Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 03-07-2019, 11:08 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
... are there other objections you have to his candidacy and what might those be?
My thoughts about his candidacy were pretty complete in my very first post in this thread. He has no path to the nomination and no path to winning a general election. Read further if you want but that really is full stop in my head.

In my mind the differences between the Democratic nominees policy goals are fairly minor and the differences between how far in those directions they would be able to go as president are even less. They are all wanting to pull in the same direction on most issues and will all be limited by ... political reality. There is a difference in tactics between some of them - do you try to move the Overton window by discussing much more than is realistic as your plan or do you focus on pragmatic approaches of what can get done? And differences in emphasis. (Yang's emphasis for example is UBI and the robo-apocalypse.) But in terms of governance in office they'd all be pulling us from the Far Right minority rule into moderation and be able to make only some slight progress on their policy goals. So thinking about candidates I'm thinking about who can best win, who can best pull along others on the coattails, and who can help best build the strength of the party in states they cannot currently win priming for future wins.

Assuming someone with a path I'd prefer someone with experience getting things done politically (both in how to fight and in how to compromise) and with the oratory skills to express a positive vision of our country and the world in a way that inspires people to work together more than we currently do. Even if Yang had a realistic path he does not possess that sort of experience or those sorts of skills.

Assuming someone with a great path, with that sort of experience, and with those skills, I'd prefer someone whose emphasis is where I think the biggest problems are (which is not UBI). But my preference there is far backseat to getting a D in the office.

Still Yang hits on none of those items so um yeah.
  #252  
Old 03-07-2019, 03:50 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
My thoughts about his candidacy were pretty complete in my very first post in this thread. He has no path to the nomination and no path to winning a general election. Read further if you want but that really is full stop in my head.

In my mind the differences between the Democratic nominees policy goals are fairly minor and the differences between how far in those directions they would be able to go as president are even less. They are all wanting to pull in the same direction on most issues and will all be limited by ... political reality. There is a difference in tactics between some of them - do you try to move the Overton window by discussing much more than is realistic as your plan or do you focus on pragmatic approaches of what can get done? And differences in emphasis. (Yang's emphasis for example is UBI and the robo-apocalypse.) But in terms of governance in office they'd all be pulling us from the Far Right minority rule into moderation and be able to make only some slight progress on their policy goals. So thinking about candidates I'm thinking about who can best win, who can best pull along others on the coattails, and who can help best build the strength of the party in states they cannot currently win priming for future wins.

Assuming someone with a path I'd prefer someone with experience getting things done politically (both in how to fight and in how to compromise) and with the oratory skills to express a positive vision of our country and the world in a way that inspires people to work together more than we currently do. Even if Yang had a realistic path he does not possess that sort of experience or those sorts of skills.

Assuming someone with a great path, with that sort of experience, and with those skills, I'd prefer someone whose emphasis is where I think the biggest problems are (which is not UBI). But my preference there is far backseat to getting a D in the office.

Still Yang hits on none of those items so um yeah.
Interesting take, and I think at this stage we’re all in the same camp - get a D, any D, in there instead of Trump. I’d written a much longer answer but then I went back and reread what you wrote and mine sounded very similar so I axed it. Except I no longer think in terms of who is electable. That went out the window in 2016. Also, Yang is the only one who has differentiated himself from the pack at this early stage. It will be interesting to see how the other Ds treat him on the debate stage. (Incidentally, Yang was a debater in high school and went to the world championships in 1992 - I think he will be ok in front of the cameras, but we’ll see.)

One thing I wonder about - is 2020 the year of the moderate or do we go full progressive? Will the pendulum snap back from the Far Right all the way to the Far Left? You sound like you want a more gradual approach - e.g. expand Medicare to 50-year-olds, tax the .1% before going after the 1%, etc. I honestly wonder if the moderate message is going take hold or will this be the year of the progressive purists? Good luck to anyone trying to build a centrist coalition as of today...

Fun stuff. Whoever is elected needs to pass a law that says presidential elections must be shorter than two years. This is nuts.
  #253  
Old 03-07-2019, 09:54 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post

... One thing I wonder about - is 2020 the year of the moderate or do we go full progressive? Will the pendulum snap back from the Far Right all the way to the Far Left? You sound like you want a more gradual approach - e.g. expand Medicare to 50-year-olds, tax the .1% before going after the 1%, etc. I honestly wonder if the moderate message is going take hold or will this be the year of the progressive purists? Good luck to anyone trying to build a centrist coalition as of today...
You want to make any guesses yourself?

Mine, for the little it is worth, is that a fuller progressive message will be the winning pitch and I think the emphasis that will resonate most in both the primaries and in the general is an economic populist one, hopefully one that attack the systems that are resulting in greater wealth inequality and not a message demonizing the rich per se.

But again once in office governance is going to be by necessity moderate at most and getting anything through, even moderate SCOTUS picks, will require some political skill.
  #254  
Old 03-08-2019, 12:39 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
I’d like us to unhijack this thread and step back from this laserlike focus on VAT (it’s a regressive tax, have you heard?) to allow some oxygen to discuss other aspects of the Yang campaign.
I'm with you. Sorry for the digressions. There's a lot more to talk about his campaign and his policies. Just one more comment before I join you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The social safety net needs to be expanded, not cut down and replaced with a regressive system funded by a regressive tax. At least those other countries that use VAT as a major part of their tax base use it to support the social safety net ... not to give money to those in upper income brackets.
As aesop has noted several times, UBI is not just an economic policy meant to directly redistribute wealth. This is how the New Yorker article cited above puts it:

Quote:
“A UBI is a lesson and an ideal, not just an economic policy,” Lowrey writes. The ideal is that a society, as a first priority, should look out for its people’s survival; the lesson is that possibly it can do so without unequal redistributive plans.

People generally have a visceral reaction to the idea of a universal basic income. For many, a government check to boost good times or to guard against starvation in bad ones seems like an obviously humane measure. Others find such payments monstrous, a model of waste and unearned rewards.
The visceral reactions to UBI can be seen in this thread. I doubt anyone will be convincing the other to change their reactions to the plan.

The reason that I asked about the candidates who are doing wealth redistribution plans is because I thought I might have missed the platforms of some of the candidates. From what I've seen, the only plans I've seen to redistribute wealth have been Kamala Harris' tax credit plan which is half of the freedom dividend amount and only applies to people with a job earning less than $100K. Elizabeth Warren has the ultra-wealth tax but doesn't show any plans about giving more benefits to the poor except for child care. Bernie Sanders has the $15/hr minimum wage. Corey Booker has "baby bonds".

