>Be me, voting-age American>Election 2028 approaches>Politicians offer slogans and donor access>Meanwhile, AI and automation rearrange the economyMake the case for Andrew Yang. Not because he’s a flawless messiah—this is politics but because he has pointed at problems others discuss only after they become emergencies.In 2020, Yang proposed the Freedom Dividend: $1,000 monthly for every adult, a universal basic income to provide a floor while work changes. Face the question underneath it: if technology creates wealth while displacing workers, who should benefit? The answer shouldn’t be “only machine owners.”His “human-centered capitalism” argument is simple: GDP is not a moral scorecard. If output rises while families struggle, bragging about growth is like celebrating a faster car with no steering wheel. Policy should measure whether people are doing better.Yang backed ranked-choice voting, letting voters rank candidates instead of gaming elections around the lesser evil. He proposed Democracy Dollars—public vouchers for campaign donations—to counter wealthy donors’ outsized influence.The moral case: people deserve dignity before proving economic usefulness. Caregiving, raising children, retraining, and helping neighbors matter even when the market assigns them a salary of zero. Government should see citizens as humans first.The rational case: Yang discusses structural shifts—automation, insecurity, political capture—instead of treating symptoms as PR crises. His proposals deserve scrutiny, especially funding and implementation. That’s a reason to test them, not dismiss them with a smug meme.Is he automatically the best candidate in 2028? Nobody knows before the field and platforms exist. But if he runs with serious, updated plans, he should be near the top. Competence means facing the future; morality means asking who gets left behind.Anon, judge policies, not tribes. Ask what works, who benefits.
>>544782188He is antiwhite. Simple as
>>544782209Kek
>>544782188If I were American I'd vote for Yang or Bernie. Your two party system makes for truly fucked presidential elections. Why shouldn't two men from the same coalition run for office?>Noo the Party says the 80 year old dementor needs to run!! It's his turn.
retard couldn't get elected in nyc of all placesnobody but a few scattered freaks on this board want him
>>544782209He's a centrist liberal running on the idea that we can't just let things happen. Whites will get screwed by their obeisance just as much as slothful or complacent minorities.If you roll with the idea that only the gladiators get to live, we're going to turn the United States into the third world.
>>544782188Yang Gangers we were simoly to early on the market.2028 is ours.We got this in the bag.
>>544782335Bernie is a little too pious for me, but I would have given him due consideration and possibly my vote if the Democrats had let him run in 2016 or 2020.
>>544782188Sure, why not. At least he’s not a shitskin
UBI would get sucked up by child support and alimony for those that need it most. Or frivolous purchases. That’s before you give it to everyone above the median income that doesn’t really need it.
>>544782339Musk would probably support Yang in a 2028 presidential run.A lot of disillusioned Trump supporters are looking for the good guy, and Yang is the most reasonable and hard working man you could have in the oval office right now; he really has something for everyone across the political compass, and primarily we could see proper collaboration with mainland China to liberate those people from their fascist government, which would be the nail in the coffin for a lot of red star dictatorships.You will see more economic issues otherwise and stagnation of global relations of the US, which would make that collaboration more distant and leave us behind as the free world falls to increasingly desperate measures.IMO
>>544782679YANG GANG YANG GANGYANG GANGYOUR MOM ON MY FACE IS MY GAMEPLAN
