8 ms·

Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

123 points by chadmhorner 8y ago

Octoth0rpe 8y ago
Re:Yang, 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.
- yumraj 8y ago
  Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are. Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done.
  - lukifer 8y ago
    Trump isn’t really a business person, he just plays one on TV :P
  - dev_dull 8y ago
    A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?
    - akhilcacharya 8y ago
      It was booming in 2016 too.
    - jkestner 8y ago
      The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.
      - briandear 8y ago
        Who are “shareholders?” Pretty much anyone with a retirement plan or a pension. The majority of Americans own stock.
        jkestner 8y ago
        Not quite. 54% of the 135M American workers have a retirement plan.[1] That's 73M out of the ~250M American adults. Maybe you can call that the middle class. But point taken. To be less pithy, these individual shareholders have little power to sway governance, particularly if their stock is held in a managed fund. The rich, connected shareholders steer things, and it's not always in the interests of the company in the long term. 1. http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many...
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        The vast majority of Americans derive the lion’s share of their income over most of their lifetime from selling their labor, not from capital returns, whether from stock alone or any other combination of capital.
    - mirimir 8y ago
      That is such a joke. What does "booming economy" really mean? Mostly the stock market, I think. And "low unemployment"? It's low because people who have given up looking aren't counted. And because it includes lots of short-term and poorly compensated jobs.
    - jrs235 8y ago
      "low inflation" ... not if you include assets (stocks, houses, education, health[care], etc.) that are not included in the "official" inflation calculations.
    - dmode 8y ago
      Unemployment, economy, stock market, GDP - all have been on the exact same trajectory post the 2009 recession. We would have been exactly here even if a tree was the President. The only thing that got worse economically was the Federal deficit, which is a trillion dollars now.
    - noelsusman 8y ago
      That's more thanks to the Fed than anything else, though their role is also pretty small. The truth is the president doesn't have the ability to affect the economy very much one way or the other.
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    Trump is a business person in the same way that the Kardashians are business people. They have businesses, but they are, first and foremost, celebrities.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    Arguably, Donald Trump is more of a media celebrity through inherited wealth that was funneled through mock business transactions for tax evasion than an actual businessman the way Yang is, but I'm not sure people are prepared to make the distinction, so that might be an effective political line against Yang even if it's not all that true in any relevant sense.
  - Octoth0rpe 8y ago
    > work across the aisle and actually get things done If the proposed action is part of / agreeable with the $opposing_party platform, I don't think I _want_ it to get done; with extraordinarily few exceptions. I'd prefer someone who can push forward without compromising the point of the platform.
  - core-questions 8y ago
    The problem here comes when there's no possible state of compromise that would make even anyone at all happy. For example, on a border wall: you build it to be functional, or you don't. A non-functional border wall is essentially not a border wall. There's no compromise state; instead, there's at best some kind of tit-for-tat, where you'll concede something else in exchange for your most important plans.
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      A non-functional border wall also pleases nobody. It’s not a great compromise at all.
    - learc83 8y ago
      That's because a border wall is too specific for a policy platform. The more general concept of border security provides plenty of room for compromise. But even a wall provides room for compromise--physical barriers in some places but not others.
  - justaguyhere 8y ago
    Also, didn't we just elect another business person One with multiple bankruptcies too!
  - erentz 8y ago
    > Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done. To work with someone across the aisle you have to have someone on the other side of the aisle who wants to work with you. The republicans have made it absolutely clear over the past decade that they will not work with Democrats. Centrist Democrats need work with their colleagues to their left if they want to accomplish anything.
- jakestein 8y ago
  I think you're referring to Venture for America, which despite the name is not a venture capital firm. https://ventureforamerica.org https://ventureforamerica.org
- motivated_gear 8y ago
  Why though? I would like my government to be open to at least listening to lots of different ideas and applying an investment mindset to them. You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. But you dont need that to initiate groundbreaking projects. Hoover didn't pour concrete at the Hoover Dam. Kennedy didn't know the rocket equation.
  - Octoth0rpe 8y ago
    > You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. Operational experience is not my concern. > applying an investment mindset to them This is my concern. I don't trust people in the VC industry to have a healthy concept of an investment mindset.
    - motivated_gear 8y ago
      Understood. Would like to hear your thoughts on why VC does not have a healthy investment philosophy.
- themgt 8y ago
  I'm taking a wait-and-see approach in general, but I do find Yang one of the most interesting candidates so far. Just to respond to this specific point, Yang wrote recently on Twitter [1]: There are lessons and principles that government can take from business - like treating customers well and resource efficiency. But anyone who says they are going to “run government like a business” is dumb. They require very different forms of leadership. As a CEO you can pretty much tell people what to do. You are their boss. You are paying them. If you say we are doing something then it generally happens. The downside is no one tells you unpleasant truths. In government most all of the time you are building consensus. You provide a vision and try to rally people around it. You build relationships. You compromise. You appeal to common goals. Things often happen more gradually. But when big things happen they can improve many lives. [1] https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432 https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432
  - sqs 8y ago
    Are you a CEO? What you say about being a CEO doesn’t ring true to me.
    - clojurestan 8y ago
      Andrew Yang, the person being quoted, has been CEO of multiple companies
    - hjek 8y ago
      It's a quote.
  - awinder 8y ago
    > like treating customers well This has come up with the current president's most-dimwitted son and it's so hysterical it bears repeating. US taxpayers and voters are not the customer. They're the board.
    - wgerard 8y ago
      Don't take this as a tacit defense of whichever son it was by any means, but: There are plenty of situations where the interaction between the government <-> constituents is very much like a business <-> customer relationship, and it's not totally insane to think that it could be a better/friendlier/more efficient one. Example: Interactions with TSA, IRS, DMVs (state government obviously but a government nonetheless), etc. I get what you're saying, but I think you also have to understand what Andrew Yang is implying (not particularly interested in looking up the quote from whichever son).
- rdiddly 8y ago
  I'm not so sympathetic to that idea in the first place. A business, particularly a corporation, is one of the most authoritarian structures ever devised. If the government were like a business, every citizen would be either an asset to be exploited or a liability to be eliminated.