Other than that, I haven't seen any wealth redistribution plans. I'm thinking the reason for that is because it's not politically easy to do. Moving wealth from the very rich to the very poor is generally going to get pushback.

Howard Schultz is so mad that AOC made an offhand remark about taxing the wealthy that he's running on the platform of cutting entitlements and not increasing any taxes on the wealthy.

The crowd at Davos (the convention for the ultra wealthy) was incensed that a historian and an economist were talking about increasing taxes on the wealthy at their conference.

Yang's plan may not be perfect, but it's a bigger attempt in the right direction than anyone else is doing, IMO. And it's set up in a way to not stigmatize the rich or the poor.

As an aside, Yang has given roughly the same numbers for the cost of UBI that you found in your CBO analysis in most interviews I've seen him do when he's talking about UBI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
One thing I wonder about - is 2020 the year of the moderate or do we go full progressive?
This might interest you. Alisyn Camerota did a focus group with 6 Hillary Clinton supporters recently (3/5/19).

No one was for Biden. (MSM was shocked.) They were vocal about Hillary NOT stumping in 2020. 4 of the 6 felt the country should move in the progressive direction while 2 felt that the direction was pragmatic and centrist.

Alisyn Camerota asks Democratic voters about Joe Biden. They weren't excited.

Part 2

The person they were unanimously excited and animated about was AOC. They all thought she was the future.

Democratic voter praises Ocasio-Cortez: She's a badass

Back to Yang's campaign. The Yang subreddit is coming alive. They're having a lively discussion on the use of memes. (They're temporarily banned in the campaign sub.) The campaign sub is one of the fastest growing sub on reddit. And as you know, donations are up to 50K individuals to the 65K needed to get to the debates.
  #255  
Old 03-08-2019, 03:02 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
You want to make any guesses yourself?

Mine, for the little it is worth, is that a fuller progressive message will be the winning pitch and I think the emphasis that will resonate most in both the primaries and in the general is an economic populist one, hopefully one that attack the systems that are resulting in greater wealth inequality and not a message demonizing the rich per se.

But again once in office governance is going to be by necessity moderate at most and getting anything through, even moderate SCOTUS picks, will require some political skill.
I am in broad agreement with you although I’m less fussed about getting a professional politician in. I view it as a nice-to-have rather than a core requirement. Any reasonably bright person ought to be able to harness the power of the party machine if he has the votes. And the charisma. (Republicans are going to lament the opportunity they lost with Trump for decades to come. All he had to do was pivot ever so slightly to broaden his appeal, instead he just keeps doubling down on his base. Madness.) Otherwise we should just nominate Biden and be done with it. No one else comes close in terms of politicking chops (and he wouldn’t be a bad choice, but I believe his progressivism would rapidly revert to a more moderate mean in short order - he being a pragmatic professional politician). That said, the core progressive agenda won’t be enough to overcome the inertia of a strong economy. The Independents we need are probably educated, employed and covered by employer healthcare. They’re not fired up by Medicare expansion. They like watching their 401K grow (who doesn’t?). We need a punchy message to capture the national imagination.

If Howard Schultz makes a real go of it, that could actually help peel off Indie's who are actually Rs but won’t admit it. I don’t see him having broad appeal for the progressives. We already know the opposition game plan. They’re going to hang that socialism label around the D nominee's neck like a lead albatross. So we have to keep that message from sticking otherwise the list of toss-up states gets a lot longer. And it won’t take much to conflate populism with socialism in the mind of the electorate. Bernie and Yang are particularly vulnerable to that attack in my opinion.

I’m betting on greed. Or perhaps naked self-interest. I think people will flock to Yang's $1K per month. I did from the moment I heard about it. Thank goodness he thought of it rather some psychopath.

I really hope he’s not a psychopath.
  #256  
Old 03-08-2019, 05:41 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Some Yang news updates.

He's on CBSNews Red and Blue (1 minute clip) with Major Garrett talking about the history of UBI [youtube] Press article.

Yang just hit 100K followers on Twitter. His response.

Quote:
When I get 100k followers on Twitter I will celebrate by reminding myself that most Americans (~79%) are not on Twitter.
Kyle Kulinski of Secular Talk (youtube channel) and co-founder of Justice Democrats named Yang as third on his list of candidates after Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren/Tulsi Gabbard (tied for second). Kulinski likes UBI and Medicare for all on Yang's platform but has reservations about some regulations he doesn't specify. [youtube starts at around minute 10]

Fast Company article
on Yang interview.

Quote:
It’s easy to be skeptical about such post-capitalistic ideas. But listening to Yang, I began to be convinced by the seriousness of the moment and the need for radical new programs. The economy isn’t working well for lots of people. Machines are likely to make things more difficult in the future, even if some of the more dire automation forecasts don’t come true
. . .
“The state of entrepreneurship in America is very bleak and it’s being obscured by these giant digital companies that are upending industries,” Yang says. “We think of this as a time of innovation but there is a difference between new technology and people starting companies.” A basic income, worth $12,000 for every American, would give boost to people setting up small businesses, even if those businesses are more artisanal than commercial.

As for Yang’s candidacy–it’s also a reason for skepticism. But we’ve seen crazier things recently.
Yang has a long way to go for name recognition, but he's working hard at it.

Last edited by Heffalump and Roo; 03-08-2019 at 05:44 AM.
  #257  
Old 03-08-2019, 07:40 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
I really hope he’s not a psychopath.
In some senses, it might be better if he was.

Why Great Presidents Are Often Psychopaths

Quote:
What do these presidents have in common? Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy
. . .
biographers of each president had been asked to rate their subjects on a standardized assessment of psychopathic traits. Those first three super-popular presidents ranked No. 1, 2, and 3; they were America’s most psychopathic presidents.
. .
While we all use the term “psychopath” as a hard-fisted pejorative, it’s more complicated.
. . .
To summarize as severely as possible, here are the eight traits that psychologists measure in identifying psychopathy: social influence, fearlessness, stress immunity, Machiavellian egocentricity, rebellious non-conformity, blame externalization, carefree nonplanfulness, and coldheartedness. It’s obvious how some of those traits (social influence, fearlessness, rebellious non-conformity) could help a leader attract followers. Other traits (stress immunity, coldheartedness) are clearly helpful to someone making the brutally hard decisions that leaders face.

The uncomfortable bottom line is that “psychopathic traits are pretty well represented in politicians and world leaders,”
If you look up Presidents and psychopaths, there's lots of literature on how the most successful Presidents have psychopathic traits.
  #258  
Old 03-08-2019, 08:18 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
In some senses, it might be better if he was.

Why Great Presidents Are Often Psychopaths



If you look up Presidents and psychopaths, there's lots of literature on how the most successful Presidents have psychopathic traits.

