
Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets - chadmhorner
https://readypipe.com/blog/yang-buttigieg/
======
js2
I really like Buttigieg. He honestly seems to be doing this because he wants
to serve America. I’m working my way through his book and I’m very impressed
by his eloquence and clarity of thought. Also, I think as a mayor he embodies
the entrepreneurial spirit. He was classmates with Mark Zuckerberg.

I submitted this interview the other day:

[http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-
demo...](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/a-long-talk-with-
democratic-2020-candidate-pete-buttigieg.html)

I think it’s also worth listening to an interview he did with David Axelrod a
couple years ago, and his recent interview on Pod Save America. Here also are
a couple videos I’m recommending because they cover a variety of topics in the
Q&A portion that I haven’t heard him speak about elsewhere:

\- [https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-
But...](https://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Indiana-Mayor-Pete-Buttigieg-
Featured-Speaker-Politics-and-Eggs-NH-506868621.html)

\-
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nldx3r7h3Cg)

I know this comment is obviously political but I think he deserves to be heard
from.

~~~
randomacct3847
How was he classmates with Zuckerberg? He’s 4ish years older than Zuck.

~~~
gamblor956
In college, there are plenty of classes open to students of all ages...

~~~
jvagner
agree with your point, but "classmate" is often a reference to "a member of
the class of [graduating year]", so it's ambiguous. even to my point, people
can enter college almost anytime, not just right after high school.

~~~
js2
It could mean same graduating class, or that they shared a class together. I
probably should have written "overlapped at Harvard" as apparently they
entered a year or two apart.

------
salimmadjd
I've been following how Buttigieg's rise has been manufactured by 1-2
insiders. Mainly David Axelrod.

He did a SXSW town hall. I watched Tulsi Gabbard (disclosure, I volunteer for
her a bit) first and then tried to watch Mayor Pete, as he is called.

He basically bombed the first 20 min. The period that any viewers would try to
give the candidate any chance to better understand them.

He was just a bit too nervous, he was talking fast. This was a big contrast to
methodical way Tulsi was speaking just prior to him her ability to connect was
in a different level.

So you thought that would be the end of it all....

Nope! I observed a beautiful spin of manufacturing narratives.

Axelrod tweeted about how great Mayor Pete's performance was [1]

Soon after there was a ton of articles talking about much lauded performance
of Buttigieg. I even called out the journalist behind one of these articles on
twitter and it was clear she had not watched the town hall nor had done her
research [2] I just went to find that discussion on twitter and she seem to
have deleted as I do not see it under my tweet and replies.

Essentially I asked her about the "much lauded performance" in her article. I
asked her where she got that from. She replied with a link to a CNN article
which was all based on Axelrod's tweet. This journalist based her article on
that CNN article. So I pointed out, this "much lauded performance" is based on
just one tweet. The journalist then replied to me, I should just google "town
hall and Buttigieg". Meaning she had no done any research herself. Point is,
Pete Buttigieg who started his promotion from a podcast on Axelrod. I think
there is a strong chance Mayor Pete is backed by Axelrod and/or at some point
he'll hire Axelrod. Mayor Pete's rise bubbling up based on the inside
influence of one person.

That being said, he is intelligent and I'm sure there is probably great
excitement supporting the first gay (at least openly) candidate. However, it
became clear to me, how a few insiders can create hype around one candidate
and manufacture "lauded performance".

[1] -
[https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144](https://twitter.com/davidaxelrod/status/1104922963386630144)

[2] - the tweet thread I was going point to is removed now

~~~
geofft
Hm, if a journalist is going to describe something as a "much lauded
performance," I'd expect her sources to be people lauding the performance,
_not_ her own judgment of the performance itself. It is weird if she hasn't
seen it herself (so she can judge whether the lauds are sensible enough to pay
attention to, to avoid manufactured lauding as you suggest) but it isn't that
weird if her primary evidence for the claim that a thing is popular is media
sources.

