The gist is that people are voting for libertarian Gary Johnson without knowing what his platform is - and goes into detail to show how it is not in the interests of these people - "eliminate environmental regulation, abolish the income tax, do away with public schools, and dismantle Social Security and Medicare — which is what the Libertarian platform calls for."
it calls for abolition of the income tax and the privatization of almost everything the government does, including education. “We would restore authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government.” And if parents don’t want their children educated, or want them indoctrinated in a cult, or put them to work in a sweatshop instead of learning to read? Not our problem.I get it and I agree. Any public school teacher who votes for Johnson is in a reality distortion field.
How about the environment?
Ok Paul. Now give us the Green platform on environment.What really struck me, however, was what the platform says about the environment. It opposes any kind of regulation; instead, it argues that we can rely on the courts. Is a giant corporation poisoning the air you breathe or the water you drink? Just sue: “Where damages can be proven and quantified in a court of law, restitution to the injured parties must be required.” Ordinary citizens against teams of high-priced corporate lawyers — what could go wrong?
Krugman then asks:
It’s really hard to believe that young voters who supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary think any of this is a good idea. But Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein have received essentially no media scrutiny, so that voters have no idea what they stand for. And their parties’ names sound nice: who among us is against liberty? The truth, that the Libertarian Party essentially stands for a return to all the worst abuses of the Gilded Age, is not out there.Note the bait and switch -- gee ya think the Green Party environmental platform is worth mentioning if you are going to lump Johnson and Stein in the same sentence?
Let's parse Krugman:
It’s really hard to believe that young voters who supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary think any of this is a good idea. But Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein have received essentially no media scrutiny, so that voters have no idea what they stand for.Wait a minute -- he just told us what Johnson stands for but because he knows that what Stein and the Greens stand for are appealing to Bernie supporters he conveniently leaves out their positions, especially on the environment.
do 29 percent of Americans between 18 and 34 believe these things? I doubt it. Yet that, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll, is the share of millennial voters who say that they would vote for Mr. Johnson if the election took place now. And the preponderance of young Americans who say they’ll back Mr. Johnson or Jill Stein, the Green Party nominee, appear to be citizens who would support Mrs. Clinton in a two-way race; including the minor party candidates cuts her margin among young voters from 21 points to just 5."Clearly, this is panic time. Why doesn't Krugman pick apart the Green platform like he does the libertarian or even provide a link?
When you are in a state of panic as Krugman seems to be, rational thought can dessert you.
Don't get me wrong. There is a good chance I may vote for Hillary too -- but with my eyes wide open. Krugman's piece makes me look at all his work which I used to fervently believe with increasing skepticism.