Thanks for that, I was being tongue in cheek. He was a successful CEO - he’s going to have some of those traits. But if you look at his videos you see a man with humility as well, and damned if we couldn’t use a massive dose of that in the Oval Office again.

I had a look at the links you posted in your previous two comments - doesn’t look like it's a good time to be a moderate. Or over 70 for that matter. Biden may be 2020’s Jen Bush, the safe, obvious choice that never gets any traction. Although should he catch fire, he wouldn’t be a bad challenger to Trump. The progressives would hold their nose a vote for him, and he could get enough of the independents. But that’s 20th century thinking.

The name recognition for Yang is coming. And he’s pretty savvy on Reddit. He, or his team, know the memes. I remember when Bob Dole tripped all over his tongue to get out the name of his website in the 1996 campaign. How times have changed.
  #259  
Old 03-08-2019, 08:39 AM
MortSahlFan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: US
Posts: 402
Thanks for the upload. I've heard of him and knows what he's about (just the basics) and I think he's completely correct how this economy doesn't work, and how automation will continue a downward trend unless radical change takes place.

Let's say we know he has no chance. Just getting on the stage, or doing more interviews, its getting some different ideas out there. I'm.. NO ONE was talking $15/hr minimum wage, Medicare-For-All, and all the other things Bernie Sanders was talking about. He's been in government a long time, but no one knew him until he ran for President in 2016, where he went from 2%, to almost getting half (despite being cheated in many ways) where now its almost a litmus test, or at least a questionaire for all those running in the DNC.
  #260  
Old 03-08-2019, 08:43 AM
MortSahlFan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: US
Posts: 402
FDR, JFK, and TR are the only Presidents I like. I don't think JFK was heartless to strive for peace, and I don't think FDR (The New Deal) was heartless for rebuilding America when it was on the brink of collapse. I think a lot of the extracurricular negativity we sometimes see is because they were considered traitors to their class.
  #261  
Old 03-08-2019, 09:00 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by MortSahlFan View Post
Let's say we know he has no chance. Just getting on the stage, or doing more interviews, its getting some different ideas out there. I'm.. NO ONE was talking $15/hr minimum wage, Medicare-For-All, and all the other things Bernie Sanders was talking about. He's been in government a long time, but no one knew him until he ran for President in 2016, where he went from 2%, to almost getting half (despite being cheated in many ways) where now its almost a litmus test, or at least a questionaire for all those running in the DNC.
I'm sorry, that's really not true. People have long pushed to raise minimum wage and for universal health care. I'll grant he helped give these ideas oxygen but he hardly introduced them to public debate. Obamacare was supposed to have a public option. The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act was introduced in 2003.
  #262  
Old 03-08-2019, 09:37 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
More Yang news updates.

The news is really coming in quickly right now. There's a question on reddit in r/outoftheloop that's getting a lot of attention at the moment.

Someone asked:

Quote:
What's going on with Andrew Yang and why are people talking about him?

I'm on a lot of discord servers and I see people say thing like "Yang 2020" and whatnot. I don't follow politics that much so i'm unaware of who this is. A quick google search tells me he founded Venture for America and is 2020 democrat presidential candidate.
. . .
Who is this guy and why is he being mentioned so much?

The comments
are really great. People are reading his policies. They're versed in what he's saying. Some people like UBI. Others like other policies. People are discussing things like the libertarian view and classical economics. It's a fast-moving thread with comments growing from 280 to 358 just in the few minutes I was reading and still growing. Some people are saying he's the Bernie 2020.

Yang also has a blurb on BigThink and a new podcast interview on the Breakfast Club today. [youtube] [some NSFW language] (I didn't even get a chance to watch it yet. It was just posted literally 15 minutes ago.)
  #263  
Old 03-08-2019, 03:22 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,186
I've got word that Andrew Yang raised more money than Kamala Harris for the entirety of February, is there any truth to that?
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #264  
Old 03-08-2019, 03:55 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
I seriously doubt it but numbers are little hard to come by yet.
  #265  
Old 03-08-2019, 04:08 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
is there any truth to that?
FEC filings are done quarterly. IIRC that means mid April for the quarter that ends this month. I would take any politically charged claims that don't involve the weight of law enforcing truthfulness with at least a few grains of salt.
  #266  
Old 03-08-2019, 05:47 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
I've got word that Andrew Yang raised more money than Kamala Harris for the entirety of February, is there any truth to that?
I would be stunned if that were the case. Harris is a strong third in polling behind Biden and Sanders.
  #267  
Old 03-09-2019, 02:22 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
I've got word that Andrew Yang raised more money than Kamala Harris for the entirety of February, is there any truth to that?
I can’t find the Harris figures, but here is the info from the (data-driven!) Yang campaign:
“February was the best month ever for our campaign—we received donations from 34,025 different people for a total of $570,954.82! The average donation was $16.78.”
Even more interesting is the breakout of donations:
8% Progressive Activists
11% Traditional Liberals
15% Passive Liberals
26% Politically Disengaged
15% Moderates
19% Traditional Conservatives
6% Devoted Conservatives
He groups the cohorts from Traditional Liberals down through Moderates into what he calls the “Exhausted Majority”. It’s fascinating to me that he’s drawing 25% of his donations so far from self-identified Conservatives. That's got to be a massive differentiator from the rest of the Democratic field. If there is another D with that kind of crossover appeal I have yet to hear of them. Possibly John Delaney, but he’s even lower on people’s radar than Yang I think.

Back to Harris v. Yang - assuming they’re both still in the race on Super Tuesday, the battle for California will be epic. It could be Bernie or Warren or whomever, but Harris has the home field advantage and the state is 15% Asian American. There can be only one...
  #268  
Old 03-09-2019, 02:57 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
It’s fascinating to me that he’s drawing 25% of his donations so far from self-identified Conservatives. That's got to be a massive differentiator from the rest of the Democratic field.
From what I'm reading in the r/outoftheloop thread (which was up to over 800 comments last I saw it), after the Joe Rogan interview, Yang caught the attention of 4chan. Since then, they've been doing memes similar to The_Donald memes to try to convert that crowd.

But also, Yang has been on Fox News more than any other news outlet, so maybe it makes sense that he's catching some attention from Conservatives.

I'm interested in the 26% politically disengaged crowd. If he could expand that, that might be super helpful.

From that outoftheloop thread, there's a bunch of discussion on UBI on both sides, as you'd expect. But the policy that got some pushback that caught my eye was on time banking. That was a weird thing for people to get hung up on. It's just the concept of creating a system to give credit to people in the community who do community service that they could trade for other people to help them with community service. It's an existing concept being used by certain groups. The policy would just make the system available to more people in more areas. It's still a completely voluntary thing. It seemed to spook a bunch of people into thinking that they'd have to be "good". Heaven forbid.

