# The Andrew Yang Presidential Campaign thread
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [February 14, 2019, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555 "2019-02-14T21:16:10Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 22
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [May 24, 2019, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/421 "2019-05-24T22:42:19Z")
> [@asahi](#):
>
> The basic problem Yang’s campaign has now is that it’s becoming an historically over-crowded field of candidates. If the debate commission had anticipated this number of candidates, they might have raised the requirements to polling at 2-5%.
The crowded field is actually in Yang’s favor. If the list were smaller, he might have been cut off. At this point, in order to cut him off, they’d have to cut out a lot of people.
While I knew about the debate qualification rules, I just found out that there are 169 declared Democratic candidates according to [filings with the FEC](https://www.fec.gov/data/candidates/president/?election_year=2020&cycle=2020&election_full=true&party=DEM). Only 20 of those people will hit the debate stage.
The DNC already set the [rules](https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/09/2020-democratic-candidates-debate-qualifications-1305150) for qualifying to the debates. Either poll 1% in 3 qualifying polls or get 65K donors from 20 or more states.
> [@](#):
>
> There are two paths to qualifying for the debate stage: breaking 1 percent in three polls from pollsters approved by the Democratic National Committee, or tallying 65,000 unique campaign donors, with at least 200 donors in 20 different states.
Yang has met both qualifications. The cut off is 20 people. So far, only 19 people qualified. Of those, only 13 people qualified on both qualifications. Yang was one of those 13.
> [@](#):
>
> According to a POLITICO analysis, 19 candidates have qualified for the first debates on June 26-27 in Miami. . .
> Thirteen of those candidates — Biden, Booker, Buttigieg, Castro, Gabbard, Harris, Inslee, Klobuchar, O’Rourke, Sanders, Warren, Williamson and Yang — have crossed both thresholds, virtually guaranteeing them a spot in one of the two nights.
The DNC [just instituted](https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/24/democrats-undercard-june-1344368) a 2% rule where those people polling over 2% will be randomly split between the first and second night and people polling under 2% will be randomly split between the first and second night with 10 participants each on 2 nights.
They’re trying to avoid the “kiddie table” format of past debates. On each night, there will be someone polling higher and someone polling lower.
> [@](#):
>
> “Here’s the bottom line: The DNC doesn’t want a ‘kids table.’ That’s what they fear,” NBC News political director Chuck Todd said on “The Tony Kornheiser Show,” before the new formula was announced. “The goal is to make sure two nights [both have top-tier candidates], so it isn’t like all the big candidates on one night and all the 1 percenters on one night.”
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [May 25, 2019, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/422 "2019-05-25T01:46:35Z")
> [@septimus](#):
>
> I’d paid very little attention to any Yang details, so thank you, **Heffalump and Roo** for the summary.
Glad it helped.
> [@septimus](#):
>
> No major new tax, except a regressive VAT tax?? He doesn’t even plan to restore income taxes on the rich to Clinton-era levels??? Cancel my subscription!
There are 3 new taxes, in addition to the VAT, funding the UBI in that [analysis](https://www.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/biem0k/for_everyone_questioning_the_math_of_the_freedom/) you quoted.
[Carbon Fee](https://www.yang2020.com/policies/carbon-fee-dividend/) - $100B
[Financial Transaction Tax](https://www.yang2020.com/policies/financial-transaction-tax/) - $50 billion
[Capital gain/Carried interest loophole](https://www.yang2020.com/policies/capital-gain-carried-interest-tax/) - $18 billion
> [@septimus](#):
>
> And yes, it’s hard to approve of a one-size-fits-all UBI where a disabled person gets no more than a healthy person. And a 17-year old handicapped person gets zero.
Because the Freedom Divident (UBI) is opt-in, depending on what the disabled person is already getting in benefits, that disabled person might get more than a healthy person. If the disabled person is currently receiving more than $1,000/mo in benefits, the disabled person would opt-out to continue receiving the benefits they have now.
Minors are not given a Freedom Dividend because the money would legally go to a parent who might not give it to them. The 17 year old would get the $1,000/mo when they turn 18. A 17 year-old disabled person might be getting disability benefits which wouldn’t change.
> [@septimus](#):
>
> A big dent in the $1.4T could come from corporate tax, capital gains taxes, estate taxes, etc.
Capital gains taxes are already included in the analysis.
The reason for choosing a VAT is to get around the fact that many of the biggest corporations in the country don’t pay corporate taxes. Raising corporate taxes on corporations claiming zero income would yield the same zero taxes. Companies like Amazon, NetFlix, GM and others, all paid zero income taxes.
[How These Fortune 500 Companies (Legally) Paid $0 In Taxes Last Year](http://fortune.com/2019/04/11/amazon-starbucks-corporate-tax-avoidance/)
> [@](#):
>
> The total U.S. income of the 60—which ITEP reports included such names as Amazon, Chevron, General Motors, Delta, Halliburton, and IBM—was more than $79 billion and the effective tax rate was -5%. On the average, they got tax refunds.
Also, any tax that corporations did pay through an increase in corporate tax would likely be passed through to the consumer at the same rate as a VAT which would make the corporate tax regressive to the consumer.
Based on a [study](https://voxeu.org/article/assessing-incidence-value-added-taxes) that aggregated pass-through rates on VATs, the average pass-through rate was 55% for increasing VATs.
