure Bill and to a lesser extent Hillary are better at "Republican" politics than many who actually are Republicans.
That makes them angry and seething with resentment.
23
Also: They are better liked on a personal basis by both sides
As if we needed any more information about Trump's character, it was shown at the Al Smith Dinner. He was petty, belligerent, unintelligent and totally lacking in any sense of humor.
13
The irony of this election is that the Republicans ended up with probably the one candidate who has more baggage than Hillary. She will win by default, because, other than the 40 percent who will vote for Trump even if he "shoots someone on 5th Avenue" there are enough voters who can overlook her issues and realize she is the candidate who can step in on day one and do the job.
3
While Clinton has been a political target, accused of everything from mismanagement to murder, a more interesting aspect of her career has been the respect she gained among Congresspersons, both while Secretary of State and as Senator from New York.
As a candidate, she's been seen by many just as corporate interests intentionally portrayed her. In action, she's worked steadily, cooperatively, and sometimes angrily, for what she believes is important. If as President she has the privilege of working with a majority in House and Senate, she will surely Make America Greater Than Ever.
As a candidate, she's been seen by many just as corporate interests intentionally portrayed her. In action, she's worked steadily, cooperatively, and sometimes angrily, for what she believes is important. If as President she has the privilege of working with a majority in House and Senate, she will surely Make America Greater Than Ever.
29
The Republican business model fashioned by Mitch McConnell over the last twenty years of more is a colossal failure.
It lured hundreds of national figures into thinking that nonsense was acceptable and sustainable. Just look back on Jeff Sessions ramblings about judges legislating from the bench and Ted Cruz working to shut done the government. The foolish religious-liberty skirmishes, Hobby Lobby, The Little Sisters of the Poor, the lawsuits against the Affordable Care Act. And now the Supreme Court nomination process blockade. The Republican caucus in our Congress is a travesty and is just a bad as Donald Trump in its callous ripping apart of our secret sauce chanting it is the country's savior.
Trump spins the economy has failed and is tanking, that our country and its image is in ruins. Our military is not devastated and the world is not laughing at us it's laughing at him.
It lured hundreds of national figures into thinking that nonsense was acceptable and sustainable. Just look back on Jeff Sessions ramblings about judges legislating from the bench and Ted Cruz working to shut done the government. The foolish religious-liberty skirmishes, Hobby Lobby, The Little Sisters of the Poor, the lawsuits against the Affordable Care Act. And now the Supreme Court nomination process blockade. The Republican caucus in our Congress is a travesty and is just a bad as Donald Trump in its callous ripping apart of our secret sauce chanting it is the country's savior.
Trump spins the economy has failed and is tanking, that our country and its image is in ruins. Our military is not devastated and the world is not laughing at us it's laughing at him.
13
From the very beginning, Hillary's formidable strengths as a female political figure has caused the GOP, along with many pundits, to spin off the rails with intensifying irrational opposition.
And with Hillary's more-than-likely election as POTUS, in my opinion, she will probably be the cause for the final demise of the GOP, as we know it. After 25 years of hatred that did not sink her political ambitions, the GOP opposition will only grow in intensity once she is elected.
After the national (and worldwide) dismay, embarrassment, and weariness of the Trump nomination (along with the begrudging support of GOP leaders), GOP probable attempts at impeachment, total obstruction, and refusal to nominate a Supreme Court justice, will be too much for this county to endure any longer.
And with Hillary's more-than-likely election as POTUS, in my opinion, she will probably be the cause for the final demise of the GOP, as we know it. After 25 years of hatred that did not sink her political ambitions, the GOP opposition will only grow in intensity once she is elected.
After the national (and worldwide) dismay, embarrassment, and weariness of the Trump nomination (along with the begrudging support of GOP leaders), GOP probable attempts at impeachment, total obstruction, and refusal to nominate a Supreme Court justice, will be too much for this county to endure any longer.
6
Oh dear, I am reading comments that are lumping Bernie supporters in with Trump supporters and also assume we are all Hillary haters and won't vote for her.
Please be careful what you assume. Me and a number of my friends were Bernie supporters and we were disappointed when he was not given proper attention and respect in the media during the primaries. We liked Bernie because he had solid values and a simple clear message as an "outsider" about what needed to be fixed in this country to get it on track.
However, Bernie lost, Hillary won the popular primary vote and the right to be the Democratic presidential candidate.
Personally, as I watched Hillary slog through this dreadful election cycle against the always bashing and bullying Trump and the Republicans, I have gained great respect for Clinton's poise, grace under pressure, and intelligence. Her performance at the Democratic Convention and in the last 2 debates was masterful under the worst of circumstances--thanks to Donald Trump and the wimpy questions and weak debate media moderators.
I thought the Democratic Party was the party of inclusion. The Democrats need all the friends we can get. It is not smart to put former Bernie supporters outside the tent. Please know that I and most of my friends will gladly and proudly vote for Hillary on November 8.
Please be careful what you assume. Me and a number of my friends were Bernie supporters and we were disappointed when he was not given proper attention and respect in the media during the primaries. We liked Bernie because he had solid values and a simple clear message as an "outsider" about what needed to be fixed in this country to get it on track.
However, Bernie lost, Hillary won the popular primary vote and the right to be the Democratic presidential candidate.
Personally, as I watched Hillary slog through this dreadful election cycle against the always bashing and bullying Trump and the Republicans, I have gained great respect for Clinton's poise, grace under pressure, and intelligence. Her performance at the Democratic Convention and in the last 2 debates was masterful under the worst of circumstances--thanks to Donald Trump and the wimpy questions and weak debate media moderators.
I thought the Democratic Party was the party of inclusion. The Democrats need all the friends we can get. It is not smart to put former Bernie supporters outside the tent. Please know that I and most of my friends will gladly and proudly vote for Hillary on November 8.
32
By the remote chance that Hillary loses (and brexit did happen), they will blame Bernie supporters.