I don't have any proof for this, but the numbers I seem to remember is Harris bringing in $1.5M in the first few days of her announcing and Sanders bringing in $10M in the first week after his announcement. It seems unlikely that Yang did close to that even in a given time period although I guess it's possible if Harris really had a bad month. Still, $570K is not too bad given his lack of name recognition.
  #269  
Old 03-09-2019, 04:41 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
From what I'm reading in the r/outoftheloop thread (which was up to over 800 comments last I saw it), after the Joe Rogan interview, Yang caught the attention of 4chan. Since then, they've been doing memes similar to The_Donald memes to try to convert that crowd.

But also, Yang has been on Fox News more than any other news outlet, so maybe it makes sense that he's catching some attention from Conservatives.

I'm interested in the 26% politically disengaged crowd. If he could expand that, that might be super helpful.

From that outoftheloop thread, there's a bunch of discussion on UBI on both sides, as you'd expect. But the policy that got some pushback that caught my eye was on time banking. That was a weird thing for people to get hung up on. It's just the concept of creating a system to give credit to people in the community who do community service that they could trade for other people to help them with community service. It's an existing concept being used by certain groups. The policy would just make the system available to more people in more areas. It's still a completely voluntary thing. It seemed to spook a bunch of people into thinking that they'd have to be "good". Heaven forbid.

I don't have any proof for this, but the numbers I seem to remember is Harris bringing in $1.5M in the first few days of her announcing and Sanders bringing in $10M in the first week after his announcement. It seems unlikely that Yang did close to that even in a given time period although I guess it's possible if Harris really had a bad month. Still, $570K is not too bad given his lack of name recognition.

$570K is not too bad?? It's brilliant! That’s a hell of a lot of seed money to start the actual name-recognition campaign. Let’s frame his fundraising achievement in the proper context. The people donating to Bernie and Harris had already heard of them ages ago. They’ve both had hours and hours of mainstream media attention and have been telegraphing their presidential aspirations on the national stage for a long time. Yang has come out of nowhere and is blowing up on both sides of the political divide. $570K in one month at this stage of the game is outstanding. At this time 4 years ago Trump hadn’t even formed his exploratory committee yet, that’s how early we are in the campaign.

I don’t have any detail on the politically disengaged, but it seems fairly self explanatory. A lot of folks have been turned off by politics over the last few election cycles and many others, particularly young people, have really low participation rates. As for his appeal to Conservatives, that’s really interesting. The main Fox-viewing demographic is decidedly against his agenda of expanded social welfare programs, higher taxes, gun control, etc. Yang skews hard left. Could it be the allure of UBI? I think so. I also think a lot of people are going to rail against him in public then quietly pull the lever for him in private to give themselves $1,000 per month.

For some the time-banking thing smacks a bit too much of the social credit system in China. I am not wild about how it’s being presented, either, primarily because it does bring the spectre of Socialism squarely to the front of his campaign, deserved or not. I’m hoping he’ll tighten up that part of his platform to sound more palatable, or it’s going to give his opponents the cudgel to beat him with.
  #270  
Old 03-09-2019, 05:07 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
$570K is not too bad?? It's brilliant!
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
For some the time-banking thing smacks a bit too much of the social credit system in China.
That's what people there are saying. Maybe he should do away with that platform. He's just trying to incentivize people participating in their communities with a system that is self-perpetuating and doesn't take any money. I guess it's hard to get that across without people thinking there might be a more nefarious outcome.

People are worried that employers will use the community credit number as a gauge for employment.

But that brings me to the idea of human-centered capitalism. His idea is to measure more human-centered measurements instead of GDP. I'm thinking that those measurements can be used in more sinister ways if you get real imaginative.

How do you think those measurements will be used in a positive way to boost the society? I do like the idea, but does it have the power to change society?
  #271  
Old 03-09-2019, 08:25 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,862
Can we please stop using how much play on Reddit something is getting as indicative of how something will influence the country. It's entirely a bubble-supported argument.

From a 2017 analysis of Reddit's demographic's we see that the people who use Reddit for news skew:

71% male
64% Ages 18-29
70% white

That's entirely non-representative of the voting population which skews older and more female. In addition, the D primary voting population will be much more non-white than the population as a whole.

Honestly, it's exactly the same as saying, "I read it on Huffington Post (or here) therefore it's indicative of the entire country!" Or on the flip side, down here (I'm in ruby red South Carolina) those people who say, "I don't know anyone who voted for Obama. I can't believe he won."

I can believe Yang has internal polling - or he's a fool or a non-serious candidate - indicating that he can overcome those issues. But appealing to demographics who vote at a lower frequency - young white males - is a recipe for disappointment.
  #272  
Old 03-09-2019, 08:25 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
I can’t find the Harris figures, but here is the info from the (data-driven!) Yang campaign:
“February was the best month ever for our campaign—we received donations from 34,025 different people for a total of $570,954.82! The average donation was $16.78.”
After the first week of March, he's already at $175K for the month. He's now at 55K donors of 65K needed.

I was thinking that the Breakfast Club interview might have helped. There were a bunch of comments on Twitter about having seen him on the Breakfast Club, so they donated.

It looks like he's picking up steam. Hopefully he can keep this going.

Also saw this on his subreddit.

Why as a Trump supporter I'm supporting Yang now.

Quote:
Within 5 minutes of his announcement speech I knew Trump had a good chance. He had his main proposal, a wall, and made a solid business case for it. After that, nobody else could talk about a wall; it was now Trump's.
. . .
Yang is doing this with his UBI/automation proposal. He's also an entrepreneur (part salesman, part executive), he knows how important it is to advertise properly and UBI is doing it. UBI sounds dumb at first, but his argument is convincing, and now he owns it. . . . .
and Yang was Google Trending higher than Elizabeth Warren and Beto O'Rourke.

Google Trends - Andrew Yang is averaging higher than Senator Elizabeth Warren


Silly stuff at the moment, but still fun.
  #273  
Old 03-09-2019, 10:31 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
Can we please stop using how much play on Reddit something is getting as indicative of how something will influence the country. It's entirely a bubble-supported argument.

From a 2017 analysis of Reddit's demographic's we see that the people who use Reddit for news skew:

71% male
64% Ages 18-29
70% white

That's entirely non-representative of the voting population which skews older and more female. In addition, the D primary voting population will be much more non-white than the population as a whole.

Honestly, it's exactly the same as saying, "I read it on Huffington Post (or here) therefore it's indicative of the entire country!" Or on the flip side, down here (I'm in ruby red South Carolina) those people who say, "I don't know anyone who voted for Obama. I can't believe he won."