> [@septimus](#):
>
> On a separate matter, sales and VAT taxes impact consumers _and_ retailers _and_ manufacturers. Because of demand elasticity, vendors will have to cut their profit margins and/or suffer reduced volumes.
Wouldn’t the same be true of an increase in corporate taxes as well?
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2019, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/423 "2019-05-28T05:15:19Z")
On his last [TV interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyoXG2IfgiM) on Fox News with Laura Ingraham, Yang was losing his voice badly, so I hope he’s having a relaxing Memorial Day holiday.
He wrote a personal note for Memorial Day. [On This Memorial Day.](https://www.yang2020.com/blog/on-this-memorial-day/)
The Yang Gangers did community service on Memorial Day. A couple groups took some pictures of their groups. [One](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/btckhs/from_our_humanity_first_day_in_durham/)from Durham. [One](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/btfpye/are_we_too_late_for_the_trashtag_challenge_did/) in DC.
TIL (thing I learned) from reading the sub - [corporations are not required to maximize profits](https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits). The main reason they do is because of CEO compensation incentives and activist hedge fund managers.
> [@](#):
>
> There is a common belief that corporate directors have a legal duty to maximize corporate profits and “shareholder value” — even if this means skirting ethical rules, damaging the environment or harming employees. But this belief is utterly false. To quote the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the recent Hobby Lobby case: “Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not.”. . .
> In other words, it is activist hedge funds and modern executive compensation practices — not corporate law — that drive so many of today’s public companies to myopically focus on short-term earnings; cut back on investment and innovation; mistreat their employees, customers and communities; and indulge in reckless, irresponsible and environmentally destructive behaviors.
Kai-Fu Lee, a tech executive who worked at Microsoft, Google, SGI and Apple, [tweeted](https://twitter.com/kaifulee/status/1133020557207900165?s=09). (Lee has a new book out about AI.)
> [@](#):
>
> Data is the new oxygen if you want to survive the wealth inequality multiplier, and data is the new oil if you want to add fuel to your economy.
then in response to this from a Yang Ganger:
> [@Joseph Kenny](#):
>
> Are you familiar with the platform of US Presidential candidate @AndrewYang? It seems to echo your sentiments:
Kai-Fu Lee replied:
> [@](#):
>
> Yes I am. I agree with his observations.
Next week, Yang is scheduled to be on [Preet Bharara](https://twitter.com/PreetBharara/status/1132071799288672256)’s podcast (5/30) and on [NPR](https://the1a.org/shows/2019-05-28/foresight-2020-andrew-yang) (5/28).
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2019, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/424 "2019-05-28T13:18:40Z")
Who in the bloody hell thought there was a law that corporations had to maximize profit?
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [May 28, 2019, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/425 "2019-05-28T22:45:19Z")
> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> Who in the bloody hell thought there was a law that corporations had to maximize profit?
lol
Anyone who took existing case law and applied the _ebay_ standard instead of the _Hobby Lobby_ standard.
I did a quick Google search.
[A Duty to Shareholder Value](https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/a-duty-to-shareholder-value)
> [@](#):
>
> The leading statement of the law’s view on corporate social responsibility goes back to Dodge v. Ford Motor Co, a 1919 decision that held that “a business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders.” . . .
> Despite contrary claims by some academics and Occupy Wall Street-type partisans, this remains the law today. A 2010 decision, for example, eBay Domestic Holdings Inc. v. Newmark, held that corporate directors are bound by “fiduciary duties and standards” which include “acting to promote the value of the corporation for the benefit of its stockholders.”
[eBay v. Newmark: Al Franken Was Right, Corporations Are Legally Required To Maximize Profits](https://www.litigationandtrial.com/2010/09/articles/series/special-comment/ebay-v-newmark-al-franken-was-right-corporations-are-legally-required-to-maximize-profits/)
> [@](#):
>
> But what I think should be the law — and what a couple politically-biased professors claim is the law — isn’t necessarily the law. Under eBay v. Newman, the law is as Franken said: “it is literally malfeasance for a corporation not to do everything it legally can to maximize its profits.” Just ask Jim and Craig; no one disputes it’s their company, but they’re legally prohibited from taking steps to preserve the profit-alongside-community-service mission that’s served them well. Maximize profits, or else.
>
> The impact of this duty-to-maximize-profits stretches far beyond mere investments. Under Citizens United, corporations now have the First Amendment right to influence our fragile democracy however they want, since they’re “people,” just like you and me, albeit profit-maximizing zombies who care not for truth, justice, or the American way.
---
### Author:  [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2019, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/426 "2019-05-29T01:00:53Z")
IANAL but “maximize shareholder value” is not necessarily the same as “maximizing profits”. In the most simple case there is R&D that diminishes the net profit line but long term may increase shareholder value. Is there case law that define what counts as shareholder value? It cannot be as simplistic as short term stock fluctuations or the years final profit loss line.
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [May 29, 2019, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/427 "2019-05-29T01:24:28Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#):
>
> lol
>
> Anyone who took existing case law and applied the _ebay_ standard instead of the _Hobby Lobby_ standard.
>
> I did a quick Google search.
> [A Duty to Shareholder Value](https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/a-duty-to-shareholder-value)
> [eBay v. Newmark: Al Franken Was Right, Corporations Are Legally Required To Maximize Profits](https://www.litigationandtrial.com/2010/09/articles/series/special-comment/ebay-v-newmark-al-franken-was-right-corporations-are-legally-required-to-maximize-profits/)
So up until reading Yang’s interview, what crimina/civill penalties did you think a CEO could face for not maximizing profits?
