Summer Of Our Disconent (Krugman Forced To Issue Corrections! HA!)

New York Times ^ | 8/26/05 | Paul Krugman

[crushkerry]

For the last few months there has been a running debate about the U.S. economy, more or less like this:

American families: "We're not doing very well."

The administration and some political commentators seem genuinely puzzled by polls showing that Americans are unhappy about the economy. After all, they point out, numbers like the growth rate of G.D.P. look pretty good. So why aren't people cheering?

(snip)

Corrections: In my column last Friday, I cited an inaccurate number (given by the Conyers report) for turnout in Ohio's Miami County last year: 98.5 percent. I should have checked the official state site, which reports a reasonable 72.2 percent. Also, the public editor says, rightly, that I should acknowledge initially misstating the results of the 2000 Florida election study by a media consortium led by The Miami Herald. Unlike a more definitive study by a larger consortium that included The New York Times, an analysis that showed Al Gore winning all statewide manual recounts, the earlier study showed him winning two out of three.

[WL-law]

He also ignores the findings of John Lott, using the data collected during the media recount, that showed that in urban voting districts controlled by democrat voting officials, that the odds that a Republican voter's ballot would be "overvoted" (showing 2 punches registering a vote BOTH for Bush AND for Gore) was FIFTY TIMES HIGHER than a democrat voter's ballot -- even though the average registered republican has a higher income, better education, etc.

Go figure??!!

[expatpat]

That's why the lefties are so angry and frantic about 2000 (and 2004) -- if they can't win when they cheat like crazy, they feel they're DOOMED!

[expatpat]

That's why the lefties are so angry and frantic about 2000 (and 2004) -- if they can't win when they cheat like crazy, they feel they're DOOMED!

[SuziQ]

Unlike a more definitive study by a larger consortium that included The New York Times, an analysis that showed Al Gore winning all statewide manual recounts, the earlier study showed him winning two out of three.

So is Krugman STILL trying to say that the recounts showed Algore winning? He's STILL wrong!

[okie01]

He also ignores the findings of John Lott...

I question whether Krugman has the mental firepower to understand Lott's statistics.