1
do not judge Hillary partisans too harshly...they have had the double sting of seeing "their girl" lose to a charismatic young Hawaiian and then nearly lose to an aging socialist. Krugman got behind Obama, but not before bashing him during the primaries, and then he was hard on Bernie, so I guess he has a special fondness for the resilient and well=prepared Secretary of State.
1
@PB. I haven't seen any of those comments knocking Bernie supporters that you refer to, but maybe because they have so few "recommends" that they are at the bottom of the list! Bernie was a fabulous Mayor of Burlington and Governor of Vermont and I think very highly of him, but In this day and age I would not have voted for him because the Socialist label would have scared so many people away at at 76 I have become much more pragmatic. But I'm thrilled to have him a powerful voice in the Senate. I'm sure he will have a great deal of influence on President Clinton.
Compare presidents elected before television to those after. Speeches were important even in the 1800s and with radio dominating dissemination, but back then it was primarily due to the content of people's thoughts, not just how well they expressed them. HRC would have done exceedingly well on radio. She is not a built-for-TV person and Trump lives on TV. Luckily his content still came through for what it was and most of the US passed its IQ and basic sanity test this year.
5
Eb The election isn't over yet. We must get out and vote for Hillary Clinton and make sure she is our next President.
1
As a business owner of a science and engineering firm, and over forty, Ms. Clinton is exactly the candidate that I always wanted. She is deeply qualified and is Not flawed for this job. She knows what it's like to be in meetings as the only woman, and how hard it is to be taken seriously and not tolerate being interrupted. Endure the mansplaining.
As a another commenter said, we are not heard, we are here and have been all along. We are busy running our lives, families, and businesses. I have already seen a difference in respect by Ms. Clintons candidacy.
Finally the media is starting to get it.
As a another commenter said, we are not heard, we are here and have been all along. We are busy running our lives, families, and businesses. I have already seen a difference in respect by Ms. Clintons candidacy.
Finally the media is starting to get it.
35
Why do you continue to avoid mentioning the economic and financial "reforms" signed into law by POTUS W.J. Clinton? The refusal to regulate derivatives trading, the termination of the Glass-Steagall Act, the willingness to let a major bank, Citibank, to be acquired by Travelers Insurance, the retention of Greenspan as Fed Chair, the signing of NAFTA, the admission of China into the WTO, and the "PARDON" of Marc Rich, all were acts of the husband of the next occupant of the White House.
Yes, Slick Willy will not act as POTUS (we hope), but rumours that he will have a major responsibility for economic policy under the new administration should be a cause for worry. Hillary Clinton has provided ample evidence that she fully shares her husband's views on Wall Street and the financialization of the US economy. And the hopeless rants of the defeated, those derided by establishment economists like Krugman, are cries of pain by Americans who have been dealt a losing hand by the advocates of so-called economic and financial "modernization." In reality, the policies pursued by the Wall Street - Washington Axis have crushed organized labour, allowed rampant misallocation of resources by financial institutions that invent "assets" for trading fees rather than lend for real economic activity, and realize profits that are multiples of their share of the labour force or of GDP. Krugman and the Clintons are the perfect amplifiers for the goals of this Axis of (Financial) Evil.
Yes, Slick Willy will not act as POTUS (we hope), but rumours that he will have a major responsibility for economic policy under the new administration should be a cause for worry. Hillary Clinton has provided ample evidence that she fully shares her husband's views on Wall Street and the financialization of the US economy. And the hopeless rants of the defeated, those derided by establishment economists like Krugman, are cries of pain by Americans who have been dealt a losing hand by the advocates of so-called economic and financial "modernization." In reality, the policies pursued by the Wall Street - Washington Axis have crushed organized labour, allowed rampant misallocation of resources by financial institutions that invent "assets" for trading fees rather than lend for real economic activity, and realize profits that are multiples of their share of the labour force or of GDP. Krugman and the Clintons are the perfect amplifiers for the goals of this Axis of (Financial) Evil.
5
You make good points before going a little over the top. I too am unhappy much of what W. J. Clinton did and how he turned the party further away from working people when he turned it to being the pal to big business and the plutocrats. But I believe Bernie made Hillary a better candidate and living with William J. must certainly have provided a extraordinary learning experience. Besides, was there a better, smarter, and more effective candidate that we missed? She has earned every bit of her chance at this.
3
BDR you have to hope that you are not judged by the actions and opinions of your spouse. And in case you haven't noticed: Bill Clinton isn't running for the Presidency and with all his faults he wasn't stupid enough to put us into a war for oil.
In Europe the economies are way worse than ours today because they adopted the austerity budgeting that the Republicans embrace trying to pay down debt. Not really smart to pull money out of the economy at a time when you are proclaiming that it isn't robust. You cannot have it both ways: another example of political double talk. The policies you rail against are demanded by a global capitalism. If our businesses did not do what they have done they would have been out competed by the lower labor costs and cheaper products. What they've done has been painful for our workers but most of the companies are still in business. That's the capitalistic imperative. Unless a government steps in to soften the necessities of the market, the inequality etc. is inevitable and the Republican Party is solidly behind business -- not workers, which explains why they are hurting. Not explained is why workers seem incapable of recognizing that Republican policies don't even pretend to help them except by working to help businesses first and foremost.
In Europe the economies are way worse than ours today because they adopted the austerity budgeting that the Republicans embrace trying to pay down debt. Not really smart to pull money out of the economy at a time when you are proclaiming that it isn't robust. You cannot have it both ways: another example of political double talk. The policies you rail against are demanded by a global capitalism. If our businesses did not do what they have done they would have been out competed by the lower labor costs and cheaper products. What they've done has been painful for our workers but most of the companies are still in business. That's the capitalistic imperative. Unless a government steps in to soften the necessities of the market, the inequality etc. is inevitable and the Republican Party is solidly behind business -- not workers, which explains why they are hurting. Not explained is why workers seem incapable of recognizing that Republican policies don't even pretend to help them except by working to help businesses first and foremost.