  - omalleyt 8y ago
    Citizens would be the shareholders
    - dsr_ 8y ago
      Small shareholders (less than 0.01% holdings) have essentially no voice in a corporation's policy; nor are they a consideration for the board of directors. Sometimes they are the beneficiaries of policies that are satisfying major stockholders, but not in a big way. No, this metaphor does not work.
    - qntty 8y ago
      In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.
      - Gibbon1 8y ago
        Despite the common wisdom governments tend to care a lot about citizens bitching. A friend used to work as a lawyer for a state utility board. They sit and listen to rants by 75 year old cat ladies and then consider how to mollify them.
      - rabidrat 8y ago
        So who gets the majority of shares in the country? Should it be the executives, or the funders? Maybe we should have a 1 vote per tax-dollar system.
        0815test 8y ago
- markn951 8y ago
  Andrew Yang has never worked for a VC as far as I can tell. What are you referring to?
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business" I really don't want a government that ruthlessly cuts costs that don't drive revenue and uses all mechanisms within reach to maximize lock-in and extract monopoly rents from customers.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    Wasn't that a Trump campaign theme? But anyway, it's not new. That was a lot of that maybe a century ago in the US.
    - mrguyorama 8y ago
      That was the words that came out of Trump's mouth, but not what his supporters heard
- fullshark 8y ago
  How about Real Estate?
- objektif 8y ago
  His primary business was a test prep company he sold to Kaplan. As far as I know he did not own or work for a VC firm.
- smallgovt 8y ago
  This comment doesn't make sense since Andrew Yang has no background in venture capital.
- losvedir 8y ago
  I don't think his business really is venture capital, though. What exactly are you referring to? At least, if you're talking about Venture for America, it's more of a YC or TechStars. It's a non-profit designed to help entrepreneurs start companies. Prior to that, I think he was the CEO of Manhattan Prep before it getting acquired by Kaplan.
- justaguyhere 8y ago
  I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?
  - asark 8y ago
    When invoked by laypersons, it usually means "don't run a deficit at all, and cut 'useless' (to me, so far as I know) programs". Arts funding and foreign aid are popular first candidates for the chopping block. I don't know what it means when politicians say it, aside from being an appeal to the above. Possibly they mean the same thing. [EDIT] incidentally, it's almost entirely associated with the Right. Unusual to see it brought up as a point in favor of a Democrat. [EDIT EDIT] awinder probably nailed what it means when politicians say it, and/or why it's an idea some of them have promoted.
  - luckydata 8y ago
    It's one of the idiotic side effects of unchecked capitalistic culture in the USA mixed with a tinge of anti-intellecutalism and tons of garden variety ignorance and racism. It's codeword for "I don't want my taxes to help folks that don't look like me".
  - specialist 8y ago
    Capitalism is our religion. It’s so much a part of our culture (identity), people aren’t aware of it.
    - Gibbon1 8y ago
      People that are heavily corrupted respond to criticism of neoliberalism/capitalism the same way fundamentalists respond to heresy.
  - awinder 8y ago
    One of the major political factions in the US has spent decades at this point deriding career politicians. It's been a decent strategy inside of that faction, but other factions point out that career politicians actually develop tools to get shit done (as any career-minded individual would). So at some point you have to combat the argument that you're running inexperienced individuals vs. experienced individuals, and advancing the argument that "business leadership actually exceeds govt leadership in getting stuff done" is an attempt to turn that weakness into a strength. I'm being charitable that no one actually believes that garbage at it's heart, but the other explanation might be garden-variety insanity.
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  >but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital. Or being the activist investor that breaks up the business and sells what's profitable.
- ams6110 8y ago
  "Run the government like a business" was Ross Perot's mantra. Was quite popular for a while, but didn't work out so well in the end. That's probably more because he sort of went insane during the campaign rather than due to a a reasoned choice the voters made about that philosophy.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  "elect a business person so they can run government like a business" This is a terrible idea for a society. Typical businesses are internally dictatorships that are single-minded, intolerant of dissent, very controlling (my employer reads my E-mails and lately they are setting up a ton of cameras) and are designed to funnel rewards to only few people. That's not a good mindset to run a whole country. We can't just lay off people to cut costs. I think that's why Trump seems to get better along with dictators like Erdogan, Putin or Kim Jong Un than with democratic leaders. their leadership is much closer to what he is used from his business. Running government more efficiently would be nice but I don't see the ex-business people who got elected into government do better than other politicians.
- Alex3917 8y ago
  He doesn't want to run the government like a business, and he's not a venture capitalist.
- vharuck 8y ago
  A government run like a business loses the most important and necessary quality of a government: it can takr actions that are economically harmful to itself but helpful to society. It should maintain all roads, not just the ones used to transport goods. It should investigate even small crimes. It steps in when the market would cause a catastrophe (e.g., tragedy of the commons). Of course, money still exists, so the government restricts its reach within a budget. Besides, the president's only tasks should be international diplomacy, commander of the military, and doing what the Congress says. They can be "ideas gals/guys," but he/she shouldn't be independently making huge decisions outside of war scenarios. That doesn't sound like a CEO to me.
- 0815test 8y ago
  > elect a business person so they can run government like a business I mean, didn't we try that already, and quite recently for that matter? It doesn't seem to be working very well. What makes you think that Yang can do better than that?
bb2018 8y ago
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).
- nutjob2 8y ago
  A low barrier to entry is arguably a good thing.
  - bb2018 8y ago
    I agree in large part but I do think it is interesting. Running a campaign reminds me of The Producers - it is just as good to have a failure of a campaign as a winning one.
- asark 8y ago
  The whole political process is so tied up in entertainment now it's hard to see the lines between them anymore. It seems especially bad on the R side (surprise surprise) and I don't just mean the President, but it's affecting the entire institution of the Federal government. Running for, and even attaining, office is a stepping stone to or enhancing move for an entertainment career, and vice-versa, in a way and to a degree I'm pretty sure it didn't used to be in the fairly recent past. And an entertainment career is even more of a feedback-loop into any other business ventures one might have than it used to be, and it already very much was. I mean, being a celebrity used to help with running for office for obvious reasons, but now running for office is a pretty good action to take if you want to become a celebrity. "Enhance your personal brand today—run for office! Just remember, your number one goal isn't winning, it's raising your profile. If you happen to win that's great, but it's beside the point. Feel free to be crazy and weird. Worst case, run as an R and as long as your activities and personality are notorious enough you're guaranteed a steady income for the occasional appearance on Fox News as an expert in... well, doesn't matter really! Maybe they'll even give you your own show! Have a book ghostwritten—it's like free money!"
