Paul Krugman weighs in on the Biden-Sanders Feud

[LonePirate]

Link to tweet

Paul Krugman @paulkrugman

Some progressives seem to be having trouble understanding the difference between two issues in this Biden-Sanders confrontation. The first is whether the Sanders campaign lied about what Biden said in 2018. Yes, it did 1/

Biden was attacking Paul Ryan's agenda; the campaign snipped out a few words to make it seem as if he was endorsing that agenda. And it's refusing to acknowledge that this was wrong, which is really bad 2/

Now, there's a quite different issue involving Biden's past positions. He was for years a member in good standing in DC's Very Serious People, who insisted that Social Security was in crisis and needed cuts. I spent years crusading against that dogma 3/

Biden's record on this and other issues is part of what makes me nervous about his willingness to confront the modern GOP. And it's fair game for Dem rivals. But it's NOT an excuse for lying about what he's said more recently 4/

And the evident decision of Sanders and associates to double down rather than apologize for an error is deeply disturbing. Progressives are supposed to be better than this 5/

[Farmer-Rick]

1. God, he sounds like such a Troll

Do we Democrats really need to be doing this kind of in fighting? Isn't this the kind of crap that was done by Russian Trolls that let Traitor Trump win?

[yaesu]

31. No, infighting, backstabbing should have been left out of the campaigns but sadly its still there

and it only serves tRump at the end.

[UniteFightBack]

43. There really is only one campaign engaging in this type of activity though. nt

[PatrickforO]

38. I'm glad you said 'sound like' because Krugman is NOT a troll.

He is a Nobel Prize winning economist. I don't like him quite as much as Robert Reich, but he is there with Stiglitz and other serious economists who are critical of the current neoliberal system that systematically routes more and more wealth into fewer hands.

As to the very serious people 'group,' it is kind of a mocking sobriquet given to talking media heads. That wiki link I provided below names a whole bunch of politicians as being subjectively included in that group, and blithely says they tend to be neoliberals 'to a man' and neoconservatives 'to a man.'

Problem is, the group doesn't officially exist.

The other, and to my mind more important problem, is that Biden has in fact taken positions in favor of cutting Social Security. If he is our nominee, is elected and does this again, he will face massive backlash.

Social Security is NOT an entitlement. It is an earned benefit, and as such if it is in trouble because of the profligacy and fiscal irresponsibility of the US Congress, then RAISE TAXES.

[flying_wahini]

47. I feel as you do.

[Farmer-Rick]

55. Yeah, Milton Friedman won that made up award too.

The Nobel prize in economics was establishes by a filthy rich Swedish bank in 1968. It wasn't one of the areas Nobel wanted to award. It was made up and attached to the Nobel prize to give economics some gravitas. Why not one in psychology or oceanograpgy or environmental science? It's a ruse.

But actually, I agree with you on everything you said.

I don't care for Biden much either, but he is the bankers choice. At this point I just want a Democrat. Anything or anyone but from the party of Russia.

But it worries me when Dems attack Dems.

[PatrickforO]

57. Well, Milton Friedman is the quintessential Chicago School

Supply side neoliberal. Bad apple that one. Hayek and that whole group, actually. They have been horrible for all of us.

[Farmer-Rick]

59. Absolutely true.

[demigoddess]

56. yes, we pay into a fund for social security and the republicans use it to

cover for their gigantic tax cuts to big businesses. then they call it an entitlement to make it look bad so they can steal the money and close it down.

[Cha]

51. Krugman:"he first is whether the Sanders campaign lied about what Biden said in 2018. Yes, it did"

Link to tweet

[BootinUp]

2. agree with Krugman. nt

[NCProgressive]

3. There you have it folks

A Nobel Laureate (Paul Krugman) vs a failed reporter/dirty trickster (David Sirota)

[George II]

4. +1,000,000

[melman]

7. Did you miss this part?

"Now, there's a quite different issue involving Biden's past positions. He was for years a member in good standing in DC's Very Serious People, who insisted that Social Security was in crisis and needed cuts. I spent years crusading against that dogma 3"

[MH1]

11. "But it's NOT an excuse for lying about what he's said more recently"

did you miss that part?

