To: bentway who wrote (2523 ) 12/16/2016 2:05:09 PM From: Katelew Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362160 I sort of agree with Krugman, but only in this sense. I agree that the information contain in WikiLeaks was damaging to Hillary. For myself, it was actually extremely damaging. When I read the actual emails verbatim--about a month before the election, my disgust with the Democratic party was sealed. I felt betrayed and totally disillusioned and feel sure that many others voters experienced similar feelings. The only question is how many. I, however, see Hillary's loss as a sort of "death by a thousand cuts". A real combination of factors ranging from slightly fewer black voters showing up for Hillary and slightly more white women coming out for Trump, i.e. a string of little changes in what was expected to what actually developed. Impossible to try to reduce the whole election to one thing--in fact juvenile to do so. The truths contained in the emails were just some of the many "cuts". I also see the election as a war of attrition. When the truth came out of WikiLeaks as to the degree of election fraud committed by Hillary and the DNC, it pealed off a certain number of voters. When the Access Hollywood tapes revealed the locker room talk of Trump, it pealed off a certain number of voters. And so on and so on throughout the whole process. If an accusation had some foundation of truth to it, minds snapped shut. Back and forth it went until the day of the election until the victor emerged with narrow margins of victory in several key states. Overall, election turnout wasn't very big. Mainly, though, the Krugman piece is juvenile, written with a fifth grade vocabulary and tortures the truth to make a remarkably unpersuasive case for getting riled up against Putin. The overriding weakness in all this outrage and fear-mongering by the left against Putin is that the truth came out. Those engaging on the right are old cold-war enthusiasts. The whole thing is a nothing-burger in my opinion.