nutjob2 8y ago
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.
- picodguyo 8y ago
  Not entirely meaningless. News outlets will need to select who gets coverage and invitations to debates. Absent many other objective rationales, they'll lean on poll numbers to make those decisions.
  - fjp 8y ago
    They'll lean on whatever kind of coverage gets them the most money
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  To get into the debates, candidates need to either raise a bunch of money across a bunch of states, or poll above 1% https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-how-were-defining-a-major-presidential-candidate/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-how-were-defining...
WhompingWindows 8y ago
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. 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?
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  VP choice makes a bigger difference for an older candidate, which might be why rumors are that Biden will be choosing his running mate very early in the process.
  - mtgx 8y ago
    Bernie/Buttigieg 2020?
    - aaomidi 8y ago
      This would be good - or Bernie/Beto for that Texas vote.
      - stevenwoo 8y ago
        We need to take bets on when Texas turns blue in a Presidential election, I bet 30 years in the future, 2020 is too soon. Beto did great against the least popular Senator in the United States. The voter registration number among Latinos in Texas is abysmal, but they will be a bigger bloc than any other in Texas in the future, it's just that older, whites make up 2/3 of Texas voters now and that's a pretty reliable GOP vote source. Every year for some time people have been saying Texas will turn and it has not happened. A little analysis here: https://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/latinos-wont-turn-texas-blue-anytime-soon/ https://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/latinos-wont-turn-te...
    - 8y ago
dopylitty 8y ago
It would be wise to not trust any phenomenon which blows up online, given the ease of generating such a phenomenon artificially.
- fullshark 8y ago
  Yet the democratic candidates that have announced seem to be chasing online mindshare at this point, moving further and further left in order to attract vocal Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders fans, with unclear results.
- papermill 8y ago
  If the interest is artificially generated or fake, it will fade quickly for sure. But I wouldn't say we shouldn't trust online phenomenon. Online phenomenon is why Obama and Trump got elected. Trump has effectively bypassed the traditional media's stranglehold on the american mind via his use of twitter and social media. And online phenomenon is why we have occasio-cortez. As the internet gains more mind share, we have to start taking the online space more seriously.
  - dopylitty 8y ago
    Why would artificial interest necessarily fade as long as whoever is generating it keeps generating it? There’s no reason to believe any internet content amplifying the message of any candidate (or president) is genuine. In fact given the findings of the past several years it’s better to assume online content is in fact generated rather than genuine.
    - papermill 8y ago
      If there is no substance behind the enthusiasm, then it can't last because it has no legs to stand on. I agree that there are tons of fake nonsense on all media, not just social media. But that doesn't mean everything on media is fake. Of course online content is generated. My point is whether that generated online content gains actual traction. Whether that generated online content has legs and real enthusiasm behind it. An easy way to tell is if politicians can draw crowds to their speeches. You can measure online interactions between actual people and their enthusiasm. For example, if a politician has tons of online interest and he can draw big crowds, then we can assume that his online interest is real rather than fake. If a politician has tons of online interest but can't draw any people to his speeches, it's like his "enthusiasm" is bought for and has no traction.
nickparker 8y ago
I don't know if this applies to BetChecker, but PredictIt is heavily handicapped by an $850 max bet. 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.
- objektif 8y ago
  There is a counter argument for this as people with a lot of money will drives the results one way which can actually impact elections. Nkt that I buy this argument but something to keep in mind.
  - nickparker 8y ago
    I definitely don't believe that today and I doubt it will ever come to pass. There are more cash-efficient ways to influence elections than warping betting odds, and I think that will hold true no matter how large the betting market gets because the manipulation gets more expensive as the market gets more attention. The weaker form of your argument "Without the caps it's biased toward people who can make big bets" is the entire point of a betting market. Edit: The one edge case where it might happen is precisely this article. Buying your way to say 5% after some organic positive press might be an effective way to buy buzz at relatively low cost. It's a small one time boost for a campaign though.
    - gumby 8y ago
      I also doubt that it's happening deliberately, but FWIW this is precisely the time in a campaign when a "small one time boost" might be worth it, to pull you up above the noise floor. But I get the feeling nobody really understands campaigns well enough (especially these long, grueling ones) to justify the time spent on these small-calibre issues.
    - skybrian 8y ago
      As a method of prediction, this all depends on whether big bettors are justified in their confidence. What sort of private information would make it worth making a big bet?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
scott_s 8y ago
Who 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.
- azernik 8y ago
  If you need any indication of the irrationality of the betting markets, look for the Q conspiracy theorists betting on indictments on people like James Comey and Hillary Clinton.
- brm 8y ago
  weight of money has an effect on odds but the bookmakers are still the ones setting them.
zarkov99 8y ago
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.
- dmode 8y ago
  While this is ideal, time and again it has been proved that an energized base and a demoralized opposition is the best chance at winning election. A passive middle will not win you anything.
ham_sandwich 8y ago
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. If prediction markets had more depth, I’m sure we would see politics hedge funds emerge.
- azernik 8y ago
  PredictIt, at least, has fairly steep transaction fees to prevent arbitrage except in cases of very high mismatches.
gringoDan 8y ago
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. 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.
- suby 8y ago
  You'd then be biasing it towards the opinions of people who can afford a 10,000 dollar bet. I'm not sure that that's any better.
  - gringoDan 8y ago
    Fair point. I hoped that some arbitrarily large number would 1) cause people to actually consider their biases and bet accordingly and 2) allow for smart money to exploit any market mispricings. But I suppose a lot of rich dumb money could just flow in.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  Yang's chances are small, Buttigieg's chances are about equal to Beto's, and better than any other candidate's outside of Biden. (And it's an open question as to whether Biden is actually serious.)
  - Alex3917 8y ago
    IMHO Yang has much better odds that Buttigieg. Mayor Pete is just blowing up right now because he had a CNN town hall, but he doesn't seem to have a lot of depth of policy and that's going to hurt him a lot as we get into the debates and then going forward. Whereas Yang hasn't yet had much mainstream media exposure, but has a lot of depth to his policies.
    - 8y ago
losvedir 8y ago
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. 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? 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.
