Andrew Yang

Andrew Yang, Who Wanted Libertarians in His Coalition and Opposed Cancel Culture, Exits the Democratic Race

The New Hampshire polls have closed, and the businessman and math advocate is no longer a candidate for president.


Businessman Andrew Yang, a longshot candidate for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, has dropped out of the race in advance of what are expected to be disappointing results in the New Hampshire primary.

"I am a numbers guy," said Yang, according to The Washington Post. "I'm not going to be at a threshold where I get delegates, which makes sticking around not necessarily helpful or productive in terms of furthering the goals of this campaign."

Yang's candidacy was predominantly based on a specific proposal, akin to a universal basic income: Yang wanted to give every adult American $1,000 each month. He described his policy approach as "humanity first," and he wanted to use the powers of the federal government to ease the burdens on Americans whose short-term job prospects have suffered due to outsourcing and automation.

That was never a particularly libertarian agenda, but Yang's practical approach—find ways to help people who may have been hurt by capitalism, rather than destroy capitalism itself—nevertheless made him popular with a diverse range of people, including some libertarians. Former Libertarian Party vice presidential candidate Bill Weld recently cited Yang as his dream running mate. Yang and Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) have been the only Democratic candidates thus far this year to make any sort of explicit pitch to libertarians. (Indeed, they are the only two candidates on the New Hamphire ballot to plausibly demonstrate that they know what a libertarian is.)

Yang also generated headlines for denouncing cancel culture. He criticized Saturday Night Live's firing of comedian Shane Gillis, and he earned the endorsement of Dave Chapelle.

"I believe that our country has become excessively punitive and vindictive about remarks that people find offensive or racist and that we need to try and move beyond that, if we can," Yang said. "Particularly in a case where the person is—in this case—a comedian whose words should be taken in a slightly different light."

Yang's friendly, upbeat approach made him extremely hard to dislike. If elections truly came down to Which candidate would you like to get a beer with?, he would undoubtedly have fared better.

NEXT: New Data Suggest Florida Cops Have Broad Power to Take Away People's Second Amendment Rights

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That’s too bad. Fortunately Elizabeth Warren is still there so nobody can claim the remaining Democrats are all white.


    1. OBL hashtags getting a little bit dystopian…

      1. Come on, Robby. It’s a parody account.

        1. Looks like he is aware of OBL. Seems to me he somewhat in on the joke, so I’ll give credit

          1. Yes, well, it’s possible that I was playing on that, making my comment even more cleverer. (I wasn’t)

        2. This mag has a bunch of parody contributors

      2. #Everything is so terrible and unfair. (TM)

      3. Mr. Soave…I am sorry that Yang exited the race. We need more people like him: non-politicians with different ideas.

        Now I am not wild about UBI. But isn’t a negative income tax (a libertarian proposal from Friedman, Murray) the same thing, from a purely functional point of view? I believe that it is. Friedman/Murray and Yang are arguing for the same thing: a blanket payment in lieu of broad social support services paid for by taxpayers. They use different mechanisms to get that result.

        The chief difference I see is that the negative income tax actually targets the people who need the most (lower income), versus UBI which is a flat payment to everyone.

        But getting back to my original point. Yang’s departure is bad because he represents the ‘Un-politican’ voice at the Team D podium.

        As an aside, I learned more from Yang on his JRE podcast. He did an excellent extended interview there.

        1. The negative income tax is a welfare replacement. Yang never proposed removing existing programs.

          1. To be fair, Yang advocated a huge reduction in those programs to fund his UBI proposal by making the program requirements significantly more stringent. That is what his pitch was….but his pitch completely ignored political reality: Team D will never, ever vote to reduce the scope and power of the federal government. Can you seriously imagine a Team D Speaker getting that through the House?

            My understanding of what Friedman/Murray advocated vis a vis negative income tax was outright elimination of the programs that Yang proposed to reduce. A straight trade-off targeted toward the lowest income citizens.

            Yang actually had a sense of humor. He spoke his mind, which I found refreshing. I don’t agree with much of his agenda, but I think we need more people like Yang throwing their hat into the ring.

    2. How you stay in character has to be studied by schools.

      You’re the Daniel Day Lewis of the Internet.

      1. I hope, that when he finally decides the account has had its day, that he dumps a little story on how he started, his high points, low points, and honorable mentions.

