Want to avoid civil war 2.0? MSM (especially CNN, NYT , MSNBC) need to be totally honest about their misleading and dishonest reporting of the past 5 years .

Can start with

1- Dossier and Trump collusion

2- call out Adam Shiff and other Dems for knowingly misleading the public

3- stop misrepresenting the Georgia Voting law - fine if they disagree but it is not Jim Crow 2.0

4 - Call out the dishonest handling of Hunter Biden story

5- stop saying CRT is not taught in schools. Of course the theory is not taught to kids but that is not relevant. What is relevant is that schools have already implemented many of its principals

6- give accurate context to the “good people on both sides “ comment - and tell people how Trump clarified it a minute after he said it. No doubt a dumb comment but he was not calling neo-nazi very fine people . Barry , you are great but this applies to you too 🤗🤗

7- Lies and misinformation around Kavanaugh and Covington kids.

7 - cover the Rittinghouse truthfully

He probably broke a gun law (due to his age) but anyone watching the trial can see it was self defense . CNN not showing relevant clips

8 - apologize for calling riots peaceful protest

There is sooo much . But media , senior Dem’s lack of leadership due to fear of squad is playing a major role in the divide . Time to call them out .

And there is so much more

Expand full comment

Any leader that supports Universal Basic Income is either part of the globalist cabal intent on eliminating the upstart capability of the American middle class, or is way too ignorant on the subject of human psychology and thus a hazard with respect to the health of the human condition.

The human animal has evolved primarily like most animals where the primary pursuit is a struggle to survive. As human society has evolved to the point that the human animal that can easily earn its basic needs, then it naturally begins to pursue higher needs. Our modern human needs are basically satisfied by working within a market economy where goods and services are produced and traded for value. This path to needs fulfillment is positive for society... goods and services are constantly refined and the value improved... new opportunities are created from the engine of individual pursuits of self-interest. If society evolves to the point where there is no struggle to survive, because of UBI, then some will continue to pursue a positive path to higher needs. However, because UBI is basically a payoff for a lack of economic opportunity, more will pursue a negative path. |

We see this already in urban areas where a high percentage of the population relies on public assistance. There is a much higher crime rate. Societal breakdowns are evident. The people in these neighborhoods have lost hope in accessing the mainstream path to economic prosperity and earned needs fulfillment from being employed in the market economy... and so they pursue other ways to get needs fulfillment that are not positive.

A market economy is a life-game that replaces the hunter-gatherer-grower system that is our natural human life-blood. Take people out of that game and pay them off, and they will create new games that end up destroying the entire system.

Expand full comment

Just checking: this awesome, upbeat, moral good guy Andrew Yang is the same one that told young Democrat voters to move to Georgia to skew the critical election there, right? The guy that wants election reform is the guy that told his followers to game elections. Same guy?



Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Expand full comment

Teachers unions, they ARE evil and not at all necessary.

Ranked choice. That’s how you get mopes like Chesa Boudin in SF who refuses to prosecute crimes and is now going to be recalled.

Expand full comment

Please imagine the supply chain if we had Universal Basic Income right now. Try to imagine it. It would be this times 1000. There literally would be no food.

However, to be fair, I should point out that there would also be garbage flooding the streets. So there wouldn’t be food BUT we could eat the garbage. Nom nom nom!!


Andrew is a nice guy and I wish him luck but UBI is just the single worst plan in human history.

Expand full comment

I strongly disfavor Ranked Choice Voting, because for practical purposes it can only be counted electronically. After the 2020 fiasco I have very little trust in electronic voting systems, at least the ones we have today: they are far too opaque and unaccountable, and whether or not they were in fact "hacked" or subverted in that election, it is certainly possible to mess with them. The more layers of hardware, software, electronic records, and complex voting procedures, the less anyone can know what is happening.

I dislike the "2 party"/uniparty system very much, but I'd rather have 2 parties with accountable voting procedures than an unaccountable and opaque system. I'm also not sure I understand the practical ramifications of RCV with regard to electing loonies. It seems this is a possible outcome due to psychological dynamics of RCV.

Paper ballots with simple and verifiable open-source hardware to scan them for efficiency, and perhaps all parties on the ballot having the right to check the scan using their own hardware. The counting should be done in a decentralized fashion, on the day of, and sealed, rather than in a central counting location. More centralized = more subject to corruption and less accountable.

That's another problem with RCV, it requires a centralized counting process.

