I thought Krugman was saying that free trade was much preferable to protectionism but that to make it work we would have to pay attention to the interests of the first world - particularly American - workers and middle class because they would be losers in the short term.
Whether or not that entails universal health insurance is debatable but it certainly means protecting the insurance of those who lose their jobs to foreigners as a result of free trade legislation.
Ummm...that is why COBRA laws were invented.
You're right. Except for Krugman's specific policy proposals (like the universal healthcare idiocy), his general point is very solid.
Free Trade, like any other trade, has winners and losers at any given moment. And even if those losers will eventually turn out better off in the long run, they'll be mad as h*ll at the moment they're on the losing side. That can make them a powerful political force.
Krugman is suggesting that the best way for free trade to flourish is to have a president who is committed to free trade - but not so committed he doesn't remember to soften the political impacts. Because a free trade supporting president who ignores these political issues runs the risk of being replaced by a true protectionist.