    3. Facebook is paying $530 Per day. Be a part of Facebook and start getting Extra Dollars every week from your home. I just got paid $8590 in my previous month. Start Getting More money and no tnsion of your Debts and other Expenses. Visit This Link and see What Facebook Owner Said…..………clickclick>

  2. Welp, the only good candidate who was good without also having a nice rack is out.

    1. Even Yang wasn’t particularly good, so there’s no great loss here. Tulsi is closer to Bernie than she is to the center. The Democratic field is not nice from a libertarian perspective. The best you can say is, “Hey, underneath all this trash that is destructive to freedom, there’s one or two issues where a libertarian might be okay with some of these jokers.”

      1. Even Yang wasn’t particularly good

        Yang was actually terrible, especially with the universal basic income stupidity. Gabbard is pretty bad too.
        It’s just compared to the Bolshevik, the fake-Indian Meneshivik, the gay corporate-buzzword generator, the authoritarian schoolmarm and the fascist billionaire, they looked human.

    2. Tulsi and Yang at least can talk to people who aren’t radical leftists. It’s something the other D candidates have shown no capacity for. There is a very small range of issues where either vaguely intersects with libertarians.
      Also, can we just go ahead and drop the assertion that Weld is libertarian? He essentially endorsed Clinton and continues to support candidates in favor of broad big government policies.

      1. Still, you expect better for someone who has run a business, instead of career politicians. UBI may be dated to show up when the robots take over, but it’s not the hill to die on in 2020.

  3. RIP Yang
    Dead man walking, Biden

    1. Also, RIP Steyer
      At least he got to say hi to Bernie

    2. They are all just awful. Thankfully it looks like Trump will win. Let’s hope that continues.

      1. Do not get overconfident.

        1. my thoughts too. Some independents are planning to push Sanders in the SC primary to fuck with the Democrat party, I heard rumors they did it at the NH primary too. All I can think of is how the left helped create Trump in the first place… At this point, if they want to prop up anyone, I’d suggest Biden, he can’t win, and he’ll steal the thunder from other moderates.

          1. I would love to see the four of them going into the convention with roughly equal shares = The Bern, Mayor Butthead, Fauxahontas and Ms. Congeniality. What a fascinating study of human behavior that would be.

    3. Huh. You think Buttigieg? Warren? No way the DNC and Obama let Sanders get the nomination.

    4. You no good dog pony hat face…or something like that

  4. Want a $1000 dollars..I’ll give you a $1K…sorry but that is about all I will remember of Mr. Yang. That and he chickened out of a SOHO forum debate on automation.

    But hell Joe Rogan liked him so I’ll give him that.

    And I’ll take my $1,000 Yang!

  5. I never heard a single word on policy from Yang that indicated he was interested in having libertarians in his coalition. Did I miss something?

    1. No…its the left libertarians at Reason…they just can’t help themselves..

      1. What is “left libertarianism”? Is that someone who focuses on civil rights and isn’t interested in economic issues? If so, what civil rights issue was Yang running on? Was he for ending the Drug War and legalizing all drugs? Was he for legalizing prostitution? Was he for eliminating all laws against gambling?

        1. Orange Men = Bad

        2. He was the Joker in Michael Keaton’s Batman, throwing money in the air and giggling wildly.

        3. well, he seems to be better than most with drug policy, even if for the wrong reasons. All I know is that he never had a chance, racist Amerikkka isn’t ready for an Asian president.

        4. ‘Left-libertarians’ are what we call the Gramscian leftists who are busily destroying the libertarian party.

          They also use ‘liberaltarian’.

  6. Wow. Sanders is way up with 38% of districts reporting. Buttigieg in second, and within striking distance since it’s only 38%. Biden is waaay down, still single digits. Any normal election and Creepy Joe is toast. I bet he stays in. The Democrats are in serious trouble.

    1. Yeah-Creepy Joe is getting pummeled so far, just like McCain did in 2008, at one point suspending his campaign, until he got the nomination. My guess is that Biden voters are holding out for Bloomberg and don’t want to waste their time right now voting for the senile fool.

  7. So much for Yang’s Wang.

    God I hope this election comes down to Trump vs. Bernie. I would pay for that.

    1. I don’t think I would even need to drink to watch that debate. Old man yells at Orange cloud. What’s not to love?

      1. Nobody needs to drink- it just adds a certain, Je ne sais quoi.

      2. Holy crap, I choked on my water reading that! Cheers for a great laugh!

      3. ‘Grumpy Old Men’.

        Although Trump would wipe the floor with him. Bernie has the disadvantage of being a commie so a lot of ideas he can’t really defend.

    2. Me too…

      Poll Date Sanders (D) Trump (R) Spread
      RCP Average 1/15 – 2/9 49.3 45.0 Sanders +4.3

      1. Oh, well, I’m sure the deadbeat scumbag can come up with some formula which shows that the hag won in ’16, right scumbag?
        Tell ya what; don’t bother fucking off and dying. Fuck off and live in your fave system. It’s called Venezuela.