- dondon1 8y ago
  I guess the predcitit market assumes a faster growth in Yangs popularity and is pricing this in.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > So, are they just very leading indicators? AFAIK, there is no evidence that early standing in prediction markets is any better a predictor than early polling; prediction markets tend to converge to the ultimate result close to the election, but so do polling numbers.
- pixelperfect 8y ago
  With PredictIt there's a max bet size, so the manipulation would have to be spread over many accounts. Seems like a very high risk/reward ratio considering how many people would have to be involved, and considering most people don't know or care much about PredictIt.
- SatvikBeri 8y ago
  The major flaw in PredictIt is the low maximum cap and lack of interest paid. That makes it unprofitable to bet on small corrections even if you're right (e.g. 5% to 10%, or 5% to 1%). So PredictIt shouldn't be considered precise at small percentages.
dondon1 8y ago
#YangGang
skybrian 8y ago
Is Andrew Yang a writer? I'd be interested in reading some of what he's written that's longer than a tweet. I did find the weekly campaign updates, which are okay as far as they go.
- juvoni 8y ago
  Well he did publish a book: 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/0316414247 https://www.amazon.com/War-Normal-People-Disappearing-Univer...
- Alex3917 8y ago
  His weekly emails often contain excerpts from his books.
scarmig 8y ago
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.
- monocasa 8y ago
  Warren isn't going to win. The party took notice of the DNA test thing, and is specifically trying to field someone who won't be baited into the mud with Trump.
js2 8y ago
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. I submitted this interview the other day: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-democratic-2020-candidate-pete-buttigieg.html http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-demo... 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: - https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-Buttigieg-Featured-Speaker-Politics-and-Eggs-NH-506868621.html https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-But... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg I know this comment is obviously political but I think he deserves to be heard from.
- petermcneeley 8y ago
  "Buttigieg is a graduate of Harvard University, a Rhodes Scholar, and a veteran of the War in Afghanistan" Wow what a fresh face. (dry sarcasm)
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- randomacct3847 8y ago
  How was he classmates with Zuckerberg? He’s 4ish years older than Zuck.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    In college, there are plenty of classes open to students of all ages...
    - jvagner 8y ago
jedberg 8y ago
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.
- defen 8y ago
  That's why I'm a little more optimistic about Yang 2024 than Yang 2020. I'm just worried that he's going to end up as the Ron Paul of the Democratic Party - highly appealing to a relatively small group of geeks, but considered a weird outsider candidate by the party mainstream. His fundamental point is one that our society needs to contend with - "high tech" is the oil of the 21st century. Do we want that wealth to be concentrated into a few world-historical fortunes? Or do we want to use it to improve the lives of everyone?
raz32dust 8y ago
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.
salimmadjd 8y ago
I've been following how Buttigieg's rise has been manufactured by 1-2 insiders. Mainly David Axelrod. 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. He basically bombed the first 20 min. The period that any viewers would try to give the candidate any chance to better understand them. 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. So you thought that would be the end of it all.... Nope! I observed a beautiful spin of manufacturing narratives. Axelrod tweeted about how great Mayor Pete's performance was [1] 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. 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. 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". [1] - https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144 https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144 [2] - the tweet thread I was going point to is removed now
- ams6110 8y ago
  So good example of Fake News then. It's not just one side that does this stuff.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  You say he bombed the first 20 minutes...but how did he do the rest of the town hall? Plenty of people into politics will give a candidate more than 20 minutes to make their case, especially now that they've seen what happens when you make emotional snap judgments about who you vote for.
xigekznutdcbfba 8y ago
Both are capitalists who will do nothing to meaningfully grant democratic rights to the working population of the US or the world.
xigekznutdcbfba 8y ago
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.
- MockObject 8y ago
  Except for the part of the working class who voted for Trump mostly to oppose socialism.
- internet_user 8y ago
  how are they meaningful? Job "guarantee" is meaningful? Free college is meaningful?
danso 8y ago
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). 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. 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. 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. 0: 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 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-for...
- dictum 8y ago
  Not sure that's a goal of his, but in many countries a candidate will enter the primaries (or the general election, in a minor party) campaigning on a single issue, and then join the government later as a secretary (or minister) to either implement some version of the policy or prepare for its implementation in the future.
anigbrowl 8y ago
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.
- internet_user 8y ago
  YangGang is his own PR. It's nothing to do with 8chan. UBI, of course, appeals to alt-right. Who wouldn't want to get $1000 a month? Would you? of course you do...
aaron695 8y ago
4/8 Chan are pushing for Yang. I think this is the main reason why he has risen.
dmode 8y ago
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]
- casper345 8y ago
  2 point is overstated in media. " there is “no indication” O’Rourke actually ever broke into computers or even possessed the skills to do so. Instead, O’Rourke’s membership is linked to his participation in online discussion forums ran by the group. Beto himself operated one such forum known as “TacoLand” to discuss mostly punk rock." https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-hacker/ https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-hacker...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Mikeb85 8y ago
White and male means Buttigieg is going to have a major problem in the primaries. Asian and male is almost as bad. Unless the Democrats suddenly decide to stop playing identity politics they're going to choose someone based on gender/race (female/not white).
- jedberg 8y ago
  He's gay though so he checks the box.
  - Mikeb85 8y ago
    Does he? Dunno, there seems to be enough gay white males in positions of authority in the US that I didn't think that would count towards his diversity status.
- danenania 8y ago
  Biden and Sanders are currently leading in polls, so I’m not sure where you’re getting this from.
  - Mikeb85 8y ago
    But neither is actually going to be chosen by the DNC (is Biden even running?). Just wait until the primaries start and the media attacks ramp up.
    - danenania 8y ago
      Anything could happen, but given that white males are currently getting a combined ~64% in polls, it's pretty silly to say that running as a white male is a 'major problem'.
internet_user 8y ago
Andrew Yang is an Accelerationist. 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. You are an American? You are a citizen? You get a thousand bucks a month. Funded by 10% VAT. The freedom dividend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw

123 points by chadmhorner 8y ago

Re:Yang, 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.

yumraj 8y ago
Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are. Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done.
- lukifer 8y ago
  Trump isn’t really a business person, he just plays one on TV :P
- dev_dull 8y ago
  A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?
  - akhilcacharya 8y ago
    It was booming in 2016 too.
  - jkestner 8y ago
    The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.
    - briandear 8y ago
      Who are “shareholders?” Pretty much anyone with a retirement plan or a pension. The majority of Americans own stock.
      - jkestner 8y ago
        Not quite. 54% of the 135M American workers have a retirement plan.[1] That's 73M out of the ~250M American adults. Maybe you can call that the middle class. But point taken. To be less pithy, these individual shareholders have little power to sway governance, particularly if their stock is held in a managed fund. The rich, connected shareholders steer things, and it's not always in the interests of the company in the long term. 1. http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many...
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        The vast majority of Americans derive the lion’s share of their income over most of their lifetime from selling their labor, not from capital returns, whether from stock alone or any other combination of capital.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    That is such a joke. What does "booming economy" really mean? Mostly the stock market, I think. And "low unemployment"? It's low because people who have given up looking aren't counted. And because it includes lots of short-term and poorly compensated jobs.
  - jrs235 8y ago
    "low inflation" ... not if you include assets (stocks, houses, education, health[care], etc.) that are not included in the "official" inflation calculations.
  - dmode 8y ago
    Unemployment, economy, stock market, GDP - all have been on the exact same trajectory post the 2009 recession. We would have been exactly here even if a tree was the President. The only thing that got worse economically was the Federal deficit, which is a trillion dollars now.
  - noelsusman 8y ago
    That's more thanks to the Fed than anything else, though their role is also pretty small. The truth is the president doesn't have the ability to affect the economy very much one way or the other.
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  Trump is a business person in the same way that the Kardashians are business people. They have businesses, but they are, first and foremost, celebrities.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  Arguably, Donald Trump is more of a media celebrity through inherited wealth that was funneled through mock business transactions for tax evasion than an actual businessman the way Yang is, but I'm not sure people are prepared to make the distinction, so that might be an effective political line against Yang even if it's not all that true in any relevant sense.
- Octoth0rpe 8y ago
  > work across the aisle and actually get things done If the proposed action is part of / agreeable with the $opposing_party platform, I don't think I _want_ it to get done; with extraordinarily few exceptions. I'd prefer someone who can push forward without compromising the point of the platform.
- core-questions 8y ago
  The problem here comes when there's no possible state of compromise that would make even anyone at all happy. For example, on a border wall: you build it to be functional, or you don't. A non-functional border wall is essentially not a border wall. There's no compromise state; instead, there's at best some kind of tit-for-tat, where you'll concede something else in exchange for your most important plans.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    A non-functional border wall also pleases nobody. It’s not a great compromise at all.
  - learc83 8y ago
    That's because a border wall is too specific for a policy platform. The more general concept of border security provides plenty of room for compromise. But even a wall provides room for compromise--physical barriers in some places but not others.
- justaguyhere 8y ago
  Also, didn't we just elect another business person One with multiple bankruptcies too!
- erentz 8y ago
  > Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done. To work with someone across the aisle you have to have someone on the other side of the aisle who wants to work with you. The republicans have made it absolutely clear over the past decade that they will not work with Democrats. Centrist Democrats need work with their colleagues to their left if they want to accomplish anything.
jakestein 8y ago
I think you're referring to Venture for America, which despite the name is not a venture capital firm. https://ventureforamerica.org https://ventureforamerica.org
motivated_gear 8y ago
Why though? I would like my government to be open to at least listening to lots of different ideas and applying an investment mindset to them. You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. But you dont need that to initiate groundbreaking projects. Hoover didn't pour concrete at the Hoover Dam. Kennedy didn't know the rocket equation.
- Octoth0rpe 8y ago
  > You're right, there is little operational experience that comes with being a VC. Operational experience is not my concern. > applying an investment mindset to them This is my concern. I don't trust people in the VC industry to have a healthy concept of an investment mindset.
  - motivated_gear 8y ago
    Understood. Would like to hear your thoughts on why VC does not have a healthy investment philosophy.
themgt 8y ago
I'm taking a wait-and-see approach in general, but I do find Yang one of the most interesting candidates so far. Just to respond to this specific point, Yang wrote recently on Twitter [1]: There are lessons and principles that government can take from business - like treating customers well and resource efficiency. But anyone who says they are going to “run government like a business” is dumb. They require very different forms of leadership. As a CEO you can pretty much tell people what to do. You are their boss. You are paying them. If you say we are doing something then it generally happens. The downside is no one tells you unpleasant truths. In government most all of the time you are building consensus. You provide a vision and try to rally people around it. You build relationships. You compromise. You appeal to common goals. Things often happen more gradually. But when big things happen they can improve many lives. [1] https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432 https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1107126100163858432
- sqs 8y ago
  Are you a CEO? What you say about being a CEO doesn’t ring true to me.
  - clojurestan 8y ago
    Andrew Yang, the person being quoted, has been CEO of multiple companies
  - hjek 8y ago
    It's a quote.
- awinder 8y ago
  > like treating customers well This has come up with the current president's most-dimwitted son and it's so hysterical it bears repeating. US taxpayers and voters are not the customer. They're the board.
  - wgerard 8y ago
    Don't take this as a tacit defense of whichever son it was by any means, but: There are plenty of situations where the interaction between the government <-> constituents is very much like a business <-> customer relationship, and it's not totally insane to think that it could be a better/friendlier/more efficient one. Example: Interactions with TSA, IRS, DMVs (state government obviously but a government nonetheless), etc. I get what you're saying, but I think you also have to understand what Andrew Yang is implying (not particularly interested in looking up the quote from whichever son).
rdiddly 8y ago
I'm not so sympathetic to that idea in the first place. A business, particularly a corporation, is one of the most authoritarian structures ever devised. If the government were like a business, every citizen would be either an asset to be exploited or a liability to be eliminated.
- omalleyt 8y ago
  Citizens would be the shareholders
  - dsr_ 8y ago
    Small shareholders (less than 0.01% holdings) have essentially no voice in a corporation's policy; nor are they a consideration for the board of directors. Sometimes they are the beneficiaries of policies that are satisfying major stockholders, but not in a big way. No, this metaphor does not work.
  - qntty 8y ago
    In what way does that meaningfully differ from the way a democracy is supposed to be run? Shareholders are treated as "voters" in a democratic organization, where 1 share = 1 vote.
    - Gibbon1 8y ago
      Despite the common wisdom governments tend to care a lot about citizens bitching. A friend used to work as a lawyer for a state utility board. They sit and listen to rants by 75 year old cat ladies and then consider how to mollify them.
    - rabidrat 8y ago
      So who gets the majority of shares in the country? Should it be the executives, or the funders? Maybe we should have a 1 vote per tax-dollar system.
      - 0815test 8y ago
markn951 8y ago
Andrew Yang has never worked for a VC as far as I can tell. What are you referring to?
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can run government like a business" I really don't want a government that ruthlessly cuts costs that don't drive revenue and uses all mechanisms within reach to maximize lock-in and extract monopoly rents from customers.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Wasn't that a Trump campaign theme? But anyway, it's not new. That was a lot of that maybe a century ago in the US.
  - mrguyorama 8y ago
    That was the words that came out of Trump's mouth, but not what his supporters heard
fullshark 8y ago
How about Real Estate?
objektif 8y ago
His primary business was a test prep company he sold to Kaplan. As far as I know he did not own or work for a VC firm.
smallgovt 8y ago
This comment doesn't make sense since Andrew Yang has no background in venture capital.
losvedir 8y ago
I don't think his business really is venture capital, though. What exactly are you referring to? At least, if you're talking about Venture for America, it's more of a YC or TechStars. It's a non-profit designed to help entrepreneurs start companies. Prior to that, I think he was the CEO of Manhattan Prep before it getting acquired by Kaplan.
justaguyhere 8y ago
I haven't seen this "run govt like a business" idea outside the U.S (or maybe I just missed it). Biz and govt are two separate things, I don't understand how one can be run like the other. Sure, there are some overlaps, but thats about it. Can someone explain?
- asark 8y ago
  When invoked by laypersons, it usually means "don't run a deficit at all, and cut 'useless' (to me, so far as I know) programs". Arts funding and foreign aid are popular first candidates for the chopping block. I don't know what it means when politicians say it, aside from being an appeal to the above. Possibly they mean the same thing. [EDIT] incidentally, it's almost entirely associated with the Right. Unusual to see it brought up as a point in favor of a Democrat. [EDIT EDIT] awinder probably nailed what it means when politicians say it, and/or why it's an idea some of them have promoted.
- luckydata 8y ago
  It's one of the idiotic side effects of unchecked capitalistic culture in the USA mixed with a tinge of anti-intellecutalism and tons of garden variety ignorance and racism. It's codeword for "I don't want my taxes to help folks that don't look like me".
- specialist 8y ago
  Capitalism is our religion. It’s so much a part of our culture (identity), people aren’t aware of it.
  - Gibbon1 8y ago
    People that are heavily corrupted respond to criticism of neoliberalism/capitalism the same way fundamentalists respond to heresy.
- awinder 8y ago
  One of the major political factions in the US has spent decades at this point deriding career politicians. It's been a decent strategy inside of that faction, but other factions point out that career politicians actually develop tools to get shit done (as any career-minded individual would). So at some point you have to combat the argument that you're running inexperienced individuals vs. experienced individuals, and advancing the argument that "business leadership actually exceeds govt leadership in getting stuff done" is an attempt to turn that weakness into a strength. I'm being charitable that no one actually believes that garbage at it's heart, but the other explanation might be garden-variety insanity.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
>but any openness to the idea goes out the window when the candidate's business is venture capital. Or being the activist investor that breaks up the business and sells what's profitable.
ams6110 8y ago
"Run the government like a business" was Ross Perot's mantra. Was quite popular for a while, but didn't work out so well in the end. That's probably more because he sort of went insane during the campaign rather than due to a a reasoned choice the voters made about that philosophy.
maxxxxx 8y ago
"elect a business person so they can run government like a business" This is a terrible idea for a society. Typical businesses are internally dictatorships that are single-minded, intolerant of dissent, very controlling (my employer reads my E-mails and lately they are setting up a ton of cameras) and are designed to funnel rewards to only few people. That's not a good mindset to run a whole country. We can't just lay off people to cut costs. I think that's why Trump seems to get better along with dictators like Erdogan, Putin or Kim Jong Un than with democratic leaders. their leadership is much closer to what he is used from his business. Running government more efficiently would be nice but I don't see the ex-business people who got elected into government do better than other politicians.
Alex3917 8y ago
He doesn't want to run the government like a business, and he's not a venture capitalist.
vharuck 8y ago
A government run like a business loses the most important and necessary quality of a government: it can takr actions that are economically harmful to itself but helpful to society. It should maintain all roads, not just the ones used to transport goods. It should investigate even small crimes. It steps in when the market would cause a catastrophe (e.g., tragedy of the commons). Of course, money still exists, so the government restricts its reach within a budget. Besides, the president's only tasks should be international diplomacy, commander of the military, and doing what the Congress says. They can be "ideas gals/guys," but he/she shouldn't be independently making huge decisions outside of war scenarios. That doesn't sound like a CEO to me.
0815test 8y ago
> elect a business person so they can run government like a business I mean, didn't we try that already, and quite recently for that matter? It doesn't seem to be working very well. What makes you think that Yang can do better than that?

