I really like Buttigieg. He honestly seems to be doing this because he wants to serve America. I’m working my way through his book and I’m very impressed by his eloquence and clarity of thought. Also, I think as a mayor he embodies the entrepreneurial spirit. He was classmates with Mark Zuckerberg.<p>I submitted this interview the other day:<p><a href="http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-democratic-2020-candidate-pete-buttigieg.html" rel="nofollow">http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-demo...</a><p>I think it’s also worth listening to an interview he did with David Axelrod a couple years ago, and his recent interview on Pod Save America. Here also are a couple videos I’m recommending because they cover a variety of topics in the Q&A portion that I haven’t heard him speak about elsewhere:<p>- <a href="https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-Buttigieg-Featured-Speaker-Politics-and-Eggs-NH-506868621.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-But...</a><p>- <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg</a><p>I know this comment is obviously political but I think he deserves to be heard from.
I've been following how Buttigieg's rise has been manufactured by 1-2 insiders. Mainly David Axelrod.<p>He did a SXSW town hall. I watched Tulsi Gabbard (disclosure, I volunteer for her a bit) first and then tried to watch Mayor Pete, as he is called.<p>He basically bombed the first 20 min. The period that any viewers would try to give the candidate any chance to better understand them.<p>He was just a bit too nervous, he was talking fast. This was a big contrast to methodical way Tulsi was speaking just prior to him her ability to connect was in a different level.<p>So you thought that would be the end of it all....<p>Nope! I observed a beautiful spin of manufacturing narratives.<p>Axelrod tweeted about how great Mayor Pete's performance was [1]<p>Soon after there was a ton of articles talking about much lauded performance of Buttigieg. I even called out the journalist behind one of these articles on twitter and it was clear she had not watched the town hall nor had done her research [2] I just went to find that discussion on twitter and she seem to have deleted as I do not see it under my tweet and replies.<p>Essentially I asked her about the "much lauded performance" in her article. I asked her where she got that from. She replied with a link to a CNN article which was all based on Axelrod's tweet. This journalist based her article on that CNN article. So I pointed out, this "much lauded performance" is based on just one tweet. The journalist then replied to me, I should just google "town hall and Buttigieg". Meaning she had no done any research herself. Point is, Pete Buttigieg who started his promotion from a podcast on Axelrod. I think there is a strong chance Mayor Pete is backed by Axelrod and/or at some point he'll hire Axelrod. Mayor Pete's rise bubbling up based on the inside influence of one person.<p>That being said, he is intelligent and I'm sure there is probably great excitement supporting the first gay (at least openly) candidate. However, it became clear to me, how a few insiders can create hype around one candidate and manufacture "lauded performance".<p>[1] - <a href="https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144</a><p>[2] - the tweet thread I was going point to is removed now
I don't know if this applies to BetChecker, but PredictIt is heavily handicapped by an $850 max bet.<p>Without the freedom for real amounts of money to come in and exploit mispriced bets, it's practically a straw poll of PredictIt users. The PredictIt user base has some obvious demographic biases that warp the odds.
Re:Yang,<p>I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital.
Does anyone here have thoughts about the quality of candidates as it relates to their ages (i.e. comparing late 70's Bernie/Biden and these younger candidates)? While I like the policies of Bernie, for instance, I ideally would prefer someone who doesn't have a high % likelihood of serious medical issues in the next 4 years of their life.<p>Is there an age that is too old to be a CEO/President/Senator/leading figure? Are they necessarily out of touch, lacking in resiliency, not forward-looking, or any of the factors we look for in our leaders?
Yang would like to be President, but his primary goal is to force a conversation amongst all the candidates on UBI and automation, which are important things that the next President should be talking about.
As an Andrew Yang fan myself, I was shocked to see that PredictIt has him as the third most expensive (read likely) candidate after Bernie and Biden, at least when I checked. This is in stark contrast to his 0-1% polling rate in the most recent polls.<p>So, are they just very leading indicators? It got me thinking that it's a relatively cheap campaign strategy since people like to refer to those as some sort of "market based odds" thing. Is it legal and/or ethical for campaigns to buy themselves on the betting markets to drive up the appearance of demand?<p>We'll see come the Apr 1 FEC reporting deadline if it translates to campaign donations, which are on of the real signals of the seriousness of campaigns.
I'm bullish on Yang's and Buttigieg's chances in general. I also think that their chances of winning the nomination (and election) are much lower than the odds indicated in betting markets.<p>There is a huge betting market selection bias in that the only people using these betting platforms are young and tech-savvy (i.e. the type of people who are in these candidates' base). Additionally, you can place nominally small bets, meaning there is no real skin in the game. Increase the minimum bet size to $10,000 or so and I think the odds will become much more realistic.
This only shows why running we now have 20 candidates running for president. They get a huge platform to expand their reach (good for both the issues they care about and their personal brand) with almost no downside (even if not pilfering their campaign funds they will raise enough money to travel the country effectively promoting for future book sales or a tv show).