I can believe Yang has internal polling - or he's a fool or a non-serious candidate - indicating that he can overcome those issues. But appealing to demographics who vote at a lower frequency - young white males - is a recipe for disappointment.

I think Reddit is just another arrow in his quiver. As are Facebook and Twitter, where he also continues to grow his following. And the number of donors, which is more important at this point. This isn’t the Literary Digest predicting victory for Alf Landon; it’s just another positive indicator.
  #274  
Old 03-09-2019, 10:49 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
After the first week of March, he's already at $175K for the month. He's now at 55K donors of 65K needed.

I was thinking that the Breakfast Club interview might have helped. There were a bunch of comments on Twitter about having seen him on the Breakfast Club, so they donated.

It looks like he's picking up steam. Hopefully he can keep this going.

Also saw this on his subreddit.

Why as a Trump supporter I'm supporting Yang now.



and Yang was Google Trending higher than Elizabeth Warren and Beto O'Rourke.

Google Trends - Andrew Yang is averaging higher than Senator Elizabeth Warren


Silly stuff at the moment, but still fun.

Nice pickup on the donations! He’s accelerating. But he’s not been battle-tested yet. I’m not worried he won’t hold his own on the debate stage, but I do wonder how the name candidates and the pols in the DNC plan to counter his threat. And they are good at it. Those people didn’t get to the top ranks of politics by accident. Ideally we’ll see another wave just as with Trump in 2016. The people will speak and the professional pols will have to come along for the ride. Only this time with a sensible person at the helm.

Yes, it’s heartening to see Trump supporters abandoning ship to join the Yang Gang, even if it is only anecdotal at this point. Let’s hope it’s a sign of more to come.
  #275  
Old 03-09-2019, 10:59 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
Nice pickup on the donations! He’s accelerating. But he’s not been battle-tested yet. I’m not worried he won’t hold his own on the debate stage, but I do wonder how the name candidates and the pols in the DNC plan to counter his threat. And they are good at it. Those people didn’t get to the top ranks of politics by accident. Ideally we’ll see another wave just as with Trump in 2016. The people will speak and the professional pols will have to come along for the ride. Only this time with a sensible person at the helm.

Yes, it’s heartening to see Trump supporters abandoning ship to join the Yang Gang, even if it is only anecdotal at this point. Let’s hope it’s a sign of more to come.
I think Trump defections to Yang are primarily those who are swing voters and independent voters.

In any event, I hope Yang can get some attention - enough to make it to the debates. I think that would be where he could actually get his name on the map, because he would be the most radical thinker at the debate. I doubt the other candidates even take him that seriously, which is fine by me.

Last edited by asahi; 03-09-2019 at 11:00 AM.
  #276  
Old 03-09-2019, 11:04 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
This isn’t the Literary Digest predicting victory for Alf Landon; it’s just another positive indicator.
Wow, that's old. I had to look it up. It's from 1936. You don't have to go back that far to find a case of polling gone wrong. You can take any poll from the 2016 Presidential election.

Or as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says in her interview with Stephen Colbert [youtube at minute 1:30] the night after her win in the NY primary. "I don't think polling is always right. . . . People try to identify who's the most likely to turn out and what we did was change who turns out." Then she tells a story of two 19 year olds who said they voted for her as she went to the victory party.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
DNC plan to counter his threat.
People in the sub were rumbling earlier that the DNC might change the requirements as the debates got closer. Yang told Fox News that the debates wouldn't be two-tiered for 2020, and that if the requirements were met, candidates would be split into two days on a random draw. We'll see.
  #277  
Old 03-09-2019, 11:07 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
Can we please stop using how much play on Reddit something is getting as indicative of how something will influence the country. It's entirely a bubble-supported argument.

From a 2017 analysis of Reddit's demographic's we see that the people who use Reddit for news skew:

71% male
64% Ages 18-29
70% white

That's entirely non-representative of the voting population which skews older and more female. In addition, the D primary voting population will be much more non-white than the population as a whole.

Honestly, it's exactly the same as saying, "I read it on Huffington Post (or here) therefore it's indicative of the entire country!" Or on the flip side, down here (I'm in ruby red South Carolina) those people who say, "I don't know anyone who voted for Obama. I can't believe he won."

I can believe Yang has internal polling - or he's a fool or a non-serious candidate - indicating that he can overcome those issues. But appealing to demographics who vote at a lower frequency - young white males - is a recipe for disappointment.
I don't think anyone's arguing that Reddit is a great substitute for political polling, but it can be a place to gauge activity. If you look at Google trends, I think Yang's online interest ranks pretty high relative to much of the field. He has actually garnered more interest than Amy Klobuchar, Corey Booker, and Elizabeth Warren in recent weeks. Obviously, that's not fundraising, but it's attention and it's building a brand, which is what he's interested in doing at this stage. Whether that translates into success is anyone's guess, but I think it's worth noting, at least.
  #278  
Old 03-09-2019, 12:08 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post

But that brings me to the idea of human-centered capitalism. His idea is to measure more human-centered measurements instead of GDP. I'm thinking that those measurements can be used in more sinister ways if you get real imaginative.

How do you think those measurements will be used in a positive way to boost the society? I do like the idea, but does it have the power to change society?

Society is changing. The question is how do we change it humanely. The robots are coming. In the past you had a man with capital who hired a hundred other men and paid them for their labor. In the future that man will buy ten robots and employ zero men. If we don’t figure out how to share what that one man with capital is reaping we’re all stuffed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I think Trump defections to Yang are primarily those who are swing voters and independent voters.

Agreed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
In any event, I hope Yang can get some attention - enough to make it to the debates. I think that would be where he could actually get his name on the map, because he would be the most radical thinker at the debate. I doubt the other candidates even take him that seriously, which is fine by me.

Agreed. He’s still in stealth mode. The debates will be a game-changer, in one direction or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Wow, that's old. I had to look it up. It's from 1936. You don't have to go back that far to find a case of polling gone wrong. You can take any poll from the 2016 Presidential election.

You say “old”, I say “classic”!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Or as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says in her interview with Stephen Colbert [youtube at minute 1:30] the night after her win in the NY primary. "I don't think polling is always right. . . . People try to identify who's the most likely to turn out and what we did was change who turns out." Then she tells a story of two 19 year olds who said they voted for her as she went to the victory party.



People in the sub were rumbling earlier that the DNC might change the requirements as the debates got closer. Yang told Fox News that the debates wouldn't be two-tiered for 2020, and that if the requirements were met, candidates would be split into two days on a random draw. We'll see.