bb2018 8y ago

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).

nutjob2 8y ago
A low barrier to entry is arguably a good thing.
- bb2018 8y ago
  I agree in large part but I do think it is interesting. Running a campaign reminds me of The Producers - it is just as good to have a failure of a campaign as a winning one.
asark 8y ago
The whole political process is so tied up in entertainment now it's hard to see the lines between them anymore. It seems especially bad on the R side (surprise surprise) and I don't just mean the President, but it's affecting the entire institution of the Federal government. Running for, and even attaining, office is a stepping stone to or enhancing move for an entertainment career, and vice-versa, in a way and to a degree I'm pretty sure it didn't used to be in the fairly recent past. And an entertainment career is even more of a feedback-loop into any other business ventures one might have than it used to be, and it already very much was. I mean, being a celebrity used to help with running for office for obvious reasons, but now running for office is a pretty good action to take if you want to become a celebrity. "Enhance your personal brand today—run for office! Just remember, your number one goal isn't winning, it's raising your profile. If you happen to win that's great, but it's beside the point. Feel free to be crazy and weird. Worst case, run as an R and as long as your activities and personality are notorious enough you're guaranteed a steady income for the occasional appearance on Fox News as an expert in... well, doesn't matter really! Maybe they'll even give you your own show! Have a book ghostwritten—it's like free money!"

nutjob2 8y ago

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.

picodguyo 8y ago
Not entirely meaningless. News outlets will need to select who gets coverage and invitations to debates. Absent many other objective rationales, they'll lean on poll numbers to make those decisions.
- fjp 8y ago
  They'll lean on whatever kind of coverage gets them the most money
bryanlarsen 8y ago
To get into the debates, candidates need to either raise a bunch of money across a bunch of states, or poll above 1% https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-how-were-defining-a-major-presidential-candidate/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-how-were-defining...