I suppose the American people cannot really appreciate the subtle nuances in political discourse so it is best to just gloss them over constantly until they become unrecognizable. The equating of Trump and Bernie supporters. Why one could actually think they were exactly the same reading here in the Times and the comments. Nice try again but at least this reader is going to point out that it is a propaganda trick and not worthy of real political discourse. There are those of us who deeply resent this comparison and will not forget the nastiness of the Times and the Democratic establishment during the primaries. We are determined to hold the Democratic Parties collective feet to the fire of their own platform. A platform adopted in large part to assuage those of us who genuinely feel we are the real Democrats here and to get us to vote for Clinton in the general election. With a margin that looked so narrow, you neoliberals were not going to pull this off, even with the Donald it has been close until recently, without the support of your base. Stop the denigration of Bernie supporters.
6
If Clinton was her husband the pundits would be praising her to the skies. She's better than her husband because she's seen first hand what can happen during a presidency. Her husband's experience is what showed her that being calm and poised under extreme pressure is better than saying things like "I did not have sex with that woman.". And Clinton is an accomplished politician in her own right. Maybe she hasn't had the headlines but she's worked on issues that concern women, children and families, a segment of the population well neglected by the GOP.
Is she a perfect candidate? No, but no one is. As for the claim that she plays the woman card, she has to because she is a woman. Is she supposed to hide her gender? It's not her gender this time that is the issue. It's the fact that Trump has shown his complete disregard for democracy during the debates and the campaign. I do not want a candidate who says we'll have to wait to see if he will accept the results of the election. That implies that if he loses he'll refuse to concede. And that means that he doesn't care about our votes. That is frightening.
Is she a perfect candidate? No, but no one is. As for the claim that she plays the woman card, she has to because she is a woman. Is she supposed to hide her gender? It's not her gender this time that is the issue. It's the fact that Trump has shown his complete disregard for democracy during the debates and the campaign. I do not want a candidate who says we'll have to wait to see if he will accept the results of the election. That implies that if he loses he'll refuse to concede. And that means that he doesn't care about our votes. That is frightening.
5
"Furthermore, there’s one thing Mrs. Clinton brought to this campaign that no establishment Republican could have matched: She truly cares about her signature issues, and believes in the solutions she’s pushing."
I spit up my coffee laughing after reading the above from Paul!
Krauthammer: The soullessness of this campaign — all ambition and entitlement — emerges almost poignantly in the emails, especially when aides keep asking what the campaign is about. In one largely overlooked passage, Clinton complains that her speechwriters have not given her any overall theme or rationale. Isn’t that the candidate’s job? Asked one of her aides, Joel Benenson: “Do we have any sense from her what she believes or wants her core message to be?”
It’s that emptiness at the core that makes every policy and position negotiable and politically calculable. Hence the embarrassing about-face on the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the popular winds swung decisively against free trade.
So too with financial regulation, as in Dodd-Frank. As she told a Goldman Sachs gathering, after the financial collapse there was “a need to do something because, for political reasons . . . you can’t sit idly by and do nothing.”
Donald Trump expected to go out fighting in last debate
Giving the appearance that something had to be done. That’s not why Elizabeth Warren supported Dodd-Frank. Which is the difference between a conviction politician like Warren and a calculating machine like Clinton.
I spit up my coffee laughing after reading the above from Paul!
Krauthammer: The soullessness of this campaign — all ambition and entitlement — emerges almost poignantly in the emails, especially when aides keep asking what the campaign is about. In one largely overlooked passage, Clinton complains that her speechwriters have not given her any overall theme or rationale. Isn’t that the candidate’s job? Asked one of her aides, Joel Benenson: “Do we have any sense from her what she believes or wants her core message to be?”
It’s that emptiness at the core that makes every policy and position negotiable and politically calculable. Hence the embarrassing about-face on the Trans-Pacific Partnership after the popular winds swung decisively against free trade.
So too with financial regulation, as in Dodd-Frank. As she told a Goldman Sachs gathering, after the financial collapse there was “a need to do something because, for political reasons . . . you can’t sit idly by and do nothing.”
Donald Trump expected to go out fighting in last debate
Giving the appearance that something had to be done. That’s not why Elizabeth Warren supported Dodd-Frank. Which is the difference between a conviction politician like Warren and a calculating machine like Clinton.
4
HRC has the potential to be a major transformative president, one who, like Lincoln and Roosevelt, rises to and rises above the challenges and circumstances that characterize their tenures. My feeling is she will meet and exceed that challenge, but will do so as long as she is able to minimize any military conflict.
I am looking forward to being a part of that national and global transformation.
I am looking forward to being a part of that national and global transformation.
11
It is absolutely true that Trump lost the three debates; Clinton's preternatural calm and strategic long view -- not to mention her infinitely superior knowledge base -- does make her formidable. And it is also true -- and a remarkable feature of the 24/7 news cycle -- that the aftermath of each debate elicited the long tail of Trump's debate failures. These debates are no longer 90 minute affairs -- they have a far longer afterlife not only among professional pundits and journalists, but among citizen commentators as well.
10
Krugman has lost the ability to be objective about a dangerously flawed Hillary Clinton. Sadly, this puts him in the same basket as the dinosaur (as in soon to be extinct) media that has made their coverage of her borderline farce. He is proud to support the most corrupt presidential candidate in history. He glosses over her monumental blunders: the ghastly wars that she so eagerly trumpeted, leaving nations devastated and millions uprooted and destitute; ignoring the pleas of her ambassador as he fought for his life and lying about the attack; suffering convenient lapses of memory as she was questioned by the FBI and congress; accepting huge payments for speeches that she desperately tried to keep secret; permanently expunging emails in defiance of a congressional subpoena; her disdain for most ordinary Americans; her two-facedness; blaming the Russians without a single proffer of verifiable evidence for the Wikileaks release of the Podesta emails; drumming up anti-Russsian far-mongering that will risk confrontation that can annihilate humanity; boasting support for women and the LGBT community while the Clinton Foundation accepts millions from governments with institutional practices that persecute and marginalize women and execute gays. And so much more. She is is "formidable figure" all right: formidably corrupt being foremost. She will not win. The American voters know her too well.