~~~
vannevar
If it was based on one article, which in turn was based on one tweet, then no,
I wouldn't expect her to report that it was a "much lauded performance." And
ten articles also based on the same self-serving tweet wouldn't make it any
better. At some point, she would need to talk to people that were actually
there, whether she was or not.

------
nickparker
I don't know if this applies to BetChecker, but PredictIt is heavily
handicapped by an $850 max bet.

Without the freedom for real amounts of money to come in and exploit mispriced
bets, it's practically a straw poll of PredictIt users. The PredictIt user
base has some obvious demographic biases that warp the odds.

~~~
objektif
There is a counter argument for this as people with a lot of money will drives
the results one way which can actually impact elections. Nkt that I buy this
argument but something to keep in mind.

~~~
nickparker
I definitely don't believe that today and I doubt it will ever come to pass.
There are more cash-efficient ways to influence elections than warping betting
odds, and I think that will hold true no matter how large the betting market
gets because the manipulation gets more expensive as the market gets more
attention.

The weaker form of your argument "Without the caps it's biased toward people
who can make big bets" is the entire point of a betting market.

Edit: The one edge case where it might happen is precisely this article.
Buying your way to say 5% after some organic positive press might be an
effective way to buy buzz at relatively low cost. It's a small one time boost
for a campaign though.

~~~
gumby
I also doubt that it's happening deliberately, but FWIW this is precisely the
time in a campaign when a "small one time boost" might be worth it, to pull
you up above the noise floor.

But I get the feeling nobody really understands campaigns well enough
(especially these long, grueling ones) to justify the time spent on these
small-calibre issues.

------
Octoth0rpe
Re:Yang,

I'm vaguely sympathetic to the idea of "elect a business person so they can
run government like a business", but any openness to the idea goes out the
window when the candidate's business is venture capital.

~~~
yumraj
Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are.

Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually
get things done.

~~~
dev_dull
A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?

~~~
jkestner
The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-
file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.

~~~
briandear
Who are “shareholders?” Pretty much anyone with a retirement plan or a
pension.

The majority of Americans own stock.

~~~
jkestner
Not quite. 54% of the 135M American workers have a retirement plan.[1] That's
73M out of the ~250M American adults. Maybe you can call that the middle
class. But point taken. To be less pithy, these individual shareholders have
little power to sway governance, particularly if their stock is held in a
managed fund. The rich, connected shareholders steer things, and it's not
always in the interests of the company in the long term.

1\. [http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-
many...](http://www.pensionrights.org/publications/statistic/how-many-
american-workers-participate-workplace-retirement-plans)

------
dopylitty
It would be wise to not trust any phenomenon which blows up online, given the
ease of generating such a phenomenon artificially.

~~~
papermill
If the interest is artificially generated or fake, it will fade quickly for
sure.

But I wouldn't say we shouldn't trust online phenomenon. Online phenomenon is
why Obama and Trump got elected. Trump has effectively bypassed the
traditional media's stranglehold on the american mind via his use of twitter
and social media. And online phenomenon is why we have occasio-cortez.

As the internet gains more mind share, we have to start taking the online
space more seriously.

~~~
dopylitty
Why would artificial interest necessarily fade as long as whoever is
generating it keeps generating it?

There’s no reason to believe any internet content amplifying the message of
any candidate (or president) is genuine. In fact given the findings of the
past several years it’s better to assume online content is in fact generated
rather than genuine.

~~~
papermill
If there is no substance behind the enthusiasm, then it can't last because it
has no legs to stand on. I agree that there are tons of fake nonsense on all
media, not just social media. But that doesn't mean everything on media is
fake.

Of course online content is generated. My point is whether that generated
online content gains actual traction. Whether that generated online content
has legs and real enthusiasm behind it.

An easy way to tell is if politicians can draw crowds to their speeches. You
can measure online interactions between actual people and their enthusiasm.
For example, if a politician has tons of online interest and he can draw big
crowds, then we can assume that his online interest is real rather than fake.
If a politician has tons of online interest but can't draw any people to his
speeches, it's like his "enthusiasm" is bought for and has no traction.

------
WhompingWindows
Does anyone here have thoughts about the quality of candidates as it relates
to their ages (i.e. comparing late 70's Bernie/Biden and these younger
candidates)? While I like the policies of Bernie, for instance, I ideally
would prefer someone who doesn't have a high % likelihood of serious medical
issues in the next 4 years of their life.

Is there an age that is too old to be a CEO/President/Senator/leading figure?
Are they necessarily out of touch, lacking in resiliency, not forward-looking,
or any of the factors we look for in our leaders?