It’s supposed to be co-equal debates over two nights. No one's going to get a lot of mike time. It will be interesting to see who will have the buzz going into the debates. As long as he stays on point and doesn’t bring up the Great Pumpkin (another classic!) I think he’ll survive the cull. Going forward it becomes much more a money game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I don't think anyone's arguing that Reddit is a great substitute for political polling, but it can be a place to gauge activity. If you look at Google trends, I think Yang's online interest ranks pretty high relative to much of the field. He has actually garnered more interest than Amy Klobuchar, Corey Booker, and Elizabeth Warren in recent weeks. Obviously, that's not fundraising, but it's attention and it's building a brand, which is what he's interested in doing at this stage. Whether that translates into success is anyone's guess, but I think it's worth noting, at least.

Agreed. And in another wee while all the candidate identities will be distilled down to a few words, either positive or negative. E.g. Klobuchar is mean, Booker is cozy with big pharma, Bernie missed his chance, Warren is..whatever. I’m not characterising anybody, just saying we all will. Every candidate is quickly going to crystalize in our minds and in the national conversation. For now, “free-money outsider tearing up the Internet” is a pretty good label to have.
  #279  
Old 03-09-2019, 12:16 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
I have a feeling that most of the Trump supporters defecting don't vote much at all and only "support" him on reddit.
  #280  
Old 03-09-2019, 02:25 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I have a feeling that most of the Trump supporters defecting don't vote much at all and only "support" him on reddit.

Could be. I think we’re all in agreement it’s just a bit of buzz at this point. It’s not like he’s made Reddit the centrepiece of his campaign. But he’s leveraging the platform, which shows his social media savvy.
  #281  
Old 03-09-2019, 07:59 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
SAgreed. And in another wee while all the candidate identities will be distilled down to a few words, either positive or negative. E.g. Klobuchar is mean, Booker is cozy with big pharma, Bernie missed his chance, Warren is..whatever. I’m not characterising anybody, just saying we all will. Every candidate is quickly going to crystalize in our minds and in the national conversation. For now, “free-money outsider tearing up the Internet” is a pretty good label to have.
I disagree that Bernie missed his chance because he never had a chance in 2016 against the Clinton brand. But Bernie has a brand of his own, and his fundraising machine has already made that abundantly clear.
  #282  
Old 03-10-2019, 01:59 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
Agreed. And in another wee while all the candidate identities will be distilled down to a few words, either positive or negative. E.g. Klobuchar is mean, Booker is cozy with big pharma, Bernie missed his chance, Warren is..whatever. I’m not characterising anybody, just saying we all will. Every candidate is quickly going to crystalize in our minds and in the national conversation. For now, “free-money outsider tearing up the Internet” is a pretty good label to have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I disagree that Bernie missed his chance because he never had a chance in 2016 against the Clinton brand. But Bernie has a brand of his own, and his fundraising machine has already made that abundantly clear.

I'm not saying Bernie missed his chance, I’m saying there are so many candidates we’re quickly going to start bucketing them using shorthand. Everyone’s going to be distilled down to a phrase, and all the subtlety and nuance of their campaign will be subsumed in an ascribed identity. Does Yang get enshrined as a crackpot or a genius in the national imagination? Is Bernie the firebrand or the also-ran? We’re about to find out.
  #283  
Old 03-10-2019, 06:37 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
What's not to like? I'm hating these time changes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Yang
The switch from Daylight Savings Time literally kills people in accidents every year because people are drowsy. I would advocate for a permanent adoption of Daylight Savings Time. No more hour-switching.
A rally in a pretty crowded room in Austin, TX looks representative of the most of the demographics of the voting public. I don't know the demographics of Austin, TX.

I found his Facebook. I was thinking that there should be a place to archive his photos and videos so I don't have to go searching for them later, and there they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
Society is changing. The question is how do we change it humanely. The robots are coming. In the past you had a man with capital who hired a hundred other men and paid them for their labor. In the future that man will buy ten robots and employ zero men. If we don’t figure out how to share what that one man with capital is reaping we’re all stuffed.
I completely agree with you. But I wonder how popular the idea will be. Here's what he's hoping to change.

Quote:
Yang would change the way the US measures success

The United States’ gross domestic product having climbed by an average of 3.7 percent since 2009. On the whole, the nation appears to be doing quite well.

Yet, 12.7 percent of the American population is living in poverty, suicide rates are on the up and employees are overworked.
. . . .
If elected, Yang wants to change the way that the United States measures success. According to Yang, humans are more important than money and success should be measured accordingly.

There will be less focus on corporate gains and more focus on the happiness of its people.
. . . .
Instead of basing success on monetary figures, Yang will use new measurements. Things like median income, life expectancy, mental health and absence of substance abuse would be used to determine whether the United States is thriving.

Promising free healthcare, higher salaries, drug programs and lower student loans among plenty of life-improving policies, Yang will set up his America to thrive in those areas.

The Verdict


From his platform here

I can see this getting maybe even more pushback than his UBI. To me, it's a bit like everyone was playing Monopoly. In Monopoly, the goal of the game is to get the most money and bankrupt everyone else. But now when people are doing just that, Yang wants to change the rules to make the goal people's happiness. The people winning the game of Monopoly might not like that. Possibly even more than money, the people who have power want status levels to remain the same.

That said, there's not really any monetary gains or losses from it. At this point, it's just a change in measurements that people might not pay attention to. It would have to be a cultural shift that makes the difference. While I see some glimmers of that cultural shift, I don't think those measurements will change much.

Then again, when the measurement was changed to GDP in the Depression era, the culture changed along with the measurement, it seems.

I'm wondering how the measurements will change things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
Bernie missed his chance
That's from Trump. Let's hope candidates aren't going to be characterized by Trump.
  #284  
Old 03-10-2019, 11:28 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
I can see this getting maybe even more pushback than his UBI. To me, it's a bit like everyone was playing Monopoly. In Monopoly, the goal of the game is to get the most money and bankrupt everyone else. But now when people are doing just that, Yang wants to change the rules to make the goal people's happiness. The people winning the game of Monopoly might not like that. Possibly even more than money, the people who have power want status levels to remain the same.

That said, there's not really any monetary gains or losses from it. At this point, it's just a change in measurements that people might not pay attention to. It would have to be a cultural shift that makes the difference. While I see some glimmers of that cultural shift, I don't think those measurements will change much.

Then again, when the measurement was changed to GDP in the Depression era, the culture changed along with the measurement, it seems.

I'm wondering how the measurements will change things.

