Andrew Yang 2020 campaign megathread

[Mr. Morden]

Original Thread Title: Andrew Yang is running for the D nomination on an anti-robot apocalypse platform.

Modified by moderator when trying to consolidate a number of old threads.


He's been running for the 2020 Dem. nomination since November, and I doubt he'll get any more traction than Fred Karger 2012, but I just wanted to create a thread with "anti-robot apocalypse platform" in the title:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/10/technology/his-2020-campaign-message-the-robots-are-coming.html

[Mr. Morden]

His ad / intro video here is titled "Humanity First":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhArPPmHjCs

He really seems to be running a scare campaign about robots taking our jobs.  But I ask you, if a robot was assembled in Mexico and brought to the United States as a child, is that really its fault, or the fault of its creators?  Shouldn't we consider an amnesty for robots brought to this country at a young age?

[Mr. Morden]

Andrew Yang is twirling towards freedom:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CCh9sk-9l4

[Mr. Morden]

Proportional electors seems insane.

Like...Nevada will go 3-3 every election ever, effectively cancelling its vote out. Wyoming would be a tight race between 2-1 R-D or 3-0 R-D, so it might get more attention than Wyoming does.

The only states with enough EVs that the number of EVs a candidate gets would shift by more than 1 either way are the states with over 10 EVs, and maybe even the ones with over 15 EVs.

It'd also still end up with wildly disproportional outcomes, too. Third Party candidates got 6% of the vote in 2016. Under this proportional EV system, they'd get 4 EVs total. (2 for Johnson, 1 each for McMullin and Stein)

Either give states 10 electors per House district, or allow electoral vote counts to go out 1 or 2 decimals, and then it's not an issue anymore.

Any move towards a proportional system like that increases the number of electors going to 3rd party candidates, which means a high probability of no one winning a majority of electors.  So then the presidency is decided by the House, or perhaps worse, by faithless electors cutting deals with each other.