What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Andrew Yang 2024! (1 Viewer)

squistion said:
I seriously doubt that. It is not like his polling numbers are so great that they decided to take him down. Please.
Click to expand...
So just incompetent? Leaving him off the debate graphic, changing topics when a commentator brings him up, cutting his mic and giving him the fewest questions and airtime. 

Its obvious they dont want him around. 

 
Max Power said:
So just incompetent? Leaving him off the debate graphic, changing topics when a commentator brings him up, cutting his mic and giving him the fewest questions and airtime. 

Its obvious they dont want him around. 
Click to expand...
Meh.

He won't make the next cut (whenever that is) anyway. He is a fringe candidate who will be out of the race shortly in any event. There was no need of any orchestrated attempt on MSNBC's part to take him out.

 
squistion said:
Meh.

He won't make the next cut (whenever that is) anyway. He is a fringe candidate who will be out of the race shortly in any event. There was no need of any orchestrated attempt on MSNBC's part to take him out.
Click to expand...
Just an example of an outsider not being able to overcome the media machine. The DNC is back driving the bus again. 

When trump was an obscure candidate he recieved unprecedented media coverage for someone polling with his numbers. Part of that was entertainment, the other was that he was considered an easy opponent for Hillary. 

DNC is already pulling strings. I hope that is what you all want.

 
Max Power said:
Just an example of an outsider not being able to overcome the media machine. The DNC is back driving the bus again. 

When trump was an obscure candidate he recieved unprecedented media coverage for someone polling with his numbers. Part of that was entertainment, the other was that he was considered an easy opponent for Hillary. 

DNC is already pulling strings. I hope that is what you all want.
Click to expand...
I doubt the DNC told MSNBC to cut Yang's mic and sabotage his candidacy.

And I could give a rat's patootie because (rightfully or wrongfully) Andrew Yang is a non-entity in the Democratic Primary field as far as most Democrats are concerned. It doesn't matter what MSNBC does - if they give him saturation coverage or none at all, because he is not going anywhere. They couldn't prop him up as a legitimate candidate and by the same token, they can't take him down.

And Trump had been a celebrity for decades and had name recognition, so to say that he was just an obscure candidate like Yang is a bit disingenuous IMO. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
I doubt the DNC told MSNBC to cut Yang's mic and sabotage his candidacy.

And I could give a rat's patootie because (rightfully or wrongfully) Andrew Yang is a non-entity in the Democratic Primary field as far as most Democrats are concerned. It doesn't matter what MSNBC does - if they give him saturation coverage or none at all, because he is not going anywhere. They couldn't prop him up as a legitimate candidate and by the same token, they can't take him down.

And Trump had been a celebrity for decades and had name recognition, so to say that he was just an obscure candidate like Yang is a bit disingenuous IMO. 
Click to expand...
I really like Yang and his platform.  Love the "Human Centered Capitalism"  MSNBC is doing us a disservice not giving Yang equal time for his message and may have a little anti-Asian bias going on as well as that is not their market.

 
Summer Wheat said:
I really like Yang and his platform.  Love the "Human Centered Capitalism"  MSNBC is doing us a disservice not giving Yang equal time for his message and maya little have anti-Asian bias going on as well as that is not their market.
Click to expand...
MSNBC has an anti-Asian bias? Their market is progressives and liberals and that includes minority viewers many of which are Asians. 

To suggest this is some kind of racism against Asians is absurd. 

 
squistion said:
Meh.

He won't make the next cut (whenever that is) anyway. He is a fringe candidate who will be out of the race shortly in any event. There was no need of any orchestrated attempt on MSNBC's part to take him out.
Click to expand...
I am not familiar with the background on this, but assuming that Yang's team is accusing MSNBC of cutting his mic?

Seems doubtful to me. Yang should have been more assertive the way others were. He couldn't have expected to be asked a lot of questions given he is in the bottom rung of candidates, but some of them were effective in getting some points out.

 
I don't know the merits of whether Yang has been getting screwed, but this sounds awfully reminiscent of the "Bernie is getting screwed" narrative from 2016 that seems to have been at least partially crafted by Russian troll farms on social media,.  

 
squistion said:
MSNBC has an anti-Asian bias? Their market is progressives and liberals and that includes minority viewers many of which are Asians. 