It won’t happen until we move from scarcity-based thinking to abundance-based thinking, and that won’t happen until the automated labor market is mature, which is still a few decades away. But it will happen. Right now all the focus is on robots and AI picking off the low-hanging jobs. That’s just the beginning. We already have the capability to print houses, customised prosthetics and vegan steaks. How many jobs do those technologies threaten? Cast your mind forward a generation or two. Do you even need a hardware store anymore? You can fabricate any part or any tool at home, and when you’re done with the tool you can recycle it into a different tool or other items. You’ll be able to “print” (fabricate and recycle) your food, your clothes, your home, your life. Supply chains and retail shops as we know them today will be obsolete, along with all the jobs associated with them. All you’ll need is power, a fabrication device, some raw material and a set of instructions.

Yang focuses on driverless trucks and automated cashiers because those we can sort of understand. But there is an avalanche of technological change heading our way that our current socio-economic model is not set up to handle. That’s what he’s trying to get out ahead of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
That's from Trump. Let's hope candidates aren't going to be characterized by Trump.

Did you sleep through the 2016 Republican primaries and general election ? Trump's primary weapon is negative characterisation, and he wields it pretty effectively. Yang, presuming he's the nominee, expects he’ll be smeared as Comrade Yang. Which means he’s already working on his defence/counterattack. I get that people doubt him because he’s a political newbie with untested ideas, but no one should doubt his intelligence or his sincerity. He’s taking this race very seriously.
  #285  
Old 03-11-2019, 11:11 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,268
He made it! The YangGang got to 65K donors. He also needs 1% in a couple major polls, I think. I'm hoping this one is correct and qualifies. If so, he might be well on his way to the debates in June. I'm interested in seeing that.

Haha. Evidently, the website pulls its number from ActBlue which is slow to update, so different people are reporting different things. But he's close enough that it seems inevitable.

I was watching Yang's interview at Georgetown that he did last month. A couple things I found interesting.

Elizabeth Warren has been in the news for announcing her plan to break up the tech giants, Amazon, Facebook and Google. I don't know the details. The article I saw didn't have any. I don't see the point of breaking them up. Facebook and Google's products are already free. Breaking them up would just reduce their critical mass, which is the draw of them.

Yang's idea [youtube at minute 38] is to force them to pay the consumer for using their data. He wants to give the consumers the ability to decide if they want to opt-in for their data to be used for a fee or opt-out and not get paid. I'm not sure I like this idea. It makes poor people who need the money more prone to get their identity stolen.

Pete Buttigieg's idea is to either break up the companies or regulate. His town hall was vague. . . about almost everything.

The other thing I found interesting is Yang's approach to climate change. While everyone is focused on the Green New Deal, Yang's position [youtube above at minute 44] is that the US only produces 15% of the world carbon emissions, so even doing everything possible won't eliminate the problem. Of course, he plans to get back in the Paris Accord. But he's looking more toward gearing up for the weather change, then looking for technological innovations to help solve the problem, like finding a way to harvest the emissions from the atmosphere and sending up mirrored satellites.

I've been noticing the audience in the town hall meetings are focusing on the idea that the US only produces 15% of the carbon emissions. This is a different emphasis on the Green New Deal. They can be compatible, but the emphasis is a bit different.

After watching Pete Buttigieg's town hall, I'm seeing the genius of Yang's time banking plan. They both want people to get back involved in the community. Yang's plan gives people incentive. Buttigieg just says he wants people more involved in the community.
  #286  
Old 03-12-2019, 05:41 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
If Howard Schultz makes a real go of it, that could actually help peel off Indie's who are actually Rs but won’t admit it. I don’t see him having broad appeal for the progressives. We already know the opposition game plan. They’re going to hang that socialism label around the D nominee's neck like a lead albatross. So we have to keep that message from sticking otherwise the list of toss-up states gets a lot longer. And it won’t take much to conflate populism with socialism in the mind of the electorate. Bernie and Yang are particularly vulnerable to that attack in my opinion.
I don't think Schultz is running for any reason except to disrupt what he probably considers to be creeping socialism.
  #287  
Old 03-12-2019, 02:49 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
And another milestone is achieved! Nate Silver tweeted this earlier today:
”It looks like Andrew Yang will make the debates so it's probably time to consider him a "major" candidate. We're going to do a theory-of-the-case for him, as we have for other major 2020 candidates.”
That may not sound like much, but 538 has been very dismissive of Yang until now. They are arguably one of the top sources for political/election information and commentary on the web and until now he could scarcely get a mention.

How long will it take the pundits to realise they don’t get to tell the public which candidates to take seriously, it’s the other way around. Did they learn nothing from 2016?
  #288  
Old 03-12-2019, 02:59 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
I don't take him seriously and I didn't need a pundit to tell me. His major promise of UBI is ill conceived and all his fans seem to want to ignore the implications of his VAT.
  #289  
Old 03-12-2019, 03:43 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I don't think Schultz is running for any reason except to disrupt what he probably considers to be creeping socialism.

Which would make him a real outlier among the D candidates. I’d prefer he not run as an Indy, but it’s a free country and his prerogative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I don't take him seriously and I didn't need a pundit to tell me. His major promise of UBI is ill conceived and all his fans seem to want to ignore the implications of his VAT.

The thing about polarising issues is that someone has to be on either side. I guess we know where you stand.
  #290  
Old 03-12-2019, 04:13 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
It's not polarizing, it's fantasy based policies. But I guess someone always wants to believe in fantasies.
  #291  
Old 03-12-2019, 05:28 PM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
It's not polarizing, it's fantasy based policies. But I guess someone always wants to believe in fantasies.

Dreams
By Langston Hughes, 1902 - 1967

Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.

Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
Frozen with snow.


I can’t say it any better. Peace.
  #292  
Old 03-12-2019, 09:07 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
From his VAT page:
Quote:
Big companies and rich people are excellent at moving things around to avoid taxes – Amazon, Google, and other companies funnel hundreds of billions in earnings overseas. A VAT makes it impossible for them to benefit from the American people and infrastructure without paying their fair share.
How can this be considered anything other than flat out bullshit? Not impossible dream but pure bullshit?
  #293  
Old 03-13-2019, 12:19 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by aesop View Post
... How long will it take the pundits to realise they don’t get to tell the public which candidates to take seriously, it’s the other way around. Did they learn nothing from 2016?
Can you expound upon this?

Pundits of course do take a candidate seriously when it is clear that the public does. If someone is polling with significant support (the public taking them seriously) they take notice no matter who they are otherwise. Reddit subs are not a great measure of that btw. That gets the top three, four, or maybe even five in based on that factor alone.