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2019, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/428 "2019-06-06T07:10:35Z")
Some headlines.
New Zealand is the first western country to build its budget around well-being. Yang’s [human-centered capitalism](https://www.yang2020.com/policies/human-capitalism/) shares some of the same goals, but of course specific to the US. Although Yang’s policies don’t call for a budget item, the idea is that the things people measure are the directions people move, so some of these measures will be highlighted as goals.
> [@](#):
>
> New Zealand has become the first Western country to design its budget around well-being over economic growth
[Vox](https://www.vox.com/vox-sentences/2019/5/31/18647590/vox-sentences-new-zealand-budget-well-being) quoting [AP](https://www.apnews.com/ca6ebda3cbab4b1e8860b4ea69cde80f)
> [@](#):
>
> Future government spending proposals must meet five priorities: improving mental health, reducing child poverty, “addressing the inequalities faced by indigenous Maori and Pacific islands people, thriving in a digital age, and transitioning to a low-emission, sustainable economy.”
[Vox](https://www.vox.com/vox-sentences/2019/5/31/18647590/vox-sentences-new-zealand-budget-well-being) summarizing [NYT](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/world/asia/new-zealand-wellbeing-budget.html)
One of the goals would be changing the downward slide of lifespan in the US. Some of those statistics are depressing.
Someone on Reddit did a [macro](https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/bvup3u/usa_male_suicide_rate_by_age_group_19502015_oc/) to show how the age range of males committing suicide has changed from just the very old to people across the age spectrum from from 2005-2015.
[All-American Despair](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/suicide-rate-america-white-men-841576/)
For the past two decades, a suicide epidemic fueled by guns, poverty and isolation has swept across the West, with middle-aged men dying in record numbers
From a guy in that article:
> [@](#):
>
> I could go on about the policy steps that must be taken to solve this social crisis. I could also tell you that the suicide rate could drop severely with a federal suicide-awareness program that would cost less than Trump’s Mar-a-Lago trips. We could talk about how a sensible gun program and better mental-health care could be paid for with the dollars the Pentagon has wasted on the troubled F-35 fighter.
>
> That’s all true, but that’s not how I want to end this, because that is not how a man on his last string thinks about it.
Nice [tweet](https://twitter.com/sapinker/status/1135295172047192064?s=09) from Stephen Pinker:
> [@](#):
>
> The first presidential candidate who is versed in behavioral genetics.
Funny [tweet](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1133535781413367812) from Yang: (he was on Vice News on HBO)
> [@](#):
>
> Wow that feeling when you turn on @HBO and you see your own face right above Game of Thrones 😀👍
Top 10 lists.
Yang made it to the [top 10 list](https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445504-the-top-10-democrats-in-the-2020-race) of The Hill. He moved up to #9 in [Business Insider](https://www.businessinsider.com/2020-democratic-presidential-primary-power-ranking-2019-4). Still #9 in [Rolling Stone](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/2020-democrat-candidates-771735/) and 10 on [CNN ranking](https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/politics/2020-rankings-biden-warren-harris-buttigieg-sanders/index.html).
Media
Time video on Yang [On The Trail With Andrew Yang | TIME](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8Xqyy0bs3Y&feature=youtu.be)
Preet Bharara [interview](https://twitter.com/preetbharara/status/1134230021936230400?s=21) with Yang
> [@](#):
>
> I spoke to presidential candidate @AndrewYang about whether America was ready for an Asian-American president on this week’s Stay Tuned. The man has a sense of humor.
[A solution for childhood obesity? Universal basic income](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/universal-basic-income-could-help-solve-childhood-obesity/)
Rep. James Clyburn [says](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1135561912882778112) that Yang has some innovative ideas and that he wouldn’t be surprised to see some of the other candidates take on his ideas. “And that’s good!”
Perhaps it’s a coincidence and the ideas are floating around, but I saw Elizabeth Warren’s [plan](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/04/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-economy-jobs.html) on increasing apprenticeships based on the German model, and it reminded me of what Yang’s been saying all along about increasing job training. He gives the stat that about ~5-6% of education in the US is based on the apprenticeship model whereas it’s ~56% in Germany.
Yang’s stance on higher education is that although he’s favorable to higher education (he’s Asian, after all, he jokes), the statistics on higher education is that the [percent](https://www.statista.com/statistics/184272/educational-attainment-of-college-diploma-or-higher-by-gender/) of college graduates has been in the low to mid 30% for a while. [52.9% of students](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/freshman-year/just-over-half-all-college-students-actually-graduate-report-finds-n465606) who enrolled in 2009 finished college within 6 years. The [underemployment rate](https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2017/07/13/new-york-fed-highlights-underemployment-among-college-graduates/) of recent college graduates is 44%.
Taken together, that means that a lot of students who are steered toward college won’t finish and of those who do, many of them won’t need a college degree to do their job. They will also have accumulated an average of $38K in debt to do it. Yang is for a loan forgiveness deal for students. He also proposes that in order for schools to get federal funds, they have to reduce their administrative personnel percentages.