WhompingWindows 8y ago

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. 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?

bryanlarsen 8y ago
VP choice makes a bigger difference for an older candidate, which might be why rumors are that Biden will be choosing his running mate very early in the process.
- mtgx 8y ago
  Bernie/Buttigieg 2020?
  - aaomidi 8y ago
    This would be good - or Bernie/Beto for that Texas vote.
    - stevenwoo 8y ago
      We need to take bets on when Texas turns blue in a Presidential election, I bet 30 years in the future, 2020 is too soon. Beto did great against the least popular Senator in the United States. The voter registration number among Latinos in Texas is abysmal, but they will be a bigger bloc than any other in Texas in the future, it's just that older, whites make up 2/3 of Texas voters now and that's a pretty reliable GOP vote source. Every year for some time people have been saying Texas will turn and it has not happened. A little analysis here: https://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/latinos-wont-turn-texas-blue-anytime-soon/ https://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/latinos-wont-turn-te...
  - 8y ago

dopylitty 8y ago

It would be wise to not trust any phenomenon which blows up online, given the ease of generating such a phenomenon artificially.

fullshark 8y ago
Yet the democratic candidates that have announced seem to be chasing online mindshare at this point, moving further and further left in order to attract vocal Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders fans, with unclear results.
papermill 8y ago
If the interest is artificially generated or fake, it will fade quickly for sure. But I wouldn't say we shouldn't trust online phenomenon. Online phenomenon is why Obama and Trump got elected. Trump has effectively bypassed the traditional media's stranglehold on the american mind via his use of twitter and social media. And online phenomenon is why we have occasio-cortez. As the internet gains more mind share, we have to start taking the online space more seriously.
- dopylitty 8y ago
  Why would artificial interest necessarily fade as long as whoever is generating it keeps generating it? There’s no reason to believe any internet content amplifying the message of any candidate (or president) is genuine. In fact given the findings of the past several years it’s better to assume online content is in fact generated rather than genuine.
  - papermill 8y ago
    If there is no substance behind the enthusiasm, then it can't last because it has no legs to stand on. I agree that there are tons of fake nonsense on all media, not just social media. But that doesn't mean everything on media is fake. Of course online content is generated. My point is whether that generated online content gains actual traction. Whether that generated online content has legs and real enthusiasm behind it. An easy way to tell is if politicians can draw crowds to their speeches. You can measure online interactions between actual people and their enthusiasm. For example, if a politician has tons of online interest and he can draw big crowds, then we can assume that his online interest is real rather than fake. If a politician has tons of online interest but can't draw any people to his speeches, it's like his "enthusiasm" is bought for and has no traction.

nickparker 8y ago

I don't know if this applies to BetChecker, but PredictIt is heavily handicapped by an $850 max bet. 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.

objektif 8y ago
There is a counter argument for this as people with a lot of money will drives the results one way which can actually impact elections. Nkt that I buy this argument but something to keep in mind.
- nickparker 8y ago
  I definitely don't believe that today and I doubt it will ever come to pass. There are more cash-efficient ways to influence elections than warping betting odds, and I think that will hold true no matter how large the betting market gets because the manipulation gets more expensive as the market gets more attention. The weaker form of your argument "Without the caps it's biased toward people who can make big bets" is the entire point of a betting market. Edit: The one edge case where it might happen is precisely this article. Buying your way to say 5% after some organic positive press might be an effective way to buy buzz at relatively low cost. It's a small one time boost for a campaign though.
  - gumby 8y ago
    I also doubt that it's happening deliberately, but FWIW this is precisely the time in a campaign when a "small one time boost" might be worth it, to pull you up above the noise floor. But I get the feeling nobody really understands campaigns well enough (especially these long, grueling ones) to justify the time spent on these small-calibre issues.
  - skybrian 8y ago
    As a method of prediction, this all depends on whether big bettors are justified in their confidence. What sort of private information would make it worth making a big bet?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

scott_s 8y ago

Who 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.

azernik 8y ago
If you need any indication of the irrationality of the betting markets, look for the Q conspiracy theorists betting on indictments on people like James Comey and Hillary Clinton.
brm 8y ago
weight of money has an effect on odds but the bookmakers are still the ones setting them.

zarkov99 8y ago

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.

dmode 8y ago
While this is ideal, time and again it has been proved that an energized base and a demoralized opposition is the best chance at winning election. A passive middle will not win you anything.

ham_sandwich 8y ago

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. If prediction markets had more depth, I’m sure we would see politics hedge funds emerge.

azernik 8y ago
PredictIt, at least, has fairly steep transaction fees to prevent arbitrage except in cases of very high mismatches.

gringoDan 8y ago

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. 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.

suby 8y ago
You'd then be biasing it towards the opinions of people who can afford a 10,000 dollar bet. I'm not sure that that's any better.
- gringoDan 8y ago
  Fair point. I hoped that some arbitrarily large number would 1) cause people to actually consider their biases and bet accordingly and 2) allow for smart money to exploit any market mispricings. But I suppose a lot of rich dumb money could just flow in.
bilbo0s 8y ago
Yang's chances are small, Buttigieg's chances are about equal to Beto's, and better than any other candidate's outside of Biden. (And it's an open question as to whether Biden is actually serious.)
- Alex3917 8y ago
  IMHO Yang has much better odds that Buttigieg. Mayor Pete is just blowing up right now because he had a CNN town hall, but he doesn't seem to have a lot of depth of policy and that's going to hurt him a lot as we get into the debates and then going forward. Whereas Yang hasn't yet had much mainstream media exposure, but has a lot of depth to his policies.
  - 8y ago

losvedir 8y ago

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. 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? 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.

