New York Times columnist Paul Krugman might be fresh out of friends before this campaign season is over. While his sanctimonious and classless attacks on Republicans have rendered him an unreliable political analyst, his recent assaults on the “Bernie bros” -- supposedly sexist Hillary-bashing Bernie Sanders' supporters -- have earned him new enemies on the left.
In his Friday column, Krugman went for a direct hit on the candidate himself: “Sanders Over The Edge.” The text box: “Sorry, but he’s not cute anymore.” (“Cute” being a Krugman term of endearment.) Krugman also showed a complete lack of self-awareness as he accused both Sanders and his supporters of "petulant self-righteousness."
Krugman seems to be getting a dose of his own medicine, though he lacks the self-awareness to see it.
From the beginning, many and probably most liberal policy wonks were skeptical about Bernie Sanders. On many major issues -- including the signature issues of his campaign, especially financial reform -- he seemed to go for easy slogans over hard thinking. And his political theory of change, his waving away of limits, seemed utterly unrealistic.
Some Sanders supporters responded angrily when these concerns were raised, immediately accusing anyone expressing doubts about their hero of being corrupt if not actually criminal. But intolerance and cultishness from some of a candidate’s supporters are one thing; what about the candidate himself?
Unfortunately, in the past few days the answer has become all too clear: Mr. Sanders is starting to sound like his worst followers. Bernie is becoming a Bernie Bro.
Krugman drilled into Sanders’ position or lack thereof on bank reform.
The easy slogan here is “Break up the big banks.” It’s obvious why this slogan is appealing from a political point of view: Wall Street supplies an excellent cast of villains. But were big banks really at the heart of the financial crisis, and would breaking them up protect us from future crises?
Many analysts concluded years ago that the answers to both questions were no. Predatory lending was largely carried out by smaller, non-Wall Street institutions like Countrywide Financial; the crisis itself was centered not on big banks but on “shadow banks” like Lehman Brothers that weren’t necessarily that big. And the financial reform that President Obama signed in 2010 made a real effort to address these problems. It could and should be made stronger, but pounding the table about big banks misses the point.
Yet going on about big banks is pretty much all Mr. Sanders has done. On the rare occasions on which he was asked for more detail, he didn’t seem to have anything more to offer. And this absence of substance beyond the slogans seems to be true of his positions across the board.
After an obligatory Bush bash, Krugman moves from criticizing the character of Sanders’ supporters to the candidate himself.
But in any case, the way Mr. Sanders is now campaigning raises serious character and values issues.
It’s one thing for the Sanders campaign to point to Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street connections, which are real, although the question should be whether they have distorted her positions, a case the campaign has never even tried to make. But recent attacks on Mrs. Clinton as a tool of the fossil fuel industry are just plain dishonest, and speak of a campaign that has lost its ethical moorings.
And then there was Wednesday’s rant about how Mrs. Clinton is not “qualified” to be president.
....
But Mr. Sanders wasn’t careful at all, declaring that what he considers Mrs. Clinton’s past sins, including her support for trade agreements and her vote to authorize the Iraq war -- for which she has apologized -- make her totally unfit for office.
And for Krugman to accuse anyone else on the planet of “petulant self-righteousness” is enough to peg out anyone’s personal irony meter:
The Sanders campaign has brought out a lot of idealism and energy that the progressive movement needs. It has also, however, brought out a streak of petulant self-righteousness among some supporters. Has it brought out that streak in the candidate, too?