Yang has been pushing for more apprenticeship programs and job training programs that would get people jobs. His view is in line with this article: [What Education Can and Can’t Do for Economic Inequality](https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/04/what-education-can-and-cant-do-for-economic-inequality/389754/)
> [@](#):
>
> Greater availability of apprenticeships or job-training programs could also help enhance labor market outcomes for those who find themselves on the lower rungs of the skills and wage scale. Kearney cautions that looking at education in limited terms can be problematic when it comes to implementing solutions that really work. “We didn’t want to cede the view that when people say we need more education that necessarily means a four-year bachelor’s degree,” she says.
It’s good to see Elizabeth Warren pushing for the same thing. Perhaps she’ll pick up or coincidentally have some of Yang’s other ideas. Yang speaks of her highly often.
Yang is scheduled to be on The Young Turks on Thursday 6/6/19 and on The Bill Maher show on Friday 6/7/19.
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [June 12, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/429 "2019-06-12T23:32:33Z")
The Bill Maher [interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9say1jGFFQ) and [Overtime](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUfFiy3yW88) went great, IMO. Donations are up, [twitter responses](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/bykxi2/bill_maher_fallout_16_pro_yang_tweets_from/) from people who saw the show are up, and there seems to be more social media buzz.
Over the weekend, Cenk Uygur from The Young Turks held a rally to publicize a pledge that he was holding progressive candidates to sign. Yang didn’t sign it but had a nice [interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I70hW-JP94) with Cenk about it. A reporter snapped a[picture](https://twitter.com/ericbradner/status/1137878738560004096) of Cory Booker and Cenk Uygur looking interested in something Yang was saying.
Yang’s book is the best seller in Labor and Industrial Relations on Amazon. [The War on Normal People: The Truth About America’s Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income Is Our Future](https://www.amazon.com/War-Normal-People-Disappearing-Universal/dp/0316414212/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=the+war+on+normal+people&link_code=qs&qid=1560217595&s=gateway&sourceid=Mozilla-search&sr=8-2). Something I learned from the review was that Yang was an editor of his law review at Columbia Law School.
Yang was at a convention in Iowa with the other candidates. [Vice.com](http://Vice.com) did a ranking of the candidates based on the best song that the candidate played to walk out with. Yang won. [Ranking the 2020 Democratic Candidates Based Only on Their Walk-Out Songs](https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/gy4m5b/ranking-the-2020-democratic-candidates-based-only-on-their-walk-out-songs)
> [@](#):
>
> 1. Andrew Yang - “Return of the Mack” by Mark Morrison
>
> Here it is, everybody. The best of all possible walk-out songs. “Return of the Mack” still slaps, two decades later. It is timeless. It is perfect. It may someday be remembered as the pinnacle of Western civilization. But wait—that’s not all Yang has going for him. Apparently, the guy also plays a version of Wu Tang’s “Ain’t Nuthing ta Fuck Wit” except with a verse about how everybody in America should get a grand a month or whatever:
Fair Media Watch [called out](https://twitter.com/FAIRmediawatch/status/1138476327022092288) MSNBC for excluding him on its candidate list. This has been happening for months with on-air personalities getting notified every time it happens. [Real Clear Politics average of polling.](https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html)
> [@](#):
>
> According to @RealClearNews’ average of polling, @AndrewYang is tied for 8th place in the Democratic race–yet he’s not one of the 20 candidates included in @MSNBC’s candidate graphic.
Chris Cillizza did a piece on Yang and his internet popularity. [Inside the internet-fueled rise of Andrew Yang](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gf0qmZ3mIME) I don’t agree with Cillizza on much, but I do agree with him that even if Yang goes no further, he’s already accomplished a lot to get to this point.
Rashida Tlaib just [introduced legislation](https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/06/06/rep-rashida-tlaib-introduces-closest-plan-congress-universal-basic-income/?utm_term=.2250fcdc3e84&utm_source=reddit.com&noredirect=on) to give a UBI-like subsidy of $3K to individuals and $6K for families that stacks on welfare and that cuts off at $50K/$100K of income. It’s like UBI in that it’s not a [trapezoid type benefit](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/12/03/why-do-democrats-love-trapezoids/?utm_term=.e9648114289d) that tapers to nothing the less income the person makes. Hopefully, the people who criticized Yang’s policy of not stacking on welfare will join on Tlaib’s legislation. Ali Velshi mentions Andrew Yang in his [interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADDgv4EHAkA) with Tlaib.
Yang made a comment in the Iowa convention about Biden’s non-appearance, saying that Biden must not like to travel. Biden responded that he was busy with family obligations. His granddaughter was graduating, and it was his daughter’s birthday. He noted that he (Biden) would skip his inauguration for that. Yang [tweeted back](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1138520393814167552) that other candidates probably had family obligations that they missed as well. NBC did an [article](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1016591) about it. There were a number of reporters [tweeting](https://twitter.com/akarl_smith/status/1138543134160408577) about it. Washington Examiner [article](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/yang-extends-biden-feud-thats-what-happens-when-you-run-for-president) with the tweets.
A nice [twitter shout-out](https://twitter.com/howardfineman/status/1138572901194575872?s=20) from Howard Fineman, journalist and MSNBC news analyst:
> [@](#):
>
> .@AndrewYang makes a clever point. Alaskans get payments from profits companies make on a publicly-owned asset: crude oil. Likewise, he argues, all of us should be paid from profits Facebook, Amazon, Google etc make by “extracting” a publicly-owned asset: personal information.
Another nice shout out in an [article](https://www.redfin.com/blog/andrew-yang-affordable-housing-policy/) from [Redfin Chief Economist](https://therealdeal.com/2018/10/13/redfin-hires-away-new-chief-economist-from-amazon/) Daryl Fairweather:
> [@](#):
>
> 2020 Presidential Candidates want to make housing more affordable, but only Andrew Yang has proposed a policy that would make it easier for Americans to move to metros that already have affordable housing
She also has [tweeted](https://twitter.com/FairweatherPhD/status/1135605650329759745?s=17) about how UBI wouldn’t cause inflation. It’s nice to have a PhD economist speaking favorably on Yang’s policies. I’ve seen a couple now posting favorably in tweets.
Another nice [tweet](https://twitter.com/marcelluswiley/status/1138807869959106560) from Marcellus Wiley:
> [@](#):
>
> Just hanging with the next President of the United States, Andrew Yang! He has my full support and I hope you take the time to learn about the person and his policies at [http://Yang2020.com](http://Yang2020.com) He’s exactly the leader our country needs right now!
Yang just did a _TYT_ [interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qo7hC3kK5g0). This is a bootleg copy, so it might disappear. Yang also did a _Pod Save America_ interview set to release on Friday 6/12/19.
The campaign is focused on getting to the third round of debates. He needs 130K donors, of which he already has 118K. He also needs 2% or higher in 4 polls after June 28. [This poll](https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_NV_061219/) doesn’t qualify, but he hit 2% in Nevada.
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [June 17, 2019, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/430 "2019-06-17T06:47:30Z")
Happy Father’s Day!
Yang’s wife, [Evelyn](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1140468298976567296) sent a [beautiful letter](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/c0yj4q/not_gonna_lie_that_email_evelyn_yang_sent_our/er929vt/) to the Yang Gang about how she felt about Andrew and how much his family means to him. There was an article very early in the year, asking all the men Presidential candidates how they handled their family obligations. For some of the journalists, Yang’s answer stood out. Evelyn asked the Yang Gang to send their support to him on this Father’s Day, so people sent their good wishes to him.
After the Bill Maher show and the TYT show, there are more people supporting Yang and also more journalists attacking him.
Bill Maher gave a [shout out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7BpMQcahNg&feature=share) to Yang [at about minute 8] saying that Yang is out of the box.
Chris Cillizza [picked](https://twitter.com/CillizzaCNN/status/1140435785658884103?s=09) Yang as his dark horse.
> [@](#):
>
> 1. The “Purple” debate, handicapped: My dark horse? Andrew Yang. Yang has a nerdy appeal and will benefit from the fact that lots and lots of Democrats know nothing (or very little) about him or his positions.
Cenk Uygur [forecasted](https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1050&v=9_fZYzua22U) that Yang will make it to the top 6. [at 16:55] The Hill reporters and Cenk argued about who helped Yang more in the beginning.
Cenk on [twitter](https://twitter.com/cenkuygur/status/1139171012065370112?s=20)
> [@](#):
>
> Fun prediction: @AndrewYang will move past a lot of the traditional candidates and move into the top six. I think he’s going to even pass @BetoORourke.
Ben Shapiro also gave Yang a [shout out](https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1139646585158033408) (about the debates).
> [@](#):
>
> \*Plus Andrew Yang, the only person on the stage who has ideas different from the rest.
ETA: Pod Save America also [interviewed](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ONkNw1jbVg) Yang.
Paul Krugman took a [slam](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1140308666320658434) at Yang and Yang responded.
Yang was [on CNN](https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1140286229566697472) with Brian Stelter where they discussed the missing MSNBC graphic. Stelter made it seem like an oversight, but it went on for months with people on Twitter notifying them every time it happened. They also talked about the alternative media routes that Yang has taken since mainstream media was not interested in him until the debates were announced.
Yang’s campaign gave the most [detailed responses](https://twitter.com/dnvolz/status/1139282039470002177?s=21) on cybersecurity of all the Democratic candidates from a reporter on cybersecurity.
> [@](#):
>
> Of all 23 Dems surveyed, @AndrewYang’s campaign gave the most detailed responses. The Yang Gang requires 2FA and training for new employees, has 4 part-time cyber staffers, retains an outside firm, uses a password manager and has tools to track disinfo
From the [WSJ article](https://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-campaigns-remain-vulnerable-on-cybersecurity-11560448372):
> [@](#):
>
> The campaign of Democrat Andrew Yang was one of the more forthcoming. A spokesman said it hired a cybersecurity advisory firm and has four employees working part time on cybersecurity. The campaign relies on multifactor authentication to log into accounts, deploys a password manager for software systems and requires new staff and volunteers undergo cybersecurity training before gaining access to campaign systems, among other measures.
Personally, I really appreciated that. The thought of Rudy Giuliani heading the cybersecurity for the nation was not reassuring.
Of course, most of the attention is on the debate. Yang will be on the second night, June 27. With a week and a half to the debates, Yang is moving up on a few polls to 2% or 3%. Hopefully, that momentum will continue.
[A poll by Business Insider](https://www.businessinsider.com/most-democratic-primary-voters-plan-to-watch-first-debate-2019-6) called Yang telegenic and said that Yang and Klobuchar are the most anticipated by people in the poll to see on the debate stage.