2
"He is proud to support the most corrupt presidential candidate in history."
I'm no Clinton fan, but that's an exaggeration. Warren Harding, Ulysses Grant, Andrew Jackson, Rutherford B Hayes, and quite a few others were considerably worse.
I'm no Clinton fan, but that's an exaggeration. Warren Harding, Ulysses Grant, Andrew Jackson, Rutherford B Hayes, and quite a few others were considerably worse.
2
These immigrants work and pay taxes that support schools, police, roads and hospitals.
You are watching too much FOX TV. Try using your brain and reading the original documentation of these events. You will find that your opinions are based on right wing tirades not on the facts.
Hillary Clinton told Wall Street she endorsed the Simpson-Bowles plan for a grand bargain to cut (entitlement) spending and raise revenue to balance the budget.
I must've read PK dozens of times lampooning and condemning this centerpiece of centrist macroeconomics. He called out the absurd Very Serious People who really had no grasp of what the economy needed to grow jobs. Their fears of exploding national debt were msplaced.
Hillary was right there with the VSP's--no surprise, as Bill Clinton always was too.
Fine to cite her admirable traits and experience, but for PK the Keynesian guru to say Clinton is talking "good sense" on macro needs some Serious explaining..
I must've read PK dozens of times lampooning and condemning this centerpiece of centrist macroeconomics. He called out the absurd Very Serious People who really had no grasp of what the economy needed to grow jobs. Their fears of exploding national debt were msplaced.
Hillary was right there with the VSP's--no surprise, as Bill Clinton always was too.
Fine to cite her admirable traits and experience, but for PK the Keynesian guru to say Clinton is talking "good sense" on macro needs some Serious explaining..
7
In reply to Richard Genz:
In a highly polarized country, an effective governing strategy involves compromise. You have to examine legislation in terms of whether or not a particular bill is better or worse than both of the two alternatives: a competing bill or nothing at all. Both Clintons understand this, which seems to be what infuriates absolutists. Krugman would certainly have wanted something even better than Simpson-Bowles. However, it still would have been better than either nothing or one of the alternatives, like a Constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget despite the consequences or, like global warming, simply pretending that long-term fiscal imbalances don't exist.
In a highly polarized country, an effective governing strategy involves compromise. You have to examine legislation in terms of whether or not a particular bill is better or worse than both of the two alternatives: a competing bill or nothing at all. Both Clintons understand this, which seems to be what infuriates absolutists. Krugman would certainly have wanted something even better than Simpson-Bowles. However, it still would have been better than either nothing or one of the alternatives, like a Constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget despite the consequences or, like global warming, simply pretending that long-term fiscal imbalances don't exist.
2
Democracy has different instruments to operate. Elections are not among the best. Information is channeled to voters through media. Media also operate publicity. It becomes straight forward that information becomes publicity and even worse, propaganda. Pundits have proliferated because they are in high demand by the money providers that want to influence the outcome, Unfortunately, information, and therefore democracy, are the losers at the end.
2
Punditry is a lucrative business, it appears. Talking heads, experts, specialists, pollsters, all get paid well because election is an expensive proposition. Bernie proved that it did not have to be that way but George Clooney says it is obscene and its so because the rich and wealthy generate "high demand by the money providers that want to influence the outcome".
Most voters are gullible, they get swayed easily by visuals and bluster and its the media's role and responsibility to provide real news, not opinion and sway. The media has failed us.
Most voters are gullible, they get swayed easily by visuals and bluster and its the media's role and responsibility to provide real news, not opinion and sway. The media has failed us.
6
American politics never understood the feminine politics - briefly Nancy Pallosi showed that feminine touch on late part of George Bush presidency and early part of Obama presidency. Clinton will bring the feminine politics to America as president and this will transform American psyche. The macho, winner takes all, Number one in the world, Superpower syndrome, boys club that predominated the American political history for so long will transform to humane, will take all with us, strong like steel against oppression and evils, and sense of togetherness in the diverse world and culture. American media is the mirror image of American political system and this feminine transformation is viewed as manipulation, untrustworthy, and deceptive. This is the first time I saw some one who has seen the possibilities of Clinton as president.
20
Her weaknesses are glaring and rooted in a shadow side that has been forced to dissemble for her husband's sexual escapades for many years. One builds up a rather thick callous emotionally from having to do that and live with endless, relentless, often ridiculous attacks by her hate-filled opponents and enemies. Years of constant abuse have worn down her ability to be authentic and sincere. Her best moment in last debate was her genuine, self-righteous anger towards Trump's unwillingness to accept outcome of election. Dr. Krugman's support of Hillary has been evident for quite some time now. This column rationalizes why she won, but not why she has so many issues connecting with potential voters and winning over her opposition. It's the shadow. We all have them. Her's is overly long and dark.
The questions is, why does it take until two-and-a-half weeks before the election for anyone to realize that Hillary is, indeed, formidable? The answer is an indictment of the herd mentality of the pedestrian minds of most journalists. They do justify the "lame stream" label because they lack the substantive background in the issues and the critical thinking to assess them sensibly. The predominant focus on the race, not the horses, reflects precisely the mindlessness of the media. The Republicans are not alone in their irresponsibility for foisting such a worthless and dangerous candidate on the electorate. And for having done so, they do not deserve down-ballot votes so that, by obstructing Hillary, they can perpetuate their irresponsibility.
37
Completely in agreement here. In spite of the unrelenting misogynistic jeering, hostility and sheer elementary school whining from Republicans, including their debauched orange leader, Hillary Clinton will probably win one of the bigger victories of recent years. I was a Bernie supporter during the primaries, as were many left-of-center Democrats I know, including my wife, but all of us were fully aware that HR Clinton was the likely candidate we were going to vote for in November. And we are happy. She will be a very good President.
