• WatDabney
    link
    fedilink
    216 days ago

    Krugman has been odd lately.

    After spending decades slavishly carrying water for the moneyed class, he’s been on a notable anti-Trump lately.

    Which implies two possibilities - either he’s finally developed some principles and integrity at this late date, which is unlikely, or the moneyed class support for Trump isn’t quite as universal as the broligarch stranglehold on social media has made it appear…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      106 days ago

      If the rich were all in on Trump, one must suspect that the dems would have a much harder time fundraising whenever elections come around.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        56 days ago

        The very richest are — but the professional class, which can shell out $3000 every few years, isn’t. And the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire is almost exactly a billion dollars. It’s still very doable for Democrats to raise the kind of money it takes to be competitive.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      66 days ago

      After spending decades slavishly carrying water for the moneyed class

      That hasn’t been my experience reading his columns, you got some examples of this?

      That said, Krugman says the opinion editor for the last 4 years had interfered with his work, toning him down and adding false equivalences.

      So his Substack is basically “Paul Krugman Unleashed” which it turns out is pretty glorious. Example: his “Health Insurance is a Racket” post starts off with a bit of Saint Luigi art.

      • WatDabney
        link
        fedilink
        46 days ago

        For the most notable examples of which I’m aware, go back to the period surrounding the subprime mortgage debacle (which he defended), the real estate market collapse (which he insisted wasn’t going to happen literally right up to the moment that it did) and the subsequent Wall Street bailouts (which he supported).

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      76 days ago

      My impression is that Krugman has been there since 2015. Did a scan through some of his old columns, like this one:

      The point is that we shouldn’t ask whether the G.O.P. will eventually nominate someone in the habit of saying things that are demonstrably untrue, and counting on political loyalists not to notice. The only question is what kind of scam it will be.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      26 days ago

      I ran the numbers for you boss. tl;dr 50% R, 25% D, 25% swing.

      748 billionaires in the US and per gpt:

      Determining the exact political affiliations of U.S. billionaires is challenging, as many do not publicly disclose their preferences. However, analyses of political contributions provide some insight into their leanings.

      In the 2024 election cycle, 150 billionaire families contributed approximately $1.9 billion to federal campaigns. Of this amount, $1.36 billion (72%) supported Republican candidates, while $413 million (22%) backed Democrats. The remaining funds were directed toward other causes or independent candidates.

      Notable examples include Elon Musk, who donated $133 million, with the majority supporting former President Donald Trump’s campaign. Conversely, some billionaires have supported Democratic candidates; for instance, during the 2020 election, a survey indicated that more billionaires leaned toward Joe Biden over Donald Trump.

      It’s important to note that political contributions can vary significantly among billionaires, influenced by personal beliefs, business interests, and policy preferences. Additionally, some billionaires contribute to both parties, aiming to maintain influence regardless of which party holds power.