> [@](#):
>
> The reasons for this aren’t certain, but the candidates that have the most supporters ready to tune in are the telegenic entrepreneur Andrew Yang and the Minnesota senator and former federal prosecutor Amy Klobuchar. Though sample size is lower than ideal, the overwhelming majority of Democratic respondents who said they’d be satisfied with Yang or Klobuchar as nominee said they’d tune in.
Sounds like it will be a good time.
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [June 24, 2019, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/431 "2019-06-24T04:13:09Z")
Yang spent most of his time in the last week in New Hampshire and South Carolina. He went to Jim Clyburn’s fish fry and leaped off the stage. [‘There’s an Asian man running for president who wants to give everyone $1,000’: Andrew Yang introduces himself to crowd at South Carolina fish fry with running leap off stage](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7169369/Andrew-Yang-introduces-crowd-South-Carolina-fish-fry-running-leap-stage.html)
After the Bill Maher show, the tone of Yang’s social media that Yang doesn’t have control over has changed a bit, IMO. There are more people joining every day, but also a few more trolls than there were. And there are well-meaning people who now want to change the sub to their liking since they’ve now joined. It’s inevitable, but the change is noticeable because it’s so quick. The positive tone is still very much predominant though, which is nice. Yang does his best to [try to keep it positive](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1142217601860415489), so that helps.
> [@](#):
>
> Hello #YangGang - thank you so much for your support!! Please do keep our online discussions positive and wholesome - we will win more people over plus it’s the #HumanityFirst way to respect others’ points of view. Thank you and let’s make history in 2020!
Some people do change their tone after seeing something like this.
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#):
>
> Paul Krugman took a [slam](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1140308666320658434) at Yang and Yang responded.
Amy Webb, futurist, author and professor at NYU, [agreed](https://mobile.twitter.com/amywebb/status/1140509105867698181) with Yang.
I was happy to see Nick Hanauer, entrepreneur and venture capitalist, writing similar ideas to Yang on education. Hanauer changed his ideas on what he thought the answer was to the problem of wealth inequality, then he wrote about what changed his mind. Basically what changed his mind are some of the same stats that Yang used to form his theories on how to fix the educational system.
Hanauer is a huge proponent of a $15/hr minimum wage, but even in that article, that idea wouldn’t help his hypothetical family get the $29K they would have gotten if wages kept up with GDP. A UBI would do more for that. From what I’ve seen, it looks like Hanauer backs Buttigieg. I haven’t seen him write anything about Yang. I don’t know if he knows anything about Yang.
Hanauer talks about the theory that if the educational systems were fixed, then wealth inequality would be reduced. He recently realized that wealth inequality needs to be fixed first before the solution of education can take hold on a broader scale. Yang emphasizes the fixes for wealth inequality but also emphasizes other forms of education such as jobs training as well.
[My Latest: “Like many rich Americans, I used to think better schools could heal the country’s ills,” writes @NickHanauer, “but I was wrong.”](https://twitter.com/NickHanauer/status/1138110809597304833)
[Better Schools Won’t Fix America
Like many rich Americans, I used to think educational investment could heal the country’s ills—but I was wrong. Fighting inequality must come first.](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/07/education-isnt-enough/590611/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share)
> [@](#):
>
> Long ago, I was captivated by a seductively intuitive idea, one many of my wealthy friends still subscribe to: that both poverty and rising inequality are largely consequences of America’s failing education system. Fix that, I believed, and we could cure much of what ails America.
>
> This belief system, which I have come to think of as “educationism,”. . .
> But after decades of organizing and giving, I have come to the uncomfortable conclusion that I was wrong. And I hate being wrong.
>
> What I’ve realized, decades late, is that educationism is tragically misguided. American workers are struggling in large part because they are underpaid—and they are underpaid because 40 years of trickle-down policies have rigged the economy in favor of wealthy people like me. Americans are more highly educated than ever before, but despite that, and despite nearly record-low unemployment, most American workers—at all levels of educational attainment—have seen little if any wage growth since 2000.
>
> To be clear: We should do everything we can to improve our public schools. But our education system can’t compensate for the ways our economic system is failing Americans… . .
> In short, great public schools are the product of a thriving middle class, not the other way around. Pay people enough to afford dignified middle-class lives, and high-quality public schools will follow. But allow economic inequality to grow, and educational inequality will inevitably grow with it.
>
> By distracting us from these truths, educationism is part of the problem.
Hanauer then notes that if wages kept pace with productivity, an average worker would be making $29K more per year.
> [@](#):
>
> Today, after wealthy elites gobble up our outsize share of national income, the median American family is left with $76,000 a year. Had hourly compensation grown with productivity since 1973—as it did over the preceding quarter century, according to the Economic Policy Institute—that family would now be earning more than $105,000 a year. Just imagine, education reforms aside, how much larger and stronger and better educated our middle class would be if the median American family enjoyed a $29,000-a-year raise.
Yang can imagine a raise for about that much for every family. He calls it the Freedom Dividend. A family of two adults would get $24K or almost a $29K raise. The fixes that Hanauer mentions such as strengthening unions and a $15/hr minimum wage wouldn’t actually help the average family get that much of a raise.
Hanauer then notes why some people still want to believe in educationism.
> [@](#):
>
> Educationism appeals to the wealthy and powerful because it tells us what we want to hear: that we can help restore shared prosperity without sharing our wealth or power.
It’s a common refrain.
On an unrelated but slightly parallel note, Yang wrote this ([Andrew’s Emails : YangForPresidentHQ](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/c25gqd/andrews_emails/)) this week.
> [@](#):
>
> “Random Man Runs for President” was the headline of the recent Washington Post Magazine cover story about me and the campaign. The theme of the story is that I am a fairly normal guy who is now running for President and changing the conversation.
>
> I like the article a lot. The journalist did a wonderful job.
>
> The fact is, though, that I’m NOT normal. And that’s sort of the point.
>
> The average American lives in Ohio or Maine (the average states) and has a net worth of $36k, $6k if you exclude home and vehicle equity. He or she attended one year of college or post-secondary school and would struggle with an unexpected $500 bill.
>
> THAT’s normal.
> . . .
> For a politician or presidential candidate, I seem fairly normal. But I have no illusions that I’m a regular guy or the average American. The average American couldn’t drop everything and decide to run for President. If they did, they would likely attract no attention. And the bills would catch up very quickly.
>
> That’s what happened to Richard. [Ojeda]
>
> I’ve had a very fortunate life and am thrilled to do my part to push this country in the right direction. This campaign is about one thing – improving the life of the average American.
>
> When someone like me is considered normal, it’s a bad sign for our democracy. Too many Americans feel like their voices are unimportant.
It’s nice to see he hasn’t forgotten this.
Yang is [scheduled](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1141788291118829568) to be on The Stephen Colbert show on Monday 6/24/19. Spiderman (Tom Holland) is also scheduled for that night. Yang is a [Spiderman fan](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21594284&postcount=375).
Then it’s the [DNC debates](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1141830601013714944) on Thursday 6/27/19. (This picture and the caption made me laugh.)
---
### Author:  [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)
#### Post date: [June 24, 2019, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/432 "2019-06-24T11:37:05Z")
Yang is definitely going to be interesting to watch over the next few weeks. It’ll be interesting to see if he can transition from being the internet candidate to a more household name.
Right now, in my own unofficial power rankings, I’ve got him ranked about 6 or 7 out of the field of 24 (25?).
---
### Author:  [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)
#### Post date: [June 24, 2019, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/433 "2019-06-24T12:27:05Z")
I gave $3 to Yang as a vote for him to be on the debate stage. So I get regular email from his campaign, along with the Warren, Booker, and Buttigieg campaigns. (I also asked Harris and O’Rourke to stop emailing me.)
The difference in tone was striking. As all the candidates were focussed on making the debate, Booker (who had qualified) wrote me scary emails about how the rules would be tighter in the future (presumably for the second) and I had to give more money now. Yang (who hadn’t quite qualified, but was looking good) wrote an upbeat missive about how the Yang Gang was going to do it. And a few days later, I got an equally upbeat letter about how he was one of (fewer than 20) who had qualified under both standards.
---
### Author:  [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/434 "2019-06-29T05:02:06Z")
It’s been quite a week for the Yang Gang. It started with Yang’s visit to the [Stephen Colbert show](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx5j1X9njHs). The Yang Gang made a good showing in the audience. Colbert was forced to mention it. Colbert’s derision was less evident than when he was roasting Yang in his monologues. Yang seemed to be having a good time.
A slightly racist and cringey decision in walk out music on the part of the Colbert show. The interview went pretty well. It was entertaining. It’s got over 500K views on youtube.
On the show, Yang announced that he would be [giving](https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1143373231430283264) a Freedom Dividend for a year to a random person who retweeted his tweet and followed him on twitter. There are 128K retweets as I write this (129K as I finished writing it), and he has more than 150K followers more than he had before the show. He got 50K of those followers after the debate.
Jack Dorsey (ex-CEO of twitter) and Casey Neistat (popular youtuber) both retweeted Yang’s tweet. That gave it a lot of exposure.
Then it was on to the debates. Going into the debates, the big issue in the media was that Yang wasn’t wearing a tie. People in the media seemed to be affronted by it. The Yang Gang didn’t seem to notice. Yang doesn’t ever wear a tie.
During the debate, Yang had 2 questions, spoke for under 3 minutes and didn’t challenge anyone. The Yang Gang was befuddled. A couple really loud people were super negative about it. (It turns out that at least one of them was a troll who wiped his account today.) The mood of the sub was down. Yang looked dispirited. As Yang gave interviews in the Spin room, he was asked if he was intimidated by the people on the stage. Yang answered that he travels with these people, so no, he wasn’t.
Meanwhile, the Yang Gang was trying to remain positive. Then there was [word](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/c6h13r/all_the_discussions_on_msnbc_shutting_yangs_mic/) that Yang gave a supporter rally where he claimed that his mic was shut off during parts of the debate. As a bit of backstory, MSNBC had been leaving Yang off their Presidential graphics so many times I lost count. There was one graphic that was supposed to be debate participants where Yang’s picture was missing but someone who didn’t make the debate had taken the space.
The Yang Gang got a hashtag [#LetYangSpeak](https://twitter.com/hashtag/LetYangSpeak?src=hash) going on twitter that was trending to at least #2 by the next morning.
Yang went from:
> [@](#):
>
> I stood at the center of the political universe last night and did not come away encouraged by our future. Will do my best to change that. 👍🇺🇸
to
> [@](#):
>
> Haha #LetYangSpeak indeed. You all are the best. The #YangGang is amazing. 👍😀
in an hour. After that, his humor and light-heartedness was back.