Expand full comment

I would be interested in voting for something like the Forward Party, but alas, a lot of Andrew Yang's political and economic views are completely whacked like so many other Democratic Party policies. That just won't reel me in.

Expand full comment

Repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments. The 16th created the Income Tax in 1913, the same time frame as the Russian revolution, and was designed to highlight class struggle in the US. The 17 Changed the process of Senate elections. The role was evolved from basically an employee of the state, accountable to the state, appointed by the state legislators to a corporate funded free agent politician who has six years unchecked. We need to be able to fire our Senators as the constitution originally planned. They should be accountable to the state not their donors.

Expand full comment

Andrew Yang: An interesting guy with a couple of good ideas, but many stupendously bad ideas.

I wish him luck, but more than that, I wish him wisdom, because he seems to ere more on the side of wishful thinking than in wisdom.

Oh, and Mark Cuban, that Nike Corporatist Chinese Apologist Sock Puppet? He'd make a good president? How do you say, "Give me a fucking break!" in Mandarin? I'm sure Mark knows.

Expand full comment

We need a Centrist party. Until then I usually vote for the sane Republican, if there is one on the ticket.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this, I look forward to listening to the whole thing later. Regarding political races and the media: another thing that galls me is that reporters and pundits tend to cover political races as games -- who is doing the right things to get votes, as if it's a video game and they're collecting things or "levelling up" rather than saying things that are true or false about issues that will make a huge difference in people's lives. Reporters will say "that issue doesn't do well with rural voters" rather than "this stance benefits people who live in cities and have office jobs, but will add more costs and no benefits to people who live in rural areas and work at trades or in service jobs."

Expand full comment

A 3rd party coming from the privileged and progressive elite left (which, I suspect, is an appropriate description of Yang) has zero chance of gaining traction. Besides, that extreme already has an entrenched home and it's called the Democratic Party. The traditional 'Dems' desperate for representation are the more moderate and conservative who traditionally voted for candidates from within that party.

Any 3rd party that hopes to gain ANY gravity must come from the big, fat middle.

Expand full comment

Yang is an excellent diagnoser, but his prescriptions miss the point. Voting methods are NOT the problem, and a third party is impossible. A massively popular celebrity like Joe Rogan might be able to make it work, but Yang isn't Rogan.

Expand full comment

I think a lot of people, especially on the right, that is establishment Republicans, don’t realize that Donald Trump actually did create a third party. He bulldozered right over the old line Republican party, which did not support him until very late in the election season, and then only reluctantly. It’s not clear whether Trump’s movement will continue if he decides to quit playing, but he has changed party politics forever.

Arguably, Barack Obama changed the Democrat party as well. He introduced a radical left orientation to what had been a big tent, working class oriented party. A new generation followed him into politics that is more interested in radical transformations such as in energy, social reprogramming, anti-racism, etc. Indeed, their priorities have little in common with the working class people of America. He effectively handed the Democrat party to a rich, elitist cabal that is interested in change at any cost. They sneer at the Constitution and freedom.

Where does Yang fit into this picture? He’s an elitist who wants to impose all kinds of so-called reforms on the people. Among other things, he wants to ban beef. You’re not going to ban beef without some kind of authoritarian heavy-handedness. That’s just the tip of the iceberg.

I wish we could just get rid of politicians, especially those who want to transform our society for us, and just make government smaller and get out of the way so that we can do what we ought to be doing, which is building a great economy, innovative technologies and products. To get rich is glorious.

Expand full comment

"You have this group of actors who benefit from the polarization. From making us angry, agitated, depressed and inflamed. So when you start realizing that's what the system rewards and that the rewards have nothing to do with policy or governance, then you start to understand why we feel the way we do."

Bingo, Andy.

Expand full comment

I'm a skeptic on ranked choice voting, but OPEN PRIMARIES are a must. Most primaries are dominated by a small minority of voters. There is little room for people outside the ideologues. Open primaries result in pragmatic candidates. its been a massive success in my home state of California. Even the liberals (and I am one) are usually not from the extremes. Open primaries are huge reason why California's government has gone from dysfunctional to functional.

As for me, I voted for the 'open primary' proposition many years ago -- very reluctantly, very nervously. The person who pushed it, Abel Maldonado, was an R. But he made a good case. And he was correct.

Wherever you are, wherever you live, open primaries are a meaningful part of better government.

Expand full comment