35
I’ve come to like personally Hillary more than I expected in part because she has shown a great ability to laugh. That said, you are wrong to say no other Rep. candidate out there would have fared well against her.
The reality is Trump’s positions resonate and it’s not about hate but rather facing reality. Unfortunately only someone so politically incorrect has what it takes to break from the Republican orthodoxy. Democrats need to find there rabble rousing, free thinking candidate. As someone who is active in Dem. politics right now I can say speaking honestly will get you banned.
The party is filled with quotas, racial and gender based. Question anything and you may wind up being called racist, homophobic, etc. You definitely will not be permitted to be a delegate, even if elected.
If I were Trump when Hillary mentioned in the last debate the poor Ecuadorian woman with 5 kids who faced deportation, I would have pointed out that each of those kids costs $10k a year to educate. That’s $50 thousand a year combined. Half a million by time they completed grade school. Multiply that story by the 10 million illegal immigrants she wants to legalize, and think about its impact on the environment and social security and funding schools.
Trump is too loopy to articulate those positions but there is someone out there who could, at least we can hope.
The reality is Trump’s positions resonate and it’s not about hate but rather facing reality. Unfortunately only someone so politically incorrect has what it takes to break from the Republican orthodoxy. Democrats need to find there rabble rousing, free thinking candidate. As someone who is active in Dem. politics right now I can say speaking honestly will get you banned.
The party is filled with quotas, racial and gender based. Question anything and you may wind up being called racist, homophobic, etc. You definitely will not be permitted to be a delegate, even if elected.
If I were Trump when Hillary mentioned in the last debate the poor Ecuadorian woman with 5 kids who faced deportation, I would have pointed out that each of those kids costs $10k a year to educate. That’s $50 thousand a year combined. Half a million by time they completed grade school. Multiply that story by the 10 million illegal immigrants she wants to legalize, and think about its impact on the environment and social security and funding schools.
Trump is too loopy to articulate those positions but there is someone out there who could, at least we can hope.
1
When those well-educated 5 kids pay taxes over 30 years, and contribute to their communities, and raise productive families of their own, I think you'll find they more than pay for themselves. The ledger of citizenship doesn't only have one side.
Love thy Ecuadorian neighbor as thyself if it doesn't cost anything?
hey Karen,
i'm active in local politics - local property taxes pay for education mostly. We don't have enough money to fund programs for arts, and sports as is.
I doubt for the most part that these kids will ever contribute more than they take in. They'll each have 3 or 4 kids and take in more than they give - at least thats the history in recent decades.
Why do you think the quality of life keeps going down in america? These kids are growing up with a mother who thinks nothing of breaking immigration laws and no father - that won't help.
Of course we just took in an Ethiopian couple with 13 kids - but at least its a couple. (they just had twins)
Meantime my wife and i can't afford to go to the dentist.
i'm active in local politics - local property taxes pay for education mostly. We don't have enough money to fund programs for arts, and sports as is.
I doubt for the most part that these kids will ever contribute more than they take in. They'll each have 3 or 4 kids and take in more than they give - at least thats the history in recent decades.
Why do you think the quality of life keeps going down in america? These kids are growing up with a mother who thinks nothing of breaking immigration laws and no father - that won't help.
Of course we just took in an Ethiopian couple with 13 kids - but at least its a couple. (they just had twins)
Meantime my wife and i can't afford to go to the dentist.
1
By their reaction to recent revelations the GOP cult still urges voters to elect Trump. Republicans think that people will believe that Republicans are patriots because HRC in the White House would destroy the country. People like these are addicted to power and because of demographic changes the only way to keep power is to destroy our system of democracy along with the Constitution. The Senate majority has already been ignoring for close to a year by refusing to do their prescribed duty to fill a Sup. Court vacancy. During this campaign the GOP has been relying on voter ignorance, racism, contempt for women and fear of losing their guns.
The GOP expected Hillary to be seen as some kind of female dragon and Trump the dragon slayer, who never slayed a dragon without his father’s help, would make short work of her. But two things happened: Trump kept stabbing himself and Hillary turned out to be very intelligent, highly experienced, knowledgeable on the issues, demonstrated coolness under pressue and knew how to bait a know little or know nothing loud mouthed bully who thinks he is smart because he hasn’t paid income taxes for years.
More than 50% of voters are women and Hillary aimed straight for them and hit bull’s eye after bull’s eye. It is clear that whether or not you believe the lies about her, and she is not perfect, she is both qualified and fit to be president and is there is a down ticket landslide she can make America Greater that it has ever been.
The GOP expected Hillary to be seen as some kind of female dragon and Trump the dragon slayer, who never slayed a dragon without his father’s help, would make short work of her. But two things happened: Trump kept stabbing himself and Hillary turned out to be very intelligent, highly experienced, knowledgeable on the issues, demonstrated coolness under pressue and knew how to bait a know little or know nothing loud mouthed bully who thinks he is smart because he hasn’t paid income taxes for years.
More than 50% of voters are women and Hillary aimed straight for them and hit bull’s eye after bull’s eye. It is clear that whether or not you believe the lies about her, and she is not perfect, she is both qualified and fit to be president and is there is a down ticket landslide she can make America Greater that it has ever been.
27
Dr. Krugman, while I was a Bernie supporter because of the Gordian Knot of corruption presaged by Eisenhower's farewell address, l have admired Hillary's grace under the overwhelming partisan onslaught perpetrated by the Republicans and their ilk (alt-right, etc.).
I have also been impressed by your policy prescriptions that have no chance of being implemented as long as the Republicans have any avenue to block them in our government. As has been shown by the examples of California and Kansas, the enormous potential of this great country can only be unleashed once the Republicans are soundly defeated. Contrary to the "lead, follow, or get out of the way" dictum, the GOP down ballot candidates advertise themselves as parts of a roadblock to the progress that could be enjoyed if the voters would only look past their racism and vote for the candidates that want to restore economic equality.
