Paul Krugman, "Triumph of the Wrong?": Obama's Economic Policy a "Presumption"

In his latest New York Times op-ed entitled "Triumph of the Wrong?" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/opinion/krugman-triumph-of-the-wrong.html), Paul Krugman remarkably acknowledges that Obama is asking to be re-elected without an economic policy:

"Which brings us to the question of what form economic policies will take after the election.

If Mr. Obama wins, he’ll presumably go back to pushing for modest stimulus, aiming to convert the gradual recovery that seems to be under way into a more rapid return to full employment."

"Presumably"? How charming that Americans are being asked to re-elect Obama on the basis of "presumed" economic policy when:

• The US is more that $16 trillion in debt;
• "[T]he federal budget deficit in 2012 will total $1.1 trillion, according to [CBO] estimates, "marking the fourth year in a row with a deficit of more than $1 trillion (http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43539);"
• "Federal debt held by the public will reach 73 percent of GDP by the end of this fiscal year—the highest level since 1950 and about twice the share that it measured at the end of 2007 (http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43539);"
• Health care costs are spiraling out of control.

Given what's at stake, shouldn't there be a game plan? There is nothing "wrong" with betting the farm on the basis of a "presumption"? Apparently, this does not trouble hyper-partisan Nobelists.