[melman]

13. No

But the person that plus-millioned this has denied over and over again that Biden ever advocated cutting SS.


And here Paul Krugman is saying quite clearly that Biden does indeed have a long history of that very thing.


And this still gets a plus million? I find that odd. YMMV

[George II]

15. An organization he belonged to advocated cutting Social Security. My wife and I belong to....

....the Catholic Church. Does that mean we're against abortion? Does that mean we're against gay marriage?

[melman]

18. lol

You mean this organization here?


"Now, there's a quite different issue involving Biden's past positions. He was for years a member in good standing in DC's Very Serious People, who insisted that Social Security was in crisis and needed cuts. I spent years crusading against that dogma"







"DC's Very Serious People" is not an actual club.

[George II]

19. I don't get what you're driving at. As I demonstrated in the post you responded to....

....but didn't address, a person can belong to an organization and not agree with everything that organization stands for.

Are you implying the Catholic Church is a "club"?

[melman]

20. Easy to see what you're doing here

And I'm not interested in playing. So sorry.

[George II]

21. You're trying to drift away from the point of the OP by pointing out something irrelevant.

[NCProgressive]

26. "Lying" is the key word there

[melman]

27. Oh the key word game again

So very clever.

[Cha]

66. The first is whether the BS campaign lied about what Biden said in 2018. Yes, it did

Link to tweet

[PatrickforO]

25. No, but apparently it is a group of people that includes

a whole bunch of politicians considered 'centrist.'

Here's a Rational Wiki link. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Very_Serious_People

If they are really neoliberals 'to a man' and neoconservatives 'to a man,' then I'm really in polar disagreement with 'them.'

Problem is, inclusion in the group seems to be a bit.............subjective.

[melman]

30. Okay

But surely you can see what the poster was trying to do there. Make it into an "organization" that Biden might have belonged to but didn't necessarily agree with.

Which is total nonsense because what Krugman is clearly saying there is that Biden was one of the people that said SS needed to be cut.

[PatrickforO]

37. Oh, I'm not disputing that. Biden really is a centrist Democrat.

He is. And, if he is our nominee, and is elected, he will face massive backlash from millions of Americans if he once again says that Social Security needs to be cut.

Because Social Security is NOT an entitlement program. It is an earned benefit. As is Medicare.

So, you know what? We're having a problem funding Social Security? RAISE TAXES.

[Demsrule86]

42. During those years, you had to pretend to care about the deficit and show your willingness to work

with the other side if you wanted to win elections. But Biden did not vote to cut SS not once-he was accused by the other side of paying lip service to such ideas, and it's true as he never voted that way.

Biden has an 89% lifetime rating in regards to Social Security...same as Ted Kennedy's...so the idea that Social Security is endangered by him as president is ludicrous, and such attacks will not work with most voters...Sanders reaches only his own supporters with this malarkey...some of whom are apparently Stein supporters or primary voting operation chaos Republicans who plan to vote for Trump in the General.

[Thekaspervote]

28. Here is Biden speaking to supporting and increasing SS

Link to tweet

?s=21

[George II]

12. Irrelevant.

[melman]

14. What's irrelevant?

[George II]

16. You know.

[melman]

17. The reality of Joe Biden's record?

[pfeiffer]

35. You're grasping here

<yawn> <stretch>

[melman]

36. No

No I'm not.

[Vogon_Glory]

5. It Is Not Enough To Be Right On The Issues!!!

Paul Krugman brings up a very good point: it is not enough to be right on the issues—WE HAVE TO BE BETTER PEOPLE!