dondon1 8y ago
I guess the predcitit market assumes a faster growth in Yangs popularity and is pricing this in.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> So, are they just very leading indicators? AFAIK, there is no evidence that early standing in prediction markets is any better a predictor than early polling; prediction markets tend to converge to the ultimate result close to the election, but so do polling numbers.
pixelperfect 8y ago
With PredictIt there's a max bet size, so the manipulation would have to be spread over many accounts. Seems like a very high risk/reward ratio considering how many people would have to be involved, and considering most people don't know or care much about PredictIt.
SatvikBeri 8y ago
The major flaw in PredictIt is the low maximum cap and lack of interest paid. That makes it unprofitable to bet on small corrections even if you're right (e.g. 5% to 10%, or 5% to 1%). So PredictIt shouldn't be considered precise at small percentages.

dondon1 8y ago

#YangGang

skybrian 8y ago

Is Andrew Yang a writer? I'd be interested in reading some of what he's written that's longer than a tweet. I did find the weekly campaign updates, which are okay as far as they go.

juvoni 8y ago
Well he did publish a book: 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/0316414247 https://www.amazon.com/War-Normal-People-Disappearing-Univer...
Alex3917 8y ago
His weekly emails often contain excerpts from his books.

scarmig 8y ago

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.

monocasa 8y ago
Warren isn't going to win. The party took notice of the DNA test thing, and is specifically trying to field someone who won't be baited into the mud with Trump.

js2 8y ago

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. I submitted this interview the other day: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-democratic-2020-candidate-pete-buttigieg.html http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-demo... 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: - https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-Buttigieg-Featured-Speaker-Politics-and-Eggs-NH-506868621.html https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-But... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg I know this comment is obviously political but I think he deserves to be heard from.

petermcneeley 8y ago
"Buttigieg is a graduate of Harvard University, a Rhodes Scholar, and a veteran of the War in Afghanistan" Wow what a fresh face. (dry sarcasm)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
randomacct3847 8y ago
How was he classmates with Zuckerberg? He’s 4ish years older than Zuck.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  In college, there are plenty of classes open to students of all ages...
  - jvagner 8y ago

jedberg 8y ago

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.

defen 8y ago
That's why I'm a little more optimistic about Yang 2024 than Yang 2020. I'm just worried that he's going to end up as the Ron Paul of the Democratic Party - highly appealing to a relatively small group of geeks, but considered a weird outsider candidate by the party mainstream. His fundamental point is one that our society needs to contend with - "high tech" is the oil of the 21st century. Do we want that wealth to be concentrated into a few world-historical fortunes? Or do we want to use it to improve the lives of everyone?

raz32dust 8y ago

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.

salimmadjd 8y ago

I've been following how Buttigieg's rise has been manufactured by 1-2 insiders. Mainly David Axelrod. 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. He basically bombed the first 20 min. The period that any viewers would try to give the candidate any chance to better understand them. 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. So you thought that would be the end of it all.... Nope! I observed a beautiful spin of manufacturing narratives. Axelrod tweeted about how great Mayor Pete's performance was [1] 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. 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. 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". [1] - https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144 https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144 [2] - the tweet thread I was going point to is removed now

ams6110 8y ago
So good example of Fake News then. It's not just one side that does this stuff.
gamblor956 8y ago
You say he bombed the first 20 minutes...but how did he do the rest of the town hall? Plenty of people into politics will give a candidate more than 20 minutes to make their case, especially now that they've seen what happens when you make emotional snap judgments about who you vote for.

xigekznutdcbfba 8y ago

Both are capitalists who will do nothing to meaningfully grant democratic rights to the working population of the US or the world.

xigekznutdcbfba 8y ago

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.

MockObject 8y ago
Except for the part of the working class who voted for Trump mostly to oppose socialism.
internet_user 8y ago
how are they meaningful? Job "guarantee" is meaningful? Free college is meaningful?

danso 8y ago

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). 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. 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. 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. 0: 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 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-for...

dictum 8y ago
Not sure that's a goal of his, but in many countries a candidate will enter the primaries (or the general election, in a minor party) campaigning on a single issue, and then join the government later as a secretary (or minister) to either implement some version of the policy or prepare for its implementation in the future.

anigbrowl 8y ago

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.

internet_user 8y ago
YangGang is his own PR. It's nothing to do with 8chan. UBI, of course, appeals to alt-right. Who wouldn't want to get $1000 a month? Would you? of course you do...

aaron695 8y ago

4/8 Chan are pushing for Yang. I think this is the main reason why he has risen.

dmode 8y ago

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]

casper345 8y ago
2 point is overstated in media. " there is “no indication” O’Rourke actually ever broke into computers or even possessed the skills to do so. Instead, O’Rourke’s membership is linked to his participation in online discussion forums ran by the group. Beto himself operated one such forum known as “TacoLand” to discuss mostly punk rock." https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-hacker/ https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-hacker...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Mikeb85 8y ago

White and male means Buttigieg is going to have a major problem in the primaries. Asian and male is almost as bad. Unless the Democrats suddenly decide to stop playing identity politics they're going to choose someone based on gender/race (female/not white).

jedberg 8y ago
He's gay though so he checks the box.
- Mikeb85 8y ago
  Does he? Dunno, there seems to be enough gay white males in positions of authority in the US that I didn't think that would count towards his diversity status.
danenania 8y ago
Biden and Sanders are currently leading in polls, so I’m not sure where you’re getting this from.
- Mikeb85 8y ago
  But neither is actually going to be chosen by the DNC (is Biden even running?). Just wait until the primaries start and the media attacks ramp up.
  - danenania 8y ago
    Anything could happen, but given that white males are currently getting a combined ~64% in polls, it's pretty silly to say that running as a white male is a 'major problem'.

internet_user 8y ago

Andrew Yang is an Accelerationist. 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. You are an American? You are a citizen? You get a thousand bucks a month. Funded by 10% VAT. The freedom dividend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw