New York Times blowhard economist Paul Krugman has a particular skill in completely contradicting himself when it comes to making economic forecasts. In Krugman’s November 19 op-ed, headlined “Making the Most of the Coming Biden Boom,” the sub-headline read: “The economic outlook is probably brighter than you think.” That’s completely different from Krugman’s August 6 op-ed headlined: “Coming Next: The Greater Recession.” In that piece, Krugman argued that things “probably will get much worse unless Republicans get serious about another economic relief package, and do it very soon.”  And yet, with no new relief packages, unemployment managed to fall to 6.9 percent in October from 8.4 percent in August; US manufacturing had hit a two-year high, and private sector business activity skyrocketed sharply in November. Apparently, the thing that seemed to change Krugman’s persona from an Armageddon prophet to an economic recovery herald was a change in presidential administrations. Typical. This latest prediction of a “Biden boom” goes right along with Krugman’s logic in his since-recanted 2016 prediction that there would be a “global recession” under a Trump administration. This time, Krugman was sure to scare readers in the lede paragraph that “[t]he next few months are going to be incredibly grim.” He continued: “The pandemic is exploding, but Donald Trump is tweeting while America burns.”  But, said Krugman, “a vaccine is coming. Nobody is sure which of the promising candidates will prevail, or when they’ll be widely available. But it’s a good guess that we’ll get this pandemic under control at some point next year. And it’s also a good bet that when we do the economy will come roaring back.” It’s amusing that Krugman is saying this after Moderna, a major beneficiary of President Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed, had announced its vaccine trials produced nearly 95 percent effectiveness against coronavirus. He doesn’t give the president an inch here, however. Krugman compared the pandemic recession to the 2008 economic collapse. But the reason he’s more optimistic about the economic outlook now in comparison to 2008 is that in the current pandemic recession, “households entered the pandemic slump with much lower debt.” Could a big part of that reason be because of Trump’s economic policies? Krugman doesn’t admit this of course, but he proceeded to theorize that Biden would be presiding over a "'morning in America’" recovery anyway: All of this suggests to me that spending will surge once the pandemic subsides and people feel safe to go out and about, just as spending surged in 1982 when the Federal Reserve slashed interest rates. And this in turn suggests that Joe Biden will eventually preside over a soaring, ‘morning in America’-type recovery. Krugman continues to be ignorant of the fact that The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board recently reported that Biden’s tax, health-care, energy and regulation proposals would lead to “$6,500 less in median household income by 2030.” Not only that, but Biden’s plans are projected to reduce “real GDP per capita by more than” a whopping “8 percent.” Asking whether or not Krugman would have held this same view if Trump was guaranteed a second term in office would be the equivalent of asking if a tiger could change his stripes. After all, it was Krugman who babbled a conspiracy theory earlier this year that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) under Trump was fudging the numbers when the May jobs report was released, which destroyed expectations and pointed to a relatively quick economic recovery. Conservatives are under attack. Contact The New York Times at 800-698-4637 and demand it distance itself from Krugman’s championing of Bidenomics and anti-conservative bias.