A couple publications picked up the story. [#LetYangSpeak trends on Twitter after Yang accuses NBC of cutting his mic in debate](https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/450934-letyangspeak-trends-on-twitter-after-yang-accuses-nbc-of-cutting-his-mic-in) NBC denied cutting off anyone’s mic during the debate. [NBC denies Yang’s accusation that his mic was turned off in debate](https://thehill.com/homenews/media/450912-nbc-denies-yangs-accusation-that-his-mic-was-turned-off-in-debate)
In a way that no one was anticipating, Yang made it to the [front page](https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/c6hh5k/andrew_yang_accuses_nbc_of_turning_off_his_mic/) of r/politics on Reddit twice in one day for not getting more time to speak in the debates. The bigger one got over 4K comments and over 14K upvotes. Redditors were mostly very sympathetic. Both a [Bernie fan](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/c6oq4b/bernie_bro_here_boutta_donate_money_to_the_yang/) and a [Pete fan](https://old.reddit.com/r/YangForPresidentHQ/comments/c6nndu/hey_yang_gang_pete_supporter_here_sorry_about/)showed up in the Yang sub to donate some money to the campaign in support of Yang getting such limited time in the debate. Yang only got two questions while others polling much lower got up to 5 questions.
As a result of some of this boost in donations, Yang made it to the 130K unique donor mark today to make it to the Sept. debate.
Despite the snark in the media, ([Politico](https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/28/who-won-the-democratic-debate-1386166))
> [@](#):
>
> The Jim Webb Award (Least Talkative): Andrew Yang
>
> The former tech executive has built a very small- but-dedicated following — mostly online. Not only did he easily clear the donor threshold for the first two debates, his campaign says it is on the cusp of clinching the 130,000 donors it needs, along with future polling, to make it to the third debate in September.
>
> But Yang barely made an impression on Thursday night. He spoke for only around 3 minutes — the shortest speaking time of any of the 20 candidates on both nights of the debate.
according to a [538/Morning Consult poll](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/democratic-debate-poll/) that polled the before and after impressions of the debate, there was only a slight downtick after the debate from 1.3% to 1.2%.
On the other hand, most of the [youtube videos](https://www.youtube.com/user/WNBC4NewYork/videos) I’ve seen of Yang’s UBI piece from the debate has the most views of the other clips of other candidates.
On balance, this could turn out positive. Onward and upward.
---
### Author:  [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/435 "2019-06-29T05:11:34Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Yang made it to the front page of r/politics on Reddit twice in one day…
That’s very exciting. If only there was some overlap between Reddit and voters
---
### Author:  [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/436 "2019-06-29T12:06:18Z")
Unfortunately for Yang, he is still mostly an internet candidate at this point. People are Googling his name, but it’s not necessarily translating into real visibility at this point.
That being said, I am in agreement that Yang should have gotten more airtime. I was surprised that Williamson, who was actually tracking lower than Yang, got to speak a lot more frequently. But I’m not sure if that was because Yang’s mic was off. It didn’t seem like he was necessarily fighting to speak; he just seemed a little confused by the whole format, which is really more on the candidate. Yang probably assumed that he’d field more questions, but he just kept waiting and waiting for his turn and it never came.
I suspect that Yang is right: other networks might be more accommodating than MSNBC and Telemundo. These moderators were clearly leaning hard to the political left and were really a lot more interested in asking social justice questions and talking about other pet left wing issues than entertaining discussions about UBI and VAT taxes.
It might feel unnatural but Yang is going to have to be a little more assertive next time and he needs to learn the art of delivering ‘zingers’. Political debates are theater. He needs to learn how to act.
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/437 "2019-06-29T12:22:37Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#):
>
> A slightly racist and cringey decision in walk out music on the part of the Colbert show.
Come on, they just stuck his name in “Everybody Wang Chung tonight”. Talk shows have been doing stuff like that for a while.
---
### Author:  [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/438 "2019-06-29T13:21:05Z")
> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> Come on, they just stuck his name in “Everybody Wang Chung tonight”. Talk shows have been doing stuff like that for a while.
So it’s okay if they play the theme song to the Jeffersons when Cory Booker and Kamala Harris come on the show then, right? I mean, it’s just music.
---
### Author:  [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)
#### Post date: [June 29, 2019, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/439 "2019-06-29T14:15:40Z")
> [@asahi](#):
>
> So it’s okay if they play the theme song to the Jeffersons when Cory Booker and Kamala Harris come on the show then, right? I mean, it’s just music.
How is that even remotely similar? Wang Chung is a British new wave band. It’s not accosiated with anything Asian, except the name which apparently means "yellow bell"in Chinese. Yang just rhymes with Wang. Chill out.
---
### Author:  [@chargerrich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chargerrich)
#### Post date: [July 1, 2019, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555/440 "2019-07-01T03:20:04Z")
> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> How is that even remotely similar? Wang Chung is a British new wave band. It’s not accosiated with anything Asian, except the name which apparently means "yellow bell"in Chinese. Yang just rhymes with Wang. Chill out.
While I personally think we are living in a “way too easy to offend era”, I can definitely see the similiarities in the two and as well as the hypocrisy of one being OK and the other not.
The fact that the band who performed the song is British, has zero relevance and is not germain to the discussion… in my opinion. :dubious:
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555.md?page=21)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-andrew-yang-presidential-campaign-thread/829555.md?page=23)