Andrew Yang Has My Attention

Let me start by saying that I will vote Democratic in 2020, no matter who ends up as our presidential nominee. We have several impressive candidates, but even the least impressive would be an improvement on what we have now.

Elizabeth Warren is and has been my first choice to be the next president. She has a plan for everything, and I like her ideas.

Warren wasn’t part of last night’s debate, although two of my other favorites were, Kamala Harris and Julián Castro. They held their own, but someone I’ve never taken notice of caught my interest.

If you were paying attention last night, you’d know the answer is yes. The first time I heard Yang’s $1,000 plan, I dismissed him as a guy with a gimmick, but last night, I realized he has substance.

This graph from the New York Times shows Andrew Yang came in dead last for debate time. He isn’t getting much of a chance, but let me say; Yang used those 8:53 minutes well. He didn’t waste time taking jabs at Joe Biden or Kamala Harris either.

I took notes and was planning to give you some quotes, but I found this clip on YouTube encompassing his eight minutes last night, so I’ll let you watch for yourself.

I think it’s time we try trickle-up economy and take health insurance coverage off the backs of small business and families, and I do believe that plan would bring back entrepreneurial endeavors.

If you have an hour, the following Preet Bharara podcast with Andrew Yang will further enlighten you as to who this antithesis of 45 is.

His website offers more information.

I’m not saying I’ve thrown over Elizabeth Warren for this new guy, but he’s on my shortlist, and I’m keeping an open mind.

One last point; I know others share this opinion. There are too many candidates, and we require some good people to keep their seats in Congress; we need a strong presence there. To those polling at the bottom half — please go baaaack.

8 thoughts on “Andrew Yang Has My Attention

      1. This is the real benefit of the debates: giving people a chance to be heard on a national stage. The article in today’s Economist made it sound like the dems are destroying each other. I was sorry to hear that.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Last night’s debate turned into a jump on Joe gang fight.

        Everyone was trying to recreate what worked for Kamala Harris last month when she confronted Biden about his stance on school bussing. (She was a child who was bussed at that time and had a strong opinion and pent up resentment about that.)

        She gained 6 points in the polls after that and Bidon came down off his mountain, although he’s still maintaining the lead.

        Gillibrand (I don’t care for her) tried the same type of thing last night. She attacked Biden for an Op-Ed he wrote several decades ago. KG would not accept his answer and wouldn’t drop it. She came off as more disingenuous to me than she already is.

        Tulsi Gabbard tried to attack Kamala on I honestly don’t even know what, because at that point it was apparent to me, and I don’t think I’m more gifted at identifying bs than the next guy, it was not real.

        Kamala was defensive most of the night.

        It was posturing to try to stand out in the crowd. Others did the same, but it was not as extreme.
        Mayor Deblasio was just himself- aggressive and loud.
        It was all terrible for the party. We can’t afford to make each other look bad, because Trump will use everything he hears against the party.
        I don’t think the debate on Tuesday was anything like that, but it wasn’t all rainbows and lollipops either.
        Hopefully, they’ll read all the comments about how their behavior is not conducive to winning in 2020.

        This reply is longer than my post. 😬

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I’m not a fan of “debates”. I wish the democratic committee would find a better method for exposing ideas while disallowing childish nastiness This type of behavior plays into the hands of folks who want to manipulate the election.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Answering the questions and not interacting with each other would be so much better. It’s what Yang did, which made it easier to focus on his policy ideas. Unfortunately, it’s the reason he only had 8 minutes.

        The moderators allow the person attacked to respond, and then the attacker is allowed to react to the response.
        It’s why Biden ended up with so much more time than anyone else.
        The format rewards bickering.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.