So John Lott and Peter Navarro say that there was massive voter fraud, and Trump actually won. I'm sure that Mary Rosh and Ron Vara agree 1/
For those who don't know what I'm talking about, Lott was previously best known for fraudulent studies purporting to show that widespread ownership of firearms reduces crime — and also for glowing testimonials to his teaching by a former student named Mary Rosh ... 2/
who didn't actually exist and was in fact Lott himself 3/ archive.thinkprogress.org/debunking-john…
Navarro is a China hawk who doesn't seem to understand basic economics, also known for repeatedly citing an expert named "Ron Vara" who doesn't exist and is also an anagram of "Navarro" 4/ nytimes.com/2019/10/16/us/…
What all this points to is an integrated view of fraudulence: people who lie about petty things also lie about big things. And of course both men were hired by Donald Trump 5/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @paulkrugman

31 Dec 20
Tis the time to be thinking about the future, and one big question beyond 2021 is the prospects for technology. For background, here's the BLS measure of multifactor productivity — how economists (try to) measure the overall level of technology 1/ Image
You can see the big slowdown beginning around 1973, the decade of IT-led growth from 1995 to 2005, and the Great Stagnation since then — when we were promised flying cars but got 280 characters instead (good line, even if Peter Thiel is loathsome) 2/
For what it's worth, I'm tentatively on the side of the techno-optimists 3/ noahpinion.substack.com/p/techno-optim…
Read 5 tweets
29 Dec 20
The proposal for $2000 stimulus checks is divisive, and not along simple left-right lines. Lots of disagreement among progressives, with people like Bernie Sanders very pro but many others not on board. Both sides have a point 1/
My take: the economics aren't very good, but the political economy may make such checks necessary 2/ nytimes.com/2020/12/17/opi…
The key economic argument, which @crampell picks up on, is that given a slump that has affected people very unevenly, aid should concentrate on those actually suffering 3/ washingtonpost.com/opinions/2000-…
Read 9 tweets
27 Dec 20
Why has Trump apparently blown up the economic relief deal? I don't care, and neither should anyone else. In 24 days we can stop worrying about this terrible person's motives, and focus on the GOP backed him all the way. But there are more interesting questions 1/
One is whether $2K for most Americans is a good idea. Even some Democrats, notably Larry Summers, don't think so 2/ bloomberg.com/news/videos/20…
LS should always be listened to, but I think he's wrong here. I agree that across-the-board checks are not an ideal policy — much better to extend enhanced unemployment benefits until the economy recovers — but that's not politically on the table 3/
Read 10 tweets
24 Dec 20
OK, so we're apparently getting more or less a UK-EU free trade area for goods, although service trade will de facto face new protective barriers 1/ nytimes.com/2020/12/24/bus…
This is better than no deal, although tariffs were never the important issue; the serious costs of Brexit were always going to come from red tape and border checks, which are impossible to avoid unless you have a full customs union 2/ nytimes.com/2018/07/10/opi…
Wrong to be apocalyptic here: traffic flows pretty smoothly at the border between the US and Canada, even though we only have a free trade area. But there will be some costs — probably highest in the next few months, when business is still adjusting 3/
Read 6 tweets
23 Dec 20
Dems are gleefully signing on to Trump's demand for $2000 checks, hoping to embarrass Rs; fair enough. And it would do no harm, since debt is not a problem given negative real interest rates. But the way this is playing out is still bad news for the future 1/
Where we are now is that a minority of American have suffered a catastrophic loss of income, which is likely to last at least 6 months, while many have suffered no loss at all. Sending everyone a check is not a good response 2/
For someone who won't have earnings until we have mass vaccination, even a $2000 check isn't remotely enough to compensate for the loss of that $300 a week extra unemployment benefit starting in mid-March 3/
Read 6 tweets
20 Dec 20
Still thinking about the R effort — apparently abandoned as a practical matter — to prevent the Fed from acting to prevent crises. I still think sabotage was the main motive. But I wonder also whether the Fed's very integrity upset them. 1/
One of the shocking things about the past four years was the ease with which Trump undermined the professionalism of technocratic agencies, from the Weather Service to, of course, the CDC. But the Fed, protected by its quasi-independence, remained competent 2/
In particular, it quickly controlled a financial crisis that for 2 weeks looked worse than the fall of Lehman 3/
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!