To suggest this is some kind of racism against Asians is absurd. 
Click to expand...
Not really racism but Yang does not fit their profile. They would much rather support a black woman or gay man.  Listen to Yang, he should be getting more coverage from MSNBC yet they ignore him.

 
Summer Wheat said:
Not really racism but Yang does not fit their profile. They would much rather support a black woman or gay man.  Listen to Yang, he should be getting more coverage from MSNBC yet they ignore him.
Click to expand...
They are pretty much ignoring all the bottom rung of candidates. With 20+ candidates MSNBC can only give so much air time and attention to each one and consequently, those polling poorly will not get the same degree of coverage as those who are more popular.

The Fairness Doctrine is over and wouldn't apply to cable anyway, no network is required to give equal time to all announced POTUS candidates.

 
Max Power said:
When trump was an obscure candidate he recieved unprecedented media coverage for someone polling with his numbers. Part of that was entertainment, the other was that he was considered an easy opponent for Hillary. 
Click to expand...
This is wrong. 

From the moment Trump’s Name was mentioned in 2012 his numbers were excellent. He never had the low numbers that Yang had. He was never an obscure candidate. 

 
squistion said:
I doubt the DNC told MSNBC to cut Yang's mic and sabotage his candidacy.

And I could give a rat's patootie because (rightfully or wrongfully) Andrew Yang is a non-entity in the Democratic Primary field as far as most Democrats are concerned. It doesn't matter what MSNBC does - if they give him saturation coverage or none at all, because he is not going anywhere. They couldn't prop him up as a legitimate candidate and by the same token, they can't take him down.

And Trump had been a celebrity for decades and had name recognition, so to say that he was just an obscure candidate like Yang is a bit disingenuous IMO. 
Click to expand...
Yang said his mic was off, NBC said that wasn't true in a bold statement.  I'll trust Yang over the MSM at the moment.  I think Yang scares the DNC as someone with ideas that people can get behind.  He isn't controlled by the establishment dems and they don't like that.

How can you stand for the media silencing a presidential candidate? I think that's the worst thing they could do. This has shades of Bernie 2016.  You'd think after the whole 2016 debacle the DNC and MSM would want to keep everything above board as possible. 

 
cubd8 said:
I am not familiar with the background on this, but assuming that Yang's team is accusing MSNBC of cutting his mic?

Seems doubtful to me. Yang should have been more assertive the way others were. He couldn't have expected to be asked a lot of questions given he is in the bottom rung of candidates, but some of them were effective in getting some points out.
Click to expand...
They didn't accuse MSNBC of it.  Just said it happened.  MSNBC responded with a "at no time was any candidate's mic off".  I don't think Yang would be up there making this stuff up.  Especially when there is video of the event where he is clearly trying to speak but there is no audio. He couldn't be assertive when he didn't have audio and that was his main complaint.

MSNBC also could have gone with a phrase that is open to the possibility it happened.  Instead it went with an absolute statement.  On a night filled with technical errors, just own up to it. 

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I don't know the merits of whether Yang has been getting screwed, but this sounds awfully reminiscent of the "Bernie is getting screwed" narrative from 2016 that seems to have been at least partially crafted by Russian troll farms on social media,.  
Click to expand...
Wait... you don't think the DNC colluded to get Hilary the nomination? 

Bernie has no chance again.  It's only a matter of time until they force him out again this cycle. 

 
timschochet said:
This is wrong. 

From the moment Trump’s Name was mentioned in 2012 his numbers were excellent. He never had the low numbers that Yang had. He was never an obscure candidate. 
Click to expand...
You're right.  I had to go back and check.  He came in polling at 3% and then jumped to 12% quickly. 

 
Alex P Keaton said:
What has Yang done to deserve a spot in the debates or frankly in the entire primary discussion?  Zilch.
Click to expand...
He has a large internet presence and is popular with millennials and gen Z.  Two groups that combine for 37% of potential voters.

The guy actually has policies too.  Unlike some of those talking heads up on the stage who are great at identifying problems and trash with providing solutions.

