Krugman points out the immediate response of prominent Republicans in Texas to show how they do not care to solve the issue of deregulation for Texans as it will go against the very corporations that support them. By having corporations essentially have control of the government in this regard, Texas will likely not be able to improve their system by having utilities be heavily regulated and publicly owned.

Krugman points out the irony of Senator Cruz for calling for regulation of the power grid here by later talking about how he was the one who advocated for a deregulated system so heavily. The fact that even he is now calling for more regulation shows the reader how little control the Texas government has in regards to their utilities.

Krugman further states his claim here that the free market will not perform basic needs as it will cut into the profit margin for these companies. By having the main goal not be the betterment of people and rather be profit for the company, power utilities will ensure that they do the bare minimum in order to ensure that they are able to make the most money of their customers.

Krugman is able to relate the incident with the avocado shortage in California to the power shortage in Texas by making the important distinction that electricity is more important than access to a specific fruit for people. This is primarily why that the power companies in Texas should be scrutinized more as it is essentially impossible to live without power in our current era.

Krugman pinpoints how a free market with little regulation can affect the population by using the issues with power companies in Texas charging exorbitant prices. By allowing coporations to have control, the only incentive for these corporations to provide power services would be their profit margin, hence the exorbitantly high prices that were seen for those who had power during the storm as well as those who had power restored early on.

Krugman emphasizes here how while Texas is not the only state to have a deregulated power grid, it has pushed further than anyone else and thus, landed itself in the mess that occurred the past few weeks with the winter storm. By leaving control of the power grid to corporations, Texas sacrificed any ability to ensure basic necessities, such as winter proofing the grid, at the expense of the people in Texas.

Krugman states his main point here talking about the Texas power grid being propped up by lies and how the winter storm proved to the public how a deregulated economy can damage everyday people to the point of death.

Krugman begins his argument by talking about how natural disasters often show how a system is often faulty and must be fixed. This overall statement allows him to narrow his argument to the disaster that was the Texas power grid.

Krugman reiterates his point here in saying that Biden talking to Republicans is not wrong in it of itself, but to compromise with them is not something he should do as it will only hurt the American people and thus, Democrat's electoral chances in 2022 and 2024.

Krugman is referring to how Obama was compromising with the Republicans during the first two years of his first term, leading to Republicans gaining a majority in both the House and Senate for the rest of his time in office, leading to him not being able to pass much legislation that he had promised, simply due to his compromising with Republicans.

Krugman is referring to how Republicans, such as Rand Paul of Kentucky, were immediately back to considering the national deficit when talking about Biden's proposal as it is their way of trying to force bipartisanship when it is against majority of America's viewpoint.

These approve/disapprove claims show how majority of America does not agree with the Republican efforts to favor the wealthy and the powerful as it does not help those in the middle class whatsoever. Krugman juxtaposes this with the Biden relief plans that are tremendously popular.

Krugman reasserts his claim that Republicans do not want bipartisanship because of how a large majority of them still refuse that Biden was elected lawfully and voted to attempt to disenfranchise states such as Arizona and Pennsylvania on January 6th

This cutting of the plan grossly undercuts the aid that the American people will be receiving during this time period and thus, Krugman is vehemently against it.

Krugman is talking about the pandemic's disastrous effects here because of how Republicans were the one's who allowed for the situation to get much worse than it needed to be by not listening to infectious disease experts.

This refers to how Republicans have used processes such as Budget Reconciliation in the Senate and Executive Orders to push forward their agenda without needing Democratic support in past years.

Krugman introduces his point about how the Republican economic plan is something Biden should not accept due to its cutting of the core of the Biden package.

The author brings up a potential solution that is essentially the opposite of what has been occurring in US polices at the moment. It is important the the solution the author has implemented as what he has stated before with nations past failing to stop fascism will occur again but in the US.

The author makes a very key point in referring to the fact that this attitude that was caused by right wing politicians will not go away when Biden becomes the president, as can be seen now with the still strong Trump support. It is important for politicians to fix the root of the issue rather than moving on.

This exact behavior is mirrored when looking at the events pre-WWII. Britain and other Western European nations had let Hitler begin to conquer Europe as a way to ensure that "peace was maintained" but it only gave Hitler more incentive to continue doing what he had been doing, leading to the terror that was Nazi Germany.

The author makes a good point here in referring to how the police in DC had a starkly different response to the attacks on January 6th compared to the Black Lives Matter protest a few months ago. This further develops the argument that the government has been very lax on this recent rise in fascist tendencies in our population.

It can be argued that this decision was due to the political power that these representatives had to maintain. As can be seen due to the recent impeachment proceedings, those who went against Trump were censored by their own party. The author could've also mentioned this as a response to how the party as a whole was complicit in maintaining their power and that is what lead to this result by House Republicans.

The author connects the riots on January 6th with the recent lockdown protests in Michigan that lead to threats on Michigan officials. This allows for him to show yet another example of how tolerance is not the correct course of action when dealing with fascism.

The author makes a key point here regarding how setting the precedent that the former president "will learn from his mistakes" rather than properly punishing him for his actions. By setting this precedent, one is enabling the fascist ideology of Donald Trump to remain acceptable, connecting back to the author's previous point of tolerance being unacceptable.

This statement relates to the paradox of tolerance, a idea that relates to how tolerance of all ideas can lead to dangerous ones, such as fascist ideology, taking root in a society. The author is able to show how this act taken by nations in the past(one prominent example of this is how western Europe was very tolerant of Hitler in the early years of his reign) has left in serious trouble.

The author makes a clear distinction between crude legislation tactics that the GOP uses and fascism as it is often used as a gotcha by those on the conservative side of politics whenever people refer to members of the party as fascists.