~~~
bryanlarsen
VP choice makes a bigger difference for an older candidate, which might be why
rumors are that Biden will be choosing his running mate very early in the
process.

~~~
ams6110
Almost nobody really makes their voting decision based on who the VP is. I'd
even have to look up the name of Clinton's running mate from the last
election.

~~~
beering
McCain/Palin was notable. I believe Biden boosted the Obama ticket by quite a
bit as well.

------
jedberg
Yang would like to be President, but his primary goal is to force a
conversation amongst all the candidates on UBI and automation, which are
important things that the next President should be talking about.

~~~
defen
That's why I'm a little more optimistic about Yang 2024 than Yang 2020. I'm
just worried that he's going to end up as the Ron Paul of the Democratic Party
- highly appealing to a relatively small group of geeks, but considered a
weird outsider candidate by the party mainstream.

His fundamental point is one that our society needs to contend with - "high
tech" is the oil of the 21st century. Do we want that wealth to be
concentrated into a few world-historical fortunes? Or do we want to use it to
improve the lives of everyone?

------
losvedir
As an Andrew Yang fan myself, I was shocked to see that PredictIt has him as
the third most expensive (read likely) candidate after Bernie and Biden, at
least when I checked. This is in stark contrast to his 0-1% polling rate in
the most recent polls.

So, are they just very leading indicators? It got me thinking that it's a
relatively cheap campaign strategy since people like to refer to those as some
sort of "market based odds" thing. Is it legal and/or ethical for campaigns to
buy themselves on the betting markets to drive up the appearance of demand?

We'll see come the Apr 1 FEC reporting deadline if it translates to campaign
donations, which are on of the real signals of the seriousness of campaigns.

~~~
SatvikBeri
The major flaw in PredictIt is the low maximum cap and lack of interest paid.
That makes it unprofitable to bet on small corrections even if you're right
(e.g. 5% to 10%, or 5% to 1%). So PredictIt shouldn't be considered precise at
small percentages.

------
gringoDan
I'm bullish on Yang's and Buttigieg's chances in general. I also think that
their chances of winning the nomination (and election) are much lower than the
odds indicated in betting markets.

There is a huge betting market selection bias in that the only people using
these betting platforms are young and tech-savvy (i.e. the type of people who
are in these candidates' base). Additionally, you can place nominally small
bets, meaning there is no real skin in the game. Increase the minimum bet size
to $10,000 or so and I think the odds will become much more realistic.

~~~
suby
You'd then be biasing it towards the opinions of people who can afford a
10,000 dollar bet. I'm not sure that that's any better.

~~~
gringoDan
Fair point. I hoped that some arbitrarily large number would 1) cause people
to actually consider their biases and bet accordingly and 2) allow for smart
money to exploit any market mispricings. But I suppose a lot of rich dumb
money could just flow in.

------
bb2018
This only shows why running we now have 20 candidates running for president.
They get a huge platform to expand their reach (good for both the issues they
care about and their personal brand) with almost no downside (even if not
pilfering their campaign funds they will raise enough money to travel the
country effectively promoting for future book sales or a tv show).

~~~
nutjob2
A low barrier to entry is arguably a good thing.

~~~
bb2018
I agree in large part but I do think it is interesting. Running a campaign
reminds me of The Producers - it is just as good to have a failure of a
campaign as a winning one.