Yang had one of the biggest increase in twitter followers after the first round of debates and sounds like his 2q donations will be around 3.5m, which is double his first quarter. 

He isn't an establishment democrat and that's probably a good thing.  

 
Max Power said:
He has a large internet presence and is popular with millennials and gen Z.  Two groups that combine for 37% of potential voters.

The guy actually has policies too.  Unlike some of those talking heads up on the stage who are great at identifying problems and trash with providing solutions.

Yang had one of the biggest increase in twitter followers after the first round of debates and sounds like his 2q donations will be around 3.5m, which is double his first quarter. 

He isn't an establishment democrat and that's probably a good thing.  
Click to expand...
$3.5M?   A drop in the bucket.  

Katy Perry has 108 million twitter followers.  Should she run too?

 
Max Power said:
I'll admit he is a long shot, but why are you so eager to dismiss him? 
Click to expand...
I don't have anything against him.    "Some of his ideas are interesting"......which is a statement I could make about probably 15-20 of the smartest or most rational people I know personally.  So again - what has he done to EARN a place in this race or on the stage?  Other than being rich, he hasn't done anything to earn a spot up there.

(note:  I could say that about many other current and past candidates too, admittedly)

 
Alex P Keaton said:
I don't have anything against him.    "Some of his ideas are interesting"......which is a statement I could make about probably 15-20 of the smartest or most rational people I know personally.  So again - what has he done to EARN a place in this race or on the stage?  Other than being rich, he hasn't done anything to earn a spot up there.

(note:  I could say that about many other current and past candidates too, admittedly)
Click to expand...
Without giving his who biography, he is a first generation American. Both parents were immigrants. He obtained a doctorate from Columbia Law.  He made a lot of his money buy building up and selling a test preparation company.  He left that gig to start a non-profit aimed at entrepreneurs to teach them how to create jobs.  He stepped down from that multimillion dollar company to run for office. 

The guy seems to genuinely want to make the world a better place, solve problems and help people.  He has actually taken the time to put together over 100 policies he would institute or support.  I think he is a person worth hearing out. 

 
If the point here is that the DNC would prefer to have certain candidates triumph over others, I think we can all agree with that. 

If the point here is that the DNC is not above trying certain tricks to help make this happen, some of them very underhanded or outright unfair, let’s just say that it wouldn’t surprise me at all. 

But when people go further than that, as they did in 2016, and suggest that the DNC was decisive in determining which candidate became the nominee- that’s where I just can’t agree. I think it way overestimates their level of influence- in some ways it’s a similar argument to those who assert that if not for Russia Trump would have lost. In both cases you’re drawing assumptions which just don’t hold up to real scrutiny. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Max Power said:
He has a large internet presence and is popular with millennials and gen Z.  Two groups that combine for 37% of potential voters.

The guy actually has policies too.  Unlike some of those talking heads up on the stage who are great at identifying problems and trash with providing solutions.

Yang had one of the biggest increase in twitter followers after the first round of debates and sounds like his 2q donations will be around 3.5m, which is double his first quarter. 

He isn't an establishment democrat and that's probably a good thing.  
Click to expand...
And he recently killed his chances with me with his quotes on Israel. Maybe he should be glad NBC kept his mic off. But he has absolutely lost my vote and I had him in my top 4. I have a feeling a lot of people will feel that way in the left.

 
timschochet said:
If the point here is that the DNC would prefer to have certain candidates triumph over others, I think we can all agree with that. 

If the point here is that the DNC is not above trying certain tricks to help make this happen, some of them very underhanded or outright unfair, let’s just say that it wouldn’t surprise me at all. 

But when people go further than that, as they did in 2016, and suggest that the DNC was decisive in determining which candidate became the nominee- that’s where I just can’t agree. I think it way overestimates their level of influence- in some ways it’s a similar argument to those who assert that if not for Russia Trump would have lost. In both cases you’re drawing assumptions which just don’t hold up to real scrutiny. 
Click to expand...
They went into court and admitted they did everything they could to rig it. Then they said they were within their rights to rig it because they are essentially a private club. That isn't conspiracy theory that is testimony under oath.

