This is dicey territory, but the implication that Paul Krugman is somehow illiberal or racist if he suggests that a black man cannot win the presidency seems wildly off-base. After all, most liberals believe there is nothing wrong with being gay, and yet few would support a gay candidate for president, irrespective of the candidate's other merits. Electability is a legitimate and long-honored consideration in choosing a candidate, and race, sexuality, gender, attractiveness, height, speaking voice, skin blemishes, and much else that's non-meritorious enters into the equation. Now, I think Krugman is wrong to say Obama can't win the presidency because of race, but if that's indeed his position (and it's a bit unclear if this is what Krugman said, or what the reporter assumed), it's not an illegitimate one, and it certainly need not be considered a racist one.