It is sad that the racist, xenophobic urges of Trump supporters, combined with the ignorance of basic economic realities have caused a clearly unqualified and dangerous man to come this close to the Oval Office. But then again, he does occasionally speak the truth, as when he said, "I love the poorly educated".
I am an independent, but will vote straight Democratic tickets until the scourge of the Republican Party is gone from our political landscape.
I have also been impressed by your policy prescriptions that have no chance of being implemented as long as the Republicans have any avenue to block them in our government. As has been shown by the examples of California and Kansas, the enormous potential of this great country can only be unleashed once the Republicans are soundly defeated. Contrary to the "lead, follow, or get out of the way" dictum, the GOP down ballot candidates advertise themselves as parts of a roadblock to the progress that could be enjoyed if the voters would only look past their racism and vote for the candidates that want to restore economic equality.
It is sad that the racist, xenophobic urges of Trump supporters, combined with the ignorance of basic economic realities have caused a clearly unqualified and dangerous man to come this close to the Oval Office. But then again, he does occasionally speak the truth, as when he said, "I love the poorly educated".
I am an independent, but will vote straight Democratic tickets until the scourge of the Republican Party is gone from our political landscape.
52
Scott,
I am not a Democrat or Republican. I am not a neoliberal, nor a neocon. I am a rather conservative democratic socialist.
The economy is not broken it does not need fixing it is working exactly as it was designed to work and it is working far better than can reasonably be expected.
In 1992 John Ralston Saul published Voltaire's Bastards (the Dictatorship of Reason in the West). John Ralston Saul used Robert McNamara as his super wonk. He told us we would see a Donald Trump come forward and threaten to take over the Oval Office.
John Ralston Saul has written a number of books since and has served as the head of PEN International. He has been called a prophet in the NYT, Washington Post and newspapers around the world. John Ralston Saul will tell you he is an historian. The economy is functioning exactly as it was designed to function many like my self believe it is functioning far beyond expectations.
If you don't like the GOP and Donald Trump change the economy it is what it is.
I am not a Democrat or Republican. I am not a neoliberal, nor a neocon. I am a rather conservative democratic socialist.
The economy is not broken it does not need fixing it is working exactly as it was designed to work and it is working far better than can reasonably be expected.
In 1992 John Ralston Saul published Voltaire's Bastards (the Dictatorship of Reason in the West). John Ralston Saul used Robert McNamara as his super wonk. He told us we would see a Donald Trump come forward and threaten to take over the Oval Office.
John Ralston Saul has written a number of books since and has served as the head of PEN International. He has been called a prophet in the NYT, Washington Post and newspapers around the world. John Ralston Saul will tell you he is an historian. The economy is functioning exactly as it was designed to function many like my self believe it is functioning far beyond expectations.
If you don't like the GOP and Donald Trump change the economy it is what it is.
1
Hillary has confounded Trump and many of her detractors with her stamina. As to the Republican party, their tent seems to get smaller and less inclusive every year. The longer states adopt Republican fiscal policies, the worse they perform relative to other states. Republican fiscal policies at the federal level have proven to be an agent of change, namely greater income inequality and a greater divide between the haves and the have nots.
16
A thoughtful column by Krugman. I still think most of the animosity toward Hillary is due to misogyny. Or, more accurately, the power-relationship between men and women. Never mind her issues; this pushy broad is intruding on a formerly all-male preserve. I don't think most people realize how deeply this anti-feminist instinct runs in most men.
Yes, it is an instinct, and an ancient one at that. Some call it male dominance. It may have helped ragtag bands of of early humans to survive in a hostile world. But it is at odds with modern, global civilization. Even today, we see growing resistance to women's progress in many parts of the world. In the Islamic culture sphere, it is often violent.
What’s more, most of the attacks on Hillary are based on innuendo. Would Hillary have been subject to such innuendo throughout her career if she were a man? I doubt it. Innuendo is a favorite tactic used by men (and some women) when they want to denigrate a woman without appearing to do so. Most men still cannot stomach the idea of a strong successful women, even to this day. And most cannot ackknowledge such feelings. They are doomed by instinct.
I'm sure I'll get intensely defensive replies from some male readers to this comment, as I have in the past. But they only serve to confirm me in my understanding of this issue.
Yes, it is an instinct, and an ancient one at that. Some call it male dominance. It may have helped ragtag bands of of early humans to survive in a hostile world. But it is at odds with modern, global civilization. Even today, we see growing resistance to women's progress in many parts of the world. In the Islamic culture sphere, it is often violent.
What’s more, most of the attacks on Hillary are based on innuendo. Would Hillary have been subject to such innuendo throughout her career if she were a man? I doubt it. Innuendo is a favorite tactic used by men (and some women) when they want to denigrate a woman without appearing to do so. Most men still cannot stomach the idea of a strong successful women, even to this day. And most cannot ackknowledge such feelings. They are doomed by instinct.
I'm sure I'll get intensely defensive replies from some male readers to this comment, as I have in the past. But they only serve to confirm me in my understanding of this issue.
169
With liberals is the Presidential run all about personal identity and a greater class struggle against the oppressed?
Sir, you are 100% spot-on in your analysis.
Biases, whether based on ethnicity or gender, reside in each of us (yes, EVERYONE is biased) at a subconcious level. Simply ceasing to be in denial about these facts goes a long way toward changing one's mindset.
Biases, whether based on ethnicity or gender, reside in each of us (yes, EVERYONE is biased) at a subconcious level. Simply ceasing to be in denial about these facts goes a long way toward changing one's mindset.
1
For example, PK feels he is oppressed by bankers in his advocacy of stimulus.
Why Hillary wins is a foregone conclusion unless there is something really bad happen in the next two weeks. The question is more how she is planning how to govern and if people understand absolute transparency is impossible in this global world with the rise of China and resurgence of Russia.
