What bothers me about Krugman is not his desire to see The Clinton's Restoration.

It is that he claims that the voters who support Hillary do so because they know all the policy ins and outs. There is ample evidence that Hillary's support is strongest among rural, un-educated, less-affluent white voters.

That does not mean that ONLY those voters vote Hillary, but it is a fact. To say that under-educated, poor, rural voters choose Clinton because they are smart is not only a stretch, it requires a Clintonian "That depends on the meaning of what 'smart' means" abandonment of reason.

I voted for Hillary twice and Bill twice. I wish I could have my vote back. Hillary, like her husband, cannot get anywhere near 50 percent of the vote. Unless The Clinton's get a Marc Rich or somebody to fund Ron Paul, she will lose against McCain.

Krugman is a Clinton ditto-head, and he is at least as smart as Taylor Marsh, but I have mailed back his books and wish him and The Clinton's and all you Clinton-lovers good luck. When Hillary is President, the Democratic party can start enjoying the endless personal wars and White House Sleepovers for "Special Friends of Bill and Hillary" and remember who cares if we lose both houses of Congress!

Isn't having The Clinton's back worth a little suffering?

Posted at April 25, 2008 2:56 PM in response to Paul Krugman is Confused