This is not just about this race and Democrats versus Republicans—it goes across the boards. I remember having an argument with a peace-movement sympathizer on these boards who REFUSED to believe that many (Not all of them, not even a plurality) peace activists not only refused to acknowledge what the murderous Khmer Rouge were doing in Cambodia between 1975 until they were thrown out, but they savaged the people who brought up the topic. I don’t understand what his reasoning was for pretending that it didn’t exist and/or lying about it—I still don’t. But I realized that part and parcel of building a better world is to try to be better people than the lying, scamming, thieving, bigoted, nihilistic, cruelty-driven people driving the political and propaganda engines of today’s Far Right.

Bernie’s actions are very disappointing. I expected far better of him. His tactics resemble those of his fellow-New Yorker.

[LonePirate]

6. You nailed it. We have to be better people.

Citizens can bicker about the candidates online; but candidates and their campaign surrogates need to stay out of the mud. I can certainly understand the need to defend one's self; but that does not mean a candidate or campaign should peddle lies or disinformation. We need to bring people together, not drive them apart.

[PatSeg]

8. And in the end

most people will vote first and foremost for who they perceive is the "better person". Lies and deceit often will cancel out policy. What good are great ideas if you cannot trust the person promoting them.

[blm]

63. ✔️

[squirecam]

10. Agreed

We can’t stoop to the repubs level.

We must be better people. Even if they won’t be.

[calimary]

23. Excellent post!

[PatrickforO]

24. True enough. We cannot simply back off and say that America

will never be the world's policeman again.

Sometimes we, and other industrialized nations, SHOULD step in. In cases where genocide needs to be prevented. In cases like the Russian invasion of Ukraine (whoops! I guess we're officially ambivalent about THIS one!) and others, we do need to come forward and say, no, you're not doing this.

And, we need to be taking a global leadership role in mitigating climate change (whoops! I guess Trump isn't interested in that, but we must be),

And, we need to reform our tax code so it actually produces the revenue needed to run the government (whoops! I guess we'll have to repeal the giant 2017 Republican tax cut for billionaire parasites and corporations, as well as get rid of residual Bush and even Reagan tax cuts!)

And, and, and...bottom line, we do have to be better people.

Bernie's actions ARE disappointing, but if Biden goes against Social Security, he can expect me to be quite vocal in opposition.

[emmaverybo]

32. Have you gone to Biden's web site? Do you get campaign email? From the start, Biden vowed to

protect Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, when other candidates were not dealing with the issue—except Warren who vowed to give every one, rich or poor, 200 more a month for SS. But Biden responded to the fact that SS is going to run out and Repugs want to privatize. He went after Paul Ryan on that issue years ago.

[PatrickforO]

39. Hmm. I get a paywall on Biden's website. It won't let me go in without

signing up. I DO NOT LIKE THAT MUCH.

So, I went to 'on the issues.' The 8 things below are what Biden has actually said or done on Social Security.

He advocated freezing entitlements; don't favor special interests. (Aug 2018)
Where would elderly be now if funds were in stock market? (Oct 2012)
Raise the $97,500 cap, but don’t raise retirement age. (Sep 2007)
Prevent senior fraud by educating seniors about caution. (Nov 2002)
Voted NO on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Voted YES on allowing Roth IRAs for retirees. (May 1998)
Voted NO on allowing personal retirement accounts. (Apr 1998)
Voted YES on deducting Social Security payments on income taxes. (May 1996)

Rated 89% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)

So, let's think about that a minute.

As to freezing 'entitlements,' I repeat. Social Security is NOT an entitlement. It is an earned benefit. Reference the NO vote on the Social Security Lockbox, which would have prevented Congress from taking money out of the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for other stuff, like 'defense.' I don't like that NO vote much.

In fact, the only things I support here, are raising the cap on Social Security payroll tax deductions. Now, to be fair, this has been done to an extent by tying the cap to the National Average Wage Index, so as of this year it is $137,500 per year. Problem is, this isn't enough and it still does not require higher earners to pay their fair share. As Biden says, lifting this cap will solve the 'solvency problem.' Hmm. That's one of the planks in Bernie's platform, for sure.