A few more words about transparency. It is ironic people criticizing Mrs Clinton for being secretive while Mr Trump criticizes President Obama for being open about the Mosul offensive, like there is any doubt.
A few more words about transparency. It is ironic people criticizing Mrs Clinton for being secretive while Mr Trump criticizes President Obama for being open about the Mosul offensive, like there is any doubt.
15
First major polling source after debate, Rasmussen has Trump advancing 5 pt.s in one day and is currently +3.
2
Rasmussen's polling has a poor track record.
"Several polling firms got notably poor results, on the other hand. For the second consecutive election — the same was true in 2010 — Rasmussen Reports polls had a statistical bias toward Republicans, overestimating Mr. Romney’s performance by about four percentage points, on average."
Nate Silver
"Several polling firms got notably poor results, on the other hand. For the second consecutive election — the same was true in 2010 — Rasmussen Reports polls had a statistical bias toward Republicans, overestimating Mr. Romney’s performance by about four percentage points, on average."
Nate Silver
And the Tooth Fairy is also showing really good numbers in that poll!
You are wrong, Paul!
Mrs Clinton wont Democratic nomination by stealing it from Bernie Sanders.
And she did this with "superdelegates", which violate the process of "one person, one vote"! Without the undemocratic superedelegates, Bernie Sanders would have swept the convention with his enthusiasm. And as we all know, there is very little enthusiasm for Mrs. Clinton. She represents there politics of deceit, corruption, and dishonesty, and little more.
And I would not count Trump out. Unlike Clinton, his support is very enthusiastic.
Mrs Clinton wont Democratic nomination by stealing it from Bernie Sanders.
And she did this with "superdelegates", which violate the process of "one person, one vote"! Without the undemocratic superedelegates, Bernie Sanders would have swept the convention with his enthusiasm. And as we all know, there is very little enthusiasm for Mrs. Clinton. She represents there politics of deceit, corruption, and dishonesty, and little more.
And I would not count Trump out. Unlike Clinton, his support is very enthusiastic.
5
Hillary Clinton won the primaries by getting 3 million more votes than Bernie Sanders. Please provide links to sources documenting your accusations that Clinton represents the politics of deceit, corruption and dishonesty and BTW get over it and yourself.
16
She won in the popular vote, and in the delegate count. You can argue about Superdelegates, but it is a Party Organization, where people get rewarded for their involvement in the party. And Hillary Clinton has made alot of friends along the way.
You say that she represents "there (sic) politics of deceit, corruption, and dishonesty, and little more". Oh, I didn't realize that until just now, after 28 years of knowing her and her husband, that's what I've been reduced to. How undemocratic of you, Michael.
You say that she represents "there (sic) politics of deceit, corruption, and dishonesty, and little more". Oh, I didn't realize that until just now, after 28 years of knowing her and her husband, that's what I've been reduced to. How undemocratic of you, Michael.
11
Actually, no. Hillary won by close to 4m votes.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_c...
Furthermore, My family and friends are all quite enthusiastic about Hillary and will help get out the vote here in NH. Elections are not won with yard signs and rallies. They are won at the voting booth.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_c...
Furthermore, My family and friends are all quite enthusiastic about Hillary and will help get out the vote here in NH. Elections are not won with yard signs and rallies. They are won at the voting booth.
13
Thank you, Mr. Krugman, for this column. I am a Hillary supporter--yes, there are actually real people out there who genuinely admire her and aren't just voting for her in opposition to Trump, for those of you who didn't believe that--and I believe she is tremendously prepared for the office of President. She is smart, talented, and genuinely cares. That shines through, especially in the face of an opposition that presents such an ugly, twisted version of America. I hope Democrats take back the Senate and pick up some more House seats this fall so they can help her implement her vision.
68
It has been baked into the narrative that a vote for Hillary can only be a vote against armageddon. Not true! Hers will be an honest victory and the vast majority of the people who voted for her will have affirmed their belief that she is the right person to lead the country. I'm with her!
Thank you for being consistent Prof Krugman! Hillary has been vilified for decades, even by Bernie. So, now the political spectrum swings from right to left, and we end up here in a left centrist mode that appears to fit the national electorate mood at this point.
Solving problems is not something the GOP has been good at for decades now. Their rigid ideology has culminated in Trump's idiotic campaign against common sense. Maybe it will help them reorganize around something other than a 'party first' focus.
Obama has pledged his political capital on working at the local level to reverse the ALEC, GOP, Koch Bros strategy of corrupting the democratic foundations that have served us well in the past, especially at the local levels. I hope he and Michelle can hold to that promise.
Solving problems is not something the GOP has been good at for decades now. Their rigid ideology has culminated in Trump's idiotic campaign against common sense. Maybe it will help them reorganize around something other than a 'party first' focus.
Obama has pledged his political capital on working at the local level to reverse the ALEC, GOP, Koch Bros strategy of corrupting the democratic foundations that have served us well in the past, especially at the local levels. I hope he and Michelle can hold to that promise.
32
I simply cannot understand the pathological hatred that so many people harbor for Mrs. Clinton. E-mail and Clinton Foundation problems -- minor peccadilos that they are -- certainly cannot account for it. Maybe this woman-hating thing is a far-deeper problem than
I have understood.
I have understood.
137
Certainly deeper. When the clear majority of US men are willing to vote for a racist and sexist fool like Trump, we all have a problem.
Maybe its not hatred. Perhaps it is "non love". Sometimes its good to be neutral and watch objectively.
1
A well coordinated program of propaganda - the Benghazi hearings, right wing radio, Fox news - might have something to do with it.
Remember the Republican House member who bragged about how keeping the bogus hearings going would knock down Clinton's polling numbers?
Nothing accidental or incomprehensible about it.
Remember the Republican House member who bragged about how keeping the bogus hearings going would knock down Clinton's polling numbers?
Nothing accidental or incomprehensible about it.
1
To say nothing of the candidate for vice president --Tim Kaine! I knew him some 40 years ago when he took my beginning course in economics at the University of Missouri. He has filled all of my expectations.
51
Its so strange that vice presidential candidates are just given a ceremonial role in the election season. If Bernie was on the ticket or Liz Warren, the pundits would be all over them.
1
Your comment that each debate victory looked greater a few days later was right on target. She mastered the art of leaving each debate on a note that would persist for the rest of the week. She is a real pro.
64
"Each debate victory looked much bigger after a couple of days, once ..."
...almost all the things Trump said were proved to be utterly false and what Hillary said was true..
...almost all the things Trump said were proved to be utterly false and what Hillary said was true..
55
Paul, your first sentence was your best - "Hillary Clinton is a terrible candidate". When it comes to creating middle class jobs, a reduction in our aggressive military posture and creating a sense of hope for Americans, Clinton is so far off the mark as to be almost irrelevant. Wall Street, military defense contractors and those who make "contributions" to the Clinton Foundation will be the ones garnering the lion share of future government largese if Clinton is president. Voting for a third-party candidate can make her and her terrible policies go away.
8
You really need to watch John Oliver's take down of Johnson and Stein. They are both woeful candidates, with inconsistent positions informed by magical thinking. Belief that they anything to offer beyond unfulfillable aspiration is delusional.
No matter how much you lie to yourself, a vote for a third party ticket is a vote for trump.
"Voting for a third-party candidate can make her and her terrible policies go away."
Wrong. Voting for a third party candidate instead of Hilary can help elect Donald Trump. If you want to know why voting for a third party candidate who has zero chance of getting elected can be a truly terrible idea, look no further than the 2000 election. I wonder if those 90,000 Floridians who voted for Nader when they should have voted for Gore (minus the handful of crazies that might have voted for Bush) ever feel any remorse over what they did. Because they should. They gave us the worst president in American history.
Wrong. Voting for a third party candidate instead of Hilary can help elect Donald Trump. If you want to know why voting for a third party candidate who has zero chance of getting elected can be a truly terrible idea, look no further than the 2000 election. I wonder if those 90,000 Floridians who voted for Nader when they should have voted for Gore (minus the handful of crazies that might have voted for Bush) ever feel any remorse over what they did. Because they should. They gave us the worst president in American history.
1
Hillary Clinton certainly deserves her time in the spotlight. But the real issue is the inability of the Democratic leadership to translate what looks to be a landslide victory for Clinton into a landslide victory in the downballot races: The House, the Senate, and state and local governments. The Republican leadership may not necessarily believe in the ideology it spouts, but it certainly does believe in funding local and state elections. The Democrats need to do the same.
30
I couldn't agree more. The Republicans have been much better at playing the long game in terms of state legislatures and governorships. Thanks for making a point of this.
Not only did Trump lose the debate the other night, Clinton clearly won. She ran rings around him. She was prepared, poised, very knowledgeable, steady and most of her answers were very substantive. Think of it like a job interview. If you were hiring someone for any position that required empathy, intelligence and understanding of the mechanics whether it was say running customer service in one of Trump's hotels or the CEO of a major corporation who would you have given the job to on the basis of the debate the other evening. It's a no brainer. She is pre-eminently qualified for the job and it stood out a mile.
64
I'm sorry, Dr Krugman, I know you support your favorite candidate, but your continued insistence that there cannot be a reasonable critique of her is simply wrong. There are lots of genuine causes for concern about Mrs Clinton:
- Her secrecy reflex reminiscent of Richard Nixon. For example, trying to keep her pneumonia a secret when there was absolutely no reason for her to do that.
- Her hawkishness. The no-fly zone in Syria, her signature foreign policy proposal, would put the US on a path to a shooting war with Russia.
- Her private positions that are different from her public positions. The contents of the Wikileaks emails, which Clinton partisans have been trying to convince everyone not to read, show that no, she doesn't necessarily care about the signature issues nor the solutions on her website.
- Her associations. She took lots of money from the very people that have caused serious problems for this country, particularly bankers.
Those are legitimate causes for concern. Not such a big deal that we're going to vote for the orange guy, but a reason to be holding our noses when we do it.
Good luck getting that job as Treasury Secretary though - you've been clearly auditioning for it all year long.
- Her secrecy reflex reminiscent of Richard Nixon. For example, trying to keep her pneumonia a secret when there was absolutely no reason for her to do that.
- Her hawkishness. The no-fly zone in Syria, her signature foreign policy proposal, would put the US on a path to a shooting war with Russia.
- Her private positions that are different from her public positions. The contents of the Wikileaks emails, which Clinton partisans have been trying to convince everyone not to read, show that no, she doesn't necessarily care about the signature issues nor the solutions on her website.
- Her associations. She took lots of money from the very people that have caused serious problems for this country, particularly bankers.
Those are legitimate causes for concern. Not such a big deal that we're going to vote for the orange guy, but a reason to be holding our noses when we do it.
Good luck getting that job as Treasury Secretary though - you've been clearly auditioning for it all year long.
24
@Dave
Cleveland
Your last sentence just about sums up your sense of reality. Krugman is not going to be Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration nor in his wildest dreams could he have imagined being so, probably because he's not qualified. And I have news for you. Every major progressive president of the last 100 years (TR, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton and Obama) has taken money from bankers.
Cleveland
Your last sentence just about sums up your sense of reality. Krugman is not going to be Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration nor in his wildest dreams could he have imagined being so, probably because he's not qualified. And I have news for you. Every major progressive president of the last 100 years (TR, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Clinton and Obama) has taken money from bankers.
49
After 25 years and $250 million spent investigating Hillary Clinton by Republicans has turned up nothing - these so-called investigations have been more of harassments of a political figure who is female and scares the conservatives to death then anything else - she is either the smartest person in the world to get away with all she's accused of or it is all what it has always been- for profit right wing propaganda that has turned up nothing except failure for the Republicans Who still believe it .
4
Dave: You want a reasonable critique? Why not give one, instead of the canned partisan attacks?
4
Because entrenched power wants no change.