Quote of the day—Andrew Yang

I’m confident that no longer being a Democrat is the right thing.

Andrew Yang
October 4, 2021
[That thought will get a lot of support in my circle of gunnies!

Before you even think he might be inclined to side with Libertarians or Republicans (from the same post):

I donated to Bernie Sanders’ campaign – everything he said struck me as true

When Trump won, I was surprised and took it as a red flag and call to action. Having spent six years working in the Midwest and the South I believed I had some insight as to what had driven Trump’s victory. I spent several years making the case for what I believed was the major policy that could address it – Universal Basic Income.

I saw nothing in his blog post that indicates he has changed these beliefs. As recently as September 27, 2021 he was still enthusiastic for UBI.

That said, Yang resonated with a lot of people. And having that pull someplace outside the Democrat party is probably a good thing. It helps split the political left.—Joe]


10 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Andrew Yang

  1. The wheels come off when you ask one simple question.

    How will we pay for it?

    Raising taxes (or revenue as it’s often put) won’t do it as we’re more or less 50% underwater now.

    And, no, the government cannot “create” all the money OT needs, at least without an eventual and catastrophic result.

    Jeff B.

  2. Having a major dissenting voice on the Left will, shall we say, become interesting.

    Discrimination against Asian Americans, in our universities and elsewhere, has become a major issue. It’s an issue he can ride, if he chooses, now that he no longer has to toe the Democrat party line.

    I suspect he won’t get much traction. It won’t take long to Other him; Democrats will make him an Unperson in no time if they see him as a threat. But I could be wrong.

  3. Who cares? What’s in a name? Why not just stay a dimocrat and vote the way you want? Repuglicans do it all the time.
    That way you still get invited to all the parties, right?
    Maybe we’ll get lucky and traitor Joe will piss off the Chinks enough to nuke DC all of them in it?
    Talk about a win-win!

    • People probably have a hardwired affinity for belonging to a tribe. If a leader in the tribe breaks away and denounces the tribe it causes feelings of doubt/anger/betrayal/etc. If it were an ordinary member of the tribe they may become an “unperson” and of little significance to the health of the tribe. A leader is going to have followers and that can cause division in the tribe as people chose sides.

      I think the whole tribalism thing is an anachronistic artifact and should be resisted by all thinking people. But I’m pretty sure the majority of people are not skilled at thinking.

      • I wish. Progressives are so full of themselves they no longer need to think or accept reality. They just need to belong to their tribe blindingly following where ever their mob is going.

        It is really ironic. They threw away most age old traditions except thinking for oneself and a desire to be independent. Now they consider thinking for oneself and a desire to be independent as an evil that must be crushed at all costs.

      • “But I’m pretty sure the majority of people are not skilled at thinking.”

        What do you think is the #1 intended result of our public/government schools is?

        It is to squash any attempt by the students to learn to think in a rational manner. To restrict them to a lowest common denominator of human, so that all fit into a tightly confined mental bucket. To stamp out any ability that rises above that low level. To create the “cookie-cutter man”, so revered by the communists.

  4. Yup. Some people oppose the Democratic Party because it’s too communist, and others because it’s not communist enough.

    Same with Republicans, by the way. Both parties are of the same system, and so, for generations now, the “conflict”* between the two parties has been over nothing but how much Marxism/fascism/authoritarianism (Romanism), how soon.

    There is no meaningful opposition party. Even a Libertarian, once he starts getting popular enough to become viable, will join the Republican Party. It is this “pragmatism” that’s been killing our republic for decades, and will, for certain, be its downfall. At this point there’s no alternative that will be taken seriously by a majority.

    * In scare quotes because it’s fake.

    • I always liked this visual: Don’t think of Democrats and Republicans as two teams engaged in a mostly-evenly-matched tug-of-war — occasionally gaining or losing ground, but not substantially going anywhere. Instead, think of Democrats and Republicans as the left and right feet of a gargantuan beast, alternately marching toward a cliff — sometimes it takes a big step, sometimes a small one, but it seldom stops and never reverses.

      The reality is, the two parties are much more alike than either would admit. They both desire to control the country and everyone in it. The only differences are what specifically they want to control, to what extent, and how quickly to seize it. They’ll only raise a token opposition on issues they don’t care about, and neither ever repeals anything passed by the other side if it means relinquishing control over the populace (the ACA/Obamacare is one high-profile, recent example).

      Both sides are anathema to those of us who just want to be left alone.

  5. Interesting essay, to say the least. While I disagree with many of his policy positions, he makes a couple points I wholeheartedly agree with.

    One in particular: I’m not very ideological. I’m practical. Making partisan arguments – particularly expressing what I often see as performative sentiment – is sometimes uncomfortable for me. I often think, “Okay, what can we actually do to solve the problem?” I’m pretty sure there are others who feel the same way I do.

    This is something I can get behind. Set partisan politics aside and actually address problems head-on. No beating around the bush trying to cast blame. No political rhetoric or grandstanding. Just solve the damn problem, even (especially) if that means getting the government out of the way.

    And it’s an attitude notably missing from most areas in government, where the probability a problem will be meaningfully addressed is inversely proportional to its utility in attacking the Other Guy.

    I still disagree with Andrew Yang on most things, but this practical attitude is something I could collaboratively work with.

  6. I suspect Yang doesn’t want to be part of the Demonrat cabal for a simple reason.
    He’s not succeeding very well at advancing in that regime. Doesn’t change what he truly is on the inside……a commie.

Comments are closed.