I do support not raising the retirement age. My 'full retirement age' is not 65 years old, it is 66 years and 8 months. If I retire before this age, I cannot earn any more than a certain amount before my benefits are affected. Also, I have to pay taxes on my benefits. Did you know? And Medicare does not cover 100%. That was the 'grand bargain' back in the 80s when we got betrayed by a Congress that kowtowed to big pharma and the health insurance lobby.

Judging from this, which is what he has DONE and what he has in the past said about Social Security, should he be the nominee and then president, Biden will merit close watching and massive pressure if he tries anything that will deprive the millions of American seniors from getting the old age pension they've paid for, paycheck by paycheck for fifty years worth of work. It had better be there. Same with Medicare.

[Demsrule86]

44. first of all...there is no paywall. I just went on it...secondly...I will let Joe speak to the rest

of this post which ignores his current view and twists decades old shit.



It took me oh...a minute to find this...and all his views are there if one cares to look so maybe you should remove the part about the paywall as it is not true.

https://joebiden.com/older-americans/

[Me.]

9. Yes It Did!

[PatrickforO]

22. Good post.

If Biden again comes out again on the 'need' for cuts in Social Security, LOOK FOR A MASSIVE, MASSIVE, MASSIVE backlash from progressives and from the AARP.

[Thekaspervote]

29. See post #28

[emmaverybo]

33. If he did that, it would be a total about face from his stated policy position at his official

website and his communications with supporters as well as his debate with Paul Ryan years ago.

[LeftTurn3623]

34. this is what scares me about Biden

"Now, there's a quite different issue involving Biden's past positions. He was for years a member in good standing in DC's Very Serious People, who insisted that Social Security was in crisis and needed cuts. I spent years crusading against that dogma 3"


Biden is too right on a lot of issues. Too willing to compromise with Republicans on issue there should be no compromise.

[LonePirate]

41. Exactly. But for some he's a messiah so all of the warning alarms mean nothing to them.

[Demsrule86]

46. Oh my, those horrible people...supporting someone you dislike!

[Cha]

54. Really! Always has to throw the insult in there.. "MESSIAH!"..

[Demsrule86]

60. That is so true Cha...

Wow, it is wild today. Mineral Man was basically called a troll and a right winger.

[Cha]

62. MIneral Man's OP Is Dead ON.. too

bad some can't handle.

[Cha]

52. NO.. you have that Wrong, LP.. Biden Is NOT a "Messiah"..

No Thanks for the Insult, though.

Joe Biden is a candidate for POTUS who happens to be leading in the Polls NOW.

[Demsrule86]

61. And who would make a great president.

[Demsrule86]

45. Oh please...you may have Pete's picture but....

There is nothing scary about Biden...just more character assassination from those who dislike possible hate him.

[Demsrule86]

48. And let me just say about compromise...nothing can be achieved without compromise...and that

is true no matter if we win the Senate or not. There is as some have noted a difference between compromising and caving. Sanders can't see the difference which is why his accomplishments are few despite his long career.

[LeftTurn3623]

49. I get there is a difference

But there is NO compromise on SS. And when the Republicans start so far to the right that meeting them in the middle is meeting them on their side its not compromising.

You can compromise on how much money for Infrastructure spending or the Military budget but taking away benefits for SS or raising the retirement age are things you do not compromise on.


And I do not hate Biden at all. I went to see him speak at the West York HS in york, PA. I have always liked Biden

https://www.wgal.com/article/vp-biden-to-visit-york-sunday/6222228#

[Demsrule86]

50. People talk shit but the tell is in the votes...Biden never voted against social security in over 40

years.

[Cha]

53. Don't Be "Scared"..

Link to tweet

[RandySF]

40. K&R

[blm]

58. Krugman truth teller

[maximusveritas]

64. Have not been a fan of Krugman's since his early attacks on Obama in 2007

but this seems like a fair take on the situation. Biden has always taken pride in being able to take tough unpopular stands and this has gotten him in trouble at times. Sanders is just peddling in dirty politics though.

[Cha]

65. there's a "fact".

[Cha]

67. k