Is it your objection that pundits also take seriously (and therefore discuss) potential candidates who are not at that point polling so high, based on other factors (like being a current governor, or being listed as a serious consideration by polled political activists who follow things more closely, factors that are often leading indicators, often predictive of how races will shake out)?
  #294  
Old 03-13-2019, 03:37 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
From his VAT page:

How can this be considered anything other than flat out bullshit? Not impossible dream but pure bullshit?

I think that’s just good old-fashioned campaigning. You use a bit of marketing spin to highlight an issue. No one really believed Mexico was going to send us a cheque to pay for a border wall did they?

Have you been outside the US? Did you buy anything? There’s a good chance you, too, took part in a VAT fantasy.
  #295  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:19 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Can you expound upon this?

Pundits of course do take a candidate seriously when it is clear that the public does. If someone is polling with significant support (the public taking them seriously) they take notice no matter who they are otherwise. Reddit subs are not a great measure of that btw. That gets the top three, four, or maybe even five in based on that factor alone.

You are confusing “I don’t take him seriously” with “He's not a serious candidate.

At the same time, you are conflating “serious” with “well-known”.

Yang declared his intention to run in November 2017. He wrote a book detailing the central thesis of his campaign. He visited Iowa and New Hampshire multiple times to meet with voters to talk about his ideas. He created a website listing scores of policy positions to a level of detail you still don’t find on the sites of “serious” candidates. He made the rounds of podcasts and talk shows to discuss his presidential aspirations. He established a social media presence and a grassroots network of campaign volunteers. In all candor, what more could he have done to prove to you he is serious?

And who said Reddit subs are the arbiter of relevance? It’s just one more avenue to get out his message.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Is it your objection that pundits also take seriously (and therefore discuss) potential candidates who are not at that point polling so high, based on other factors (like being a current governor, or being listed as a serious consideration by polled political activists who follow things more closely, factors that are often leading indicators, often predictive of how races will shake out)?

On the contrary, I welcome discussions on all candidates who have done the work to demonstrate they are serious. I don’t think Tulsi Gabbard has a chance in hell. It doesn’t mean she’s not a serious candidate. I’m hearing good things about Buttigieg. Should we laugh him out of the room because he is only the mayor of the fourth-largest city in Indiana? Of course not. I just recently heard of Marianne Williamson. Does that mean she’s not serious or that she’s not been given the same media exposure as more conventional candidates?

I want to hear good ideas. I think they matter more than political pedigrees. You seem to think because someone is a politician that automatically makes them more qualified than someone who is not. What were all these politicians before they went into politics? Ordinary folks no one had ever heard of. Now who does that sound like?

And as far as the predictive value of political experts, they really called it in 2016 didn’t they? That Bush vs. Clinton race was a squeaker, but thank goodness Hillary pulled it out at the end.
  #296  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:10 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,510
So your position is that if someone writes a book, creates a website, and travels to Iowa and New Hampshire, the "pundits" should pay attention and spend time covering the person and their ideas, no matter how few of the public give a shit about the person or their ideas?

And the post before? Really there is something telling when someone is using Trump's lies to his base as justification for saying misleading dishonest bullshit ... because it is just marketing and campaigning, like Trump does.
  #297  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:39 AM
DMC is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 3,739
I can get behind most of his policies, but there are a few that concern me and one is a potential showstopper.
  • Until he actually fleshes out the VAT proposal, he's a complete non-starter for me. An across the board VAT is about as regressive as it gets and his policy is so vague that I can't rule that out.
  • Aside from that, he wants to lock down the southern border far tighter than it is today, but doesn't offer any options for those who want to come here legally from places like Central America. I'm aware of his stance on DREAM and the Pathway to Citizenship proposal, but those stances appear to be simply because he accepts the illegals living here already as an unfortunate truth.
  • While he doesn't come out and say it, his retirement savings proposal sounds a whole lot like a backdoor to get rid of social security.

Finally, $750K isn't nearly enough money per month to have a good shot at this, so he needs to increase that fast or get left behind. That's not even on pace for Carly Fiorina money, much less an actual contender.

Last edited by DMC; 03-13-2019 at 06:40 AM. Reason: typo
  #298  
Old 03-13-2019, 10:25 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
So your position is that if someone writes a book, creates a website, and travels to Iowa and New Hampshire, the "pundits" should pay attention and spend time covering the person and their ideas, no matter how few of the public give a shit about the person or their ideas?

You didn’t answer my question from before. What else could he do to convince you he’s serious? And kindly stop using your opinion as the metric for what qualifies as serious. Objectively speaking, what makes any candidate a serious one?

My response to your question, above, is if a man spends 18 months of his life campaigning for president (not just saying that he is but putting in the long hours and the hard miles) but doesn’t attract the attention of pundits because they view his ideas as too far outside the mainstream, that in no way detracts from the seriousness of his effort.

And lo, in the 19th month he has sprang fully clad in seriousness upon the pundit conscious. Mirabile dictu!

Or perhaps he was serious all along and now he’s getting more notice. Which is entirely different.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
And the post before? Really there is something telling when someone is using Trump's lies to his base as justification for saying misleading dishonest bullshit ... because it is just marketing and campaigning, like Trump does.

Now you’re just being disingenuous. You know I used Trump to make a point, not to liken Yang to him. A campaign presents a point of view and attempts to influence people to support it. Pick any plank in any platform and the party on the other side will scream that it distorts the truth. You know, the way you are with VAT/UBI.
  #299  
Old 03-13-2019, 10:33 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,143
Saying a VAT will make Google pay its fair share is a lie, not a point of view.
  #300  
Old 03-13-2019, 10:51 AM
aesop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC View Post
I can get behind most of his policies, but there are a few that concern me and one is a potential showstopper.
  • Until he actually fleshes out the VAT proposal, he's a complete non-starter for me. An across the board VAT is about as regressive as it gets and his policy is so vague that I can't rule that out.
  • Aside from that, he wants to lock down the southern border far tighter than it is today, but doesn't offer any options for those who want to come here legally from places like Central America. I'm aware of his stance on DREAM and the Pathway to Citizenship proposal, but those stances appear to be simply because he accepts the illegals living here already as an unfortunate truth.
  • While he doesn't come out and say it, his retirement savings proposal sounds a whole lot like a backdoor to get rid of social security.

Finally, $750K isn't nearly enough money per month to have a good shot at this, so he needs to increase that fast or get left behind. That's not even on pace for Carly Fiorina money, much less an actual contender.

It’s cool that you’re keeping an open mind until you hear more. The debates aren’t for 3 more months. Maybe he shines, maybe he fizzles but let’s let the man state his case. He’s earned a spot on the stage.

Yeah, he’s definitely got to crank up the money machine, but he’s only now getting on people's radar and hasn’t placed any media ads yet as far as I know. And his heart is in the right place regarding campaign finance reform.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:57 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017