All errors should be reported to

Friday, March 10, 2017

NYT mocks Trump supporters

Guess what my reaction was to this headline in the New York Times:
Why Trump Supporters Have the Most to Lose With the G.O.P. Repeal Bill

My reaction was well, this came from the newspaper's "upshot" section, which on Election Day declared:
Hillary Clinton has an 85% chance to win.
I had already declared Trump's victory months, and had begun on September writing my book on his victory, "Trump the Establishment."

So now these losers at the New York Times are saying that Trump supporters will be fleeced by President Trump's repeal and replacement of Obamacare.

We're the dummies, right?

Never mind that the actual replacement is still being negotiated.

The New York Times knows all!

From the New York Times:
The people who stand to lose the most in tax credits under the House Republican health plan tended to support Donald J. Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, according to a new Upshot analysis.
Over all, voters who would be eligible for a tax credit that would be at least $1,000 smaller than the subsidy they’re eligible for under Obamacare supported Mr. Trump over Hillary Clinton by a seven-point margin.
The voters hit the hardest — eligible for at least $5,000 less in tax credits under the Republican plan — supported Mr. Trump by a margin of 59 percent to 36 percent.
So the New York Times has changed the joke about its editorializing in headlines from “WORLD ENDS: WOMEN, MINORITIES HARDEST HIT” to
Thanks for thinking of us, guys. Your concern trolling is duly noted.

Meanwhile, the New York Times's resident Nobel laureate in economics, Paul Krugman, denounced the plan:
A Bill So Bad It’s Awesome
It has long been obvious to anyone following health policy that Republicans would never devise a workable replacement for Obamacare. But the bill unveiled this week is worse than even the cynics expected; its awfulness is almost surreal. And the process by which it came to be tells you a lot about the state of the G.O.P.
Given the rhetoric Republicans have used over the past seven years to attack health reform, you might have expected them to do away with the whole structure of the Affordable Care Act — deregulate, de-subsidize and let the magic of the free market do its thing. This would have been devastating for the 20 million Americans who gained coverage thanks to the act, but at least it would have been ideologically consistent.
But Republican leaders weren’t willing to bite that bullet. What they came up with instead was a dog’s breakfast that conservatives are, with some justice, calling Obamacare 2.0. But a better designation would be Obamacare 0.5, because it’s a half-baked plan that accepts the logic and broad outline of the Affordable Care Act while catastrophically weakening key provisions. If enacted, the bill would almost surely lead to a death spiral of soaring premiums and collapsing coverage. Which makes you wonder, what’s the point?
He's the same guy who predicted the market would tank upon Trump's election, so given the track record of Krugman, a former Enron advisor, I have to say the replacement will indeed be awesome.

"Trump the Establishment" is now on Kindle!

"Trump the Establishment" is also available in paperback.

This is the sequel to "Trump the Press," which covered the nomination. The original -- "Trump the Press" -- is available on Kindle, or in paperback on Create Space.

Autographed copies are available by writing me at

Please follow me on Twitter.

Friend me on Facebook.


  1. That Paullie "The Beard" Krugman! What a card (the joker, specifically).

  2. Krugman not only predicted the matket would tank, but that it would never recover (like a Enron). Hahahaha

  3. I wonder how many people who are opposed to the bill even read it THEMSELVES. dem senators and congressmen trashed it before the ink was dry.

    1. It's obvious that none of them read it before they enacted it. I doubt many of them have read it since. In fact, I doubt many of them have the ability to read it, let alone understand it. They know what they've been told it says, and that's about it.

  4. Insurance is hardly accepted in Manhattan where Komando Krugman's fortress is rented out. Pay your doctor or keep walking is the idea. I would wager his NYT insurance doesn't have a 10G decuctable but if it did he wouldn't care. As for the general argument, I hear HC wailing that she just can't understand why she isn't up 50 points. The left always argues that people are stupid if they don't vote for those who want to ladle them out more gruel while roasting a chop for themselves. The idea of choice or quality for others is never considered important.

    1. Don't forget Professor PK is likely covered by CUNY, which means the state of New York. The plans for state workers are not Cadillac plans. They are Bentley plans

  5. Krugman destroyed a multi-billion dollar business, and is hell-bent on doing the same thing to the profession of economist. Why does anyone listen to the twerp?

  6. What they need to do is totally repeal Obummercare not "tweak" it. What we are getting is Obummercare lite.

    1. I think a deal was cut allowing Ryan to put his bill out, but with the proviso it would not be a Pelosi Special (pass before you see) and other bills could be proposed.

      Trump's already cut the debt by 60+ B, so he'll get this worked out.

  7. The fallacy in their argument, which is, in the real sense, stupidity (not knowing) is that low income bracket workers may be working 3 part time jobs at very low wages to keep up with family health insurance under the current ACA supplement *AND* EIC. The singles in the bracket probably won't pick up recurrent healthcare costs under the current rates (they will, however, game the system).

    Under an expanding economy not only do wages increase, but those displaced U6 workers may find full time jobs which provide more income and/or jobs that provide healh insurance. Their "red herring" is that they promote the narrative of unions/Wall Street to use the USCoC method of pulling healthcare costs out of their profits.

    But, the real insult in the headline is calling the majority of low income brackets Trump voters. From my experience, and hard and cold demographic facts, those demos tend to overwhelmingly side with the Sanders/communist dogma of "free everything."

    So, again, they are lost in the fog.

  8. Breaking: Krugman says there will be no spring, summer, or fall this year! Damn, I swear, the guy thinks he's God or something...

    1. I think we have had all three within the past tens days.

    2. You're lucky. We have nothing but winter since before Christmas here in Montana.

    3. Can you imagine Krugman praying?

      "Okay, God, so maybe you're not a Democrat. I can live with that. I mean, hey, that's your problem..."

  9. The editors are smart. They know the real money is in real estate.