------
skybrian
Is Andrew Yang a writer? I'd be interested in reading some of what he's
written that's longer than a tweet.

I did find the weekly campaign updates, which are okay as far as they go.

~~~
juvoni
Well he did publish a book: The War on Normal People: The Truth About
America's Disappearing Jobs and Why Universal Basic Income Is Our Future

[https://www.amazon.com/War-Normal-People-Disappearing-
Univer...](https://www.amazon.com/War-Normal-People-Disappearing-
Universal/dp/0316414247)

------
zarkov99
The majority of Americans are not insane and both mainstream Democrats and the
incumbent are mostly appealing to the insane. A moderate, any moderate, left
or right, that speaks logically, does not indulge in identity bullshit and
does not treat the other side as if they were stupid or evil or both, will
have a great shot at capturing the exhausted middle.

~~~
dmode
While this is ideal, time and again it has been proved that an energized base
and a demoralized opposition is the best chance at winning election. A passive
middle will not win you anything.

------
nutjob2
This is entirely meaningless at this point in the race. There may be some
enthusiasts paying attention right now, and they're prone to focusing on
particular candidates, but a more likely bet is that most primary voters are
waiting to see how candidates perform with a view to backing the best
candidate who has the best chance of winning.

~~~
picodguyo
Not entirely meaningless. News outlets will need to select who gets coverage
and invitations to debates. Absent many other objective rationales, they'll
lean on poll numbers to make those decisions.

~~~
fjp
They'll lean on whatever kind of coverage gets them the most money __ __ __

------
ham_sandwich
Looking at that odds chart got me in a betting mood. I think those Yang odds
in the article could be steep given the exuberance of some in his online
following, however there could be interesting arb plays with an outsider like
Yang like going long presidency+short nomination paired with going short
presidency+long nomination with someone more establishment like Biden.

If prediction markets had more depth, I’m sure we would see politics hedge
funds emerge.

~~~
azernik
PredictIt, at least, has fairly steep transaction fees to prevent arbitrage
except in cases of very high mismatches.

------
scott_s
_Who_ is participating in the betting markets? Are these people perhaps more
likely to personally like certain candidates more than others? When the market
is relatively small, this question matters. I'm skeptical of the betting
markets for this reason, as I think the participants skew heavily to a
particular demographic.

~~~
azernik
If you need any indication of the irrationality of the betting markets, look
for the Q conspiracy theorists betting on indictments on people like James
Comey and Hillary Clinton.

------
danso
I don't have strong opinions or awareness of Yang's platform, nor have I gone
out of my way to learn much about him, other than seeing the random
sensational stories that pop up on my feed (e.g. his thoughts about
circumcisions, wrt health policy).

But knowing little of his background (e.g. career, wealth, any other attempts
at politics), I think it's cool as hell he acted on what must have been a wild
"what if" idea to join the race. I'd like to think that the more normal, non-
political-machine-produced humans who go through this process, the more
accessible and interesting that process will be to the average person.

It seems Yang afigured out how to "hack" the Democratic primary process to get
on the national debate stage. I call it a "hack" because someone like me
thinks the possibility of a no-namer like Yang on stage with Sanders and
Warren is too absurd a reality to imagine. But Yang did his research and found
he could target the minimum requirement of having 65,000 donors [0] -- a
number that seems laughably low, because of how easy it is today for anyone
with a phone/computer to make small donations, coupled with Internet platforms
like Reddit that let Yang find voters/donors who aren't willing to provide the
traditional value (e.g. large donations), but can make all the difference when
the metric is number of people, not cash on hand.

Yang likely has no chance in the primary, so I won't have to wonder if my vote
for/against him would have been even slightly biased by subconscious feelings
about solidarity with other Asian-Americans. However, I like that I can just
marvel at the sight of an Asian-American strolling on this rarefied political
stage, like it's a normal thing. And yet, it isn't -- It's something I don't
think I ever thought I'd see in my life. Not because I think there's a hard
barrier of racial/social injustice. It's just something I had apparently had
no reason to imagine or contemplate. Just like I don't ever normally
contemplate the idea of 2 cats trying to steer a Tesla. There's nothing that
logically blocks that concept in real life. But seeing it in real still feels
like a small, happy surprise.

0: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-
for...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/candidates-reach-for-the-
magic-ticket-to-democratic-
debates-65000-donors/2019/03/19/9a1f80e0-4a4b-11e9-9663-00ac73f49662_story.html)

~~~
dictum
Not sure that's a goal of his, but in many countries a candidate will enter
the primaries (or the general election, in a minor party) campaigning on a
single issue, and then join the government later as a secretary (or minister)
to either implement some version of the policy or prepare for its
implementation in the future.

------
scarmig
There is no way that Yang is more likely to win the nomination than Warren.
And I say that as a Yang fan. So there's a lot of money on the table, but I'm
not willing to tie up a couple grand for a year for a website I know pretty
much nothing about.

~~~
monocasa
Warren isn't going to win. The party took notice of the DNA test thing, and is
specifically trying to field someone who won't be baited into the mud with
Trump.

------
Mikeb85
White and male means Buttigieg is going to have a major problem in the
primaries. Asian and male is almost as bad.

Unless the Democrats suddenly decide to stop playing identity politics they're
going to choose someone based on gender/race (female/not white).

~~~
jedberg
He's gay though so he checks the box.

~~~
Mikeb85
Does he? Dunno, there seems to be enough gay white males in positions of
authority in the US that I didn't think that would count towards his diversity
status.

------
internet_user
Andrew Yang is an Accelerationist.

His Universal Basic Income proposal is the most interesting thing in politics
in a long time. It is actually feasible and will get us on the track to post-
capitalism.

You are an American? You are a citizen? You get a thousand bucks a month.
Funded by 10% VAT.

The freedom dividend:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTkhrosH8xw)

------
raz32dust
I had been following Yang since a while and have been super pumped up about
his ideas and focus on real underlying issues. But with Pete joining the race,
I am somewhat torn between these two. Both of them are really smart people.
Yang has great ideas and vision, but Pete has real experience running a city
and seems to be very likable in general. On the other hand, I am sure
conservative media will paint Yang as a socialist which would take away a lot
of votes, and Pete being openly gay is also going to take away a lot of
conservative voters.

------
dmode
I am sincerely hoping for Beto to blow up. We need someone like Beto because
1. He is young 2. He was a hacker [we need people in politics that understand
the most important driver of commerce now] 3. He was in a punk band 4. He is
from Texas [he will be forced to have a balanced approach] 5. He campaigns
hard 6. He can inspire people positively [as opposed to the constant whining
that politics have become]

~~~
casper345
2 point is overstated in media.

" there is “no indication” O’Rourke actually ever broke into computers or even
possessed the skills to do so. Instead, O’Rourke’s membership is linked to his
participation in online discussion forums ran by the group. Beto himself
operated one such forum known as “TacoLand” to discuss mostly punk rock."

[https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-
hacker...](https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/beto-orourke-infamous-hacker/)

------
anigbrowl
Andrew Yang seems like a nice guy with a cool UBI proposal, but his blowing up
on Twitter has a lot to do with 8chan forcing 'YangGang' memes which began
about 6 weeks ago. It would be unwise to view this like a true market signal.

~~~
internet_user
YangGang is his own PR. It's nothing to do with 8chan. UBI, of course, appeals
to alt-right.

Who wouldn't want to get $1000 a month? Would you? of course you do...

------
xigekznutdcbfba
There is a reason that Bernie Sanders is the most popular politician in
America, and that is because his policy presents meaningful gains to the
working class that perform all of society's labour, and without which everyone
would immediately die. Working class people are, on the whole, shifting from
supporting capitalism to supporting socialism.

~~~
internet_user
how are they meaningful? Job "guarantee" is meaningful? Free college is
meaningful?