Is Andrew Yang a writer? I'd be interested in reading some of what he's written that's longer than a tweet.<p>I did find the weekly campaign updates, which are okay as far as they go.
The majority of Americans are not insane and both mainstream Democrats and the incumbent are mostly appealing to the insane. A moderate, any moderate, left or right, that speaks logically, does not indulge in identity bullshit and does not treat the other side as if they were stupid or evil or both, will have a great shot at capturing the exhausted middle.
This is entirely meaningless at this point in the race. There may be some enthusiasts paying attention right now, and they're prone to focusing on particular candidates, but a more likely bet is that most primary voters are waiting to see how candidates perform with a view to backing the best candidate who has the best chance of winning.
Looking at that odds chart got me in a betting mood. I think those Yang odds in the article could be steep given the exuberance of some in his online following, however there could be interesting arb plays with an outsider like Yang like going long presidency+short nomination paired with going short presidency+long nomination with someone more establishment like Biden.<p>If prediction markets had more depth, I’m sure we would see politics hedge funds emerge.
<i>Who</i> is participating in the betting markets? Are these people perhaps more likely to personally like certain candidates more than others? When the market is relatively small, this question matters. I'm skeptical of the betting markets for this reason, as I think the participants skew heavily to a particular demographic.
I don't have strong opinions or awareness of Yang's platform, nor have I gone out of my way to learn much about him, other than seeing the random sensational stories that pop up on my feed (e.g. his thoughts about circumcisions, wrt health policy).<p>But knowing little of his background (e.g. career, wealth, any other attempts at politics), I think it's cool as hell he acted on what must have been a wild "what if" idea to join the race. I'd like to think that the more normal, non-political-machine-produced humans who go through this process, the more accessible and interesting that process will be to the average person.<p>It seems Yang afigured out how to "hack" the Democratic primary process to get on the national debate stage. I call it a "hack" because someone like me thinks the possibility of a no-namer like Yang on stage with Sanders and Warren is too absurd a reality to imagine. But Yang did his research and found he could target the minimum requirement of having 65,000 donors [0] -- a number that seems laughably low, because of how easy it is today for anyone with a phone/computer to make small donations, coupled with Internet platforms like Reddit that let Yang find voters/donors who aren't willing to provide the traditional value (e.g. large donations), but can make all the difference when the metric is number of people, not cash on hand.<p>Yang likely has no chance in the primary, so I won't have to wonder if my vote for/against him would have been even slightly biased by subconscious feelings about solidarity with other Asian-Americans. However, I like that I can just marvel at the sight of an Asian-American strolling on this rarefied political stage, like it's a normal thing. And yet, it isn't -- It's something I don't think I ever thought I'd see in my life. Not because I think there's a hard barrier of racial/social injustice. It's just something I had apparently had no reason to imagine or contemplate. Just like I don't ever normally contemplate the idea of 2 cats trying to steer a Tesla. There's nothing that logically blocks that concept in real life. But seeing it in real still feels like a small, happy surprise.<p>0: <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-for-the-magic-ticket-to-democratic-debates-65000-donors/2019/03/19/9a1f80e0-4a4b-11e9-9663-00ac73f49662_story.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-for...</a>
There is no way that Yang is more likely to win the nomination than Warren. And I say that as a Yang fan. So there's a lot of money on the table, but I'm not willing to tie up a couple grand for a year for a website I know pretty much nothing about.
White and male means Buttigieg is going to have a major problem in the primaries. Asian and male is almost as bad.<p>Unless the Democrats suddenly decide to stop playing identity politics they're going to choose someone based on gender/race (female/not white).
Andrew Yang is an Accelerationist.<p>His Universal Basic Income proposal is the most interesting thing in politics in a long time. It is actually feasible and will get us on the track to post-capitalism.<p>You are an American? You are a citizen? You get a thousand bucks a month. Funded by 10% VAT.<p>The freedom dividend: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw</a>
I had been following Yang since a while and have been super pumped up about his ideas and focus on real underlying issues. But with Pete joining the race, I am somewhat torn between these two. Both of them are really smart people. Yang has great ideas and vision, but Pete has real experience running a city and seems to be very likable in general. On the other hand, I am sure conservative media will paint Yang as a socialist which would take away a lot of votes, and Pete being openly gay is also going to take away a lot of conservative voters.
I am sincerely hoping for Beto to blow up. We need someone like Beto because 1. He is young 2. He was a hacker [we need people in politics that understand the most important driver of commerce now] 3. He was in a punk band 4. He is from Texas [he will be forced to have a balanced approach] 5. He campaigns hard 6. He can inspire people positively [as opposed to the constant whining that politics have become]
Andrew Yang seems like a nice guy with a cool UBI proposal, but his blowing up on Twitter has a lot to do with 8chan forcing 'YangGang' memes which began about 6 weeks ago. It would be unwise to view this like a true market signal.
There is a reason that Bernie Sanders is the most popular politician in America, and that is because his policy presents meaningful gains to the working class that perform all of society's labour, and without which everyone would immediately die. Working class people are, on the whole, shifting from supporting capitalism to supporting socialism.