 
NCCommish said:
And he recently killed his chances with me with his quotes on Israel. Maybe he should be glad NBC kept his mic off. But he has absolutely lost my vote and I had him in my top 4. I have a feeling a lot of people will feel that way in the left.
Click to expand...
I missed what he said, but had to figure he would be weak on foreign policy. 

 
Max Power said:
Without giving his who biography, he is a first generation American. Both parents were immigrants. He obtained a doctorate from Columbia Law.  He made a lot of his money buy building up and selling a test preparation company.  He left that gig to start a non-profit aimed at entrepreneurs to teach them how to create jobs.  He stepped down from that multimillion dollar company to run for office. 

The guy seems to genuinely want to make the world a better place, solve problems and help people.  He has actually taken the time to put together over 100 policies he would institute or support.  I think he is a person worth hearing out. 
Click to expand...
Thanks for this info, I think he is a very intriguing candidate. Much more so than the re-treads on the left. 

 
adonis said:
Why on earth would Richard Spencer speaking out in support of Andrew Yang be something Yang should have to answer for.

Are...you...freaking...kidding...me?
Click to expand...
So then you agree that it was ridiculous for the media to make candidate Trump have to denounce David Duke speaking out in support of him?

 
Gary Coal Man said:
So then you agree that it was ridiculous for the media to make candidate Trump have to denounce David Duke speaking out in support of him?
Click to expand...
The problem is that Trump didn't want to disown Duke and pretended not to know who he was which was a lie. At least Yang immediately and forcefully rejected all support from Spencer and his fellow travelers 

 
Gary Coal Man said:
adonis said:
Why on earth would Richard Spencer speaking out in support of Andrew Yang be something Yang should have to answer for.

Are...you...freaking...kidding...me?
Click to expand...
So then you agree that it was ridiculous for the media to make candidate Trump have to denounce David Duke speaking out in support of him?
Click to expand...
Andrew...Yang.  Yang.  His name and a picture of him should be all you need to realize he has no overlapping sympathies with white supremacists.

And if you get a wild hair after that, listen to what he says which bears no resemblance to anything white powerish.  It's absurd.

Trump on the other hand spearheaded the racist birther movement, made many derogatory comments towards minorities, is white, and could possibly have had some meaningful ideological overlap with white supremacists with respect to their hateful ideologies.  He had a chance to disavow Duke and he decided not to do it.  Narcissist?  Sympathizer? You be the judge.

But to have a guy named Yang who would never be a white supremacist have to distance himself from one as if he's lobbying them, it's absurd.

 
rockaction said:
I guess this isn't the thread where you pop in and casually say, "Who?"

But, guys...
Click to expand...
Super smart...great ideas.

Speaks too fast and technical..needs polishing...and IMO just doesn't display a leadership quality as being “the guy in charge”.

And immaturely i keep hearing the guy in the Golden Child

Yak loin...good to keep the yang up...

And thats twice in the last few days that ive quoted that movie.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If that CNN graphic is showing podium position tonight, Yang is just right of center.  I take that as a good sign that his campaign is gaining momentum.

 
Mister CIA said:
Max Power said:
Pretty letdown by his showing tonight. The crowd seemed to love him.

 Not a lot of screen time.
Click to expand...
My expectations were exceeded.
Click to expand...
Thought he started out strong but his last few answers started to sound very “politician” (the Iran question jumps to mind) which he hasn’t prior.  But despite that he was still the only person on stage tonight that I could get behind.   Was throughly unimpressed by everyone else.   

 
Yang is the only D that moderate Trump supporters would vote for. He is your clear path to victory and lefties are ####ting on it. Sad.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Kyle Rittenhouse an Andrew Yang supporter?
10 11 12
Replies
578
Views
12K
Insomniac
Insomniac
(HULK)
Larry Hogan - 2024
2
Replies
89
Views
2K
quick-hands
quick-hands
GordonGekko
Axios: Democrats Fear MAGA Republican Kari Lake Could Be Arizona's Next Governor (10/21/22 01:52 PST)
Replies
18
Views
777
Snotbubbles
Snotbubbles

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top