      2. Who knows what the polls will say if Bernie Sanders ever gets scrutiny?

        1. Yeah, but you gotta admit that it says something about Dear Leader’s popularity that he’s losing to an apologist for the Soviet Union. That’s pretty bad, don’t ya think?

          1. That sword cuts both ways.

          2. Sure he is. We believe you.

          3. “Yeah, but you gotta admit that it says something about Dear Leader’s popularity that he’s losing to an apologist for the Soviet Union.”

            Losing is what you do.

        2. People would apparently rather die in a frozen gulag then vote for some NY lib bullshitter. I’m not there, Brian. I’m enjoying Dear Leader’s tax cuts for rich guys like me.

          1. Communism: a few points more popular than Donald Trump.

            I’m good with that.

            1. We’ve gone from <1% to between 40 and 50% and all it took was 3 years of Trump. 4 more years and we’ll all be riding tractors on Nancy Pelosi’s collective vineyard. I mean, anything is better than what we have now.

              1. We could be cleaning Bernie’s second vacation home.

          2. So rich you can’t lay your. Mortgage.

            Sure, we believe you.

      3. Bernie is going to get trounced in the debates. He’s a grumpy old man and Trump isn’t going to push his buttons. He’s going to jump up and down on them like a kid in a puddle.

        1. Bernie’s exactly the kind of guy that Trump is best with. Jeb Bush treatment x 10

          1. Bernie could have a heart attack mid-debate.

            1. It’s not even my birthday.

      4. Based on history Bush the younger was behind at this point in his re-election. Clinton was also, as was Reagan. Bush the senior, which was really considered by many as a 3rd Reagan term (despite the obvious ideological differences between the two) was losing to Dukakis in the polling until August. How many states did President Dukakis win? Or Mondale? Or Dole? Or Kerry? What? None of them were President? My bad. So you are saying polling sucks at this point in the race, as the adversary party always gets far more coverage then the incumbent? Especially in uncontested or nearly uncontested primaries? And that the state of the economy is by far a better predictor? Say it isn’t so.

        1. Polling and even betting odds are mostly irrelevant at this point, however, we should note that not all polls are made equal. The most accurate ones considering the last couple Presidential Elections are:
          – HarrisX
          – Rasmussen Report
          – IBD/TIPP
          – Moody’s

          And guess what? Both Harris, Rasmussen and Gallup says Trump’s approval rating is 49% which is his personal record, and is more than what Obama had during this time of his term. So it’s safe to say that while all the other polls are underestimating Trump and Republican-leaning voters in general, these polls are the least inaccurate. Better yet, some of them even shows that Trump’s approval-disapproval rating is tied, and this will most certainly improve till November.

          As for Moody’s and IBD/TIPP: they aren’t simple polls, they’re economical models and projections, and the former was correct in their Presidential picks since 1980 save for 2016, but even then they were in their margin of error, and warned that it will be a “tight match”. And the latter one got Trump’s win actually right.

  8. Starting to look like maybe a Bloomberg/Klobuchar ticket?

    1. Is Bloomberg just Pelosi in drag?

      1. No. Pelosi is way taller.

        1. that’s only with the heels on

    2. It looks that way, but it will be a Biden ticket because I bet he gave the DNC the most money. DNC primaries are theater. That means the Bernie supporters will pout and either not vote or vote for Trump out of spite.

      It’s rather comical.

  9. If you don’t want the government to spend a trillion dollars on the military or strap a women who wants to have an abortion to a Bible gurney where can libertarians turn. Hey, I live in Cali— where we kicked the GOP out of the government— and I can pick up my eggs and milk and the Safeway and then grab my Grape Ape at the dispensary. Can all you GOP suckups do That in Jesus-Land?

    1. Grow up, pay your bills, fuck off and die, dead-beat scumbag.

    2. “Hey, I live in Cali— where we kicked the GOP out of the government”

      Sweet! I want the entire country to someday look like California. After all, California has plenty of millionaires and billionaires, but also the highest poverty rate in the country. And since I’m a Koch / Reason left-libertarian rather than a progressive, I think extreme economic inequality is actually a good thing.


      1. I mean sure for the cost of my modest abode here in Cali I could afford a manor with slaves in Texarkana, but do I really want to live with All the Jeebus worshippers and monster truck rallies and oxy freaks. I’m ok with where i’m At.

        1. Yeah. While Texarkana no longer has slaves, the People’s Republic of California sure has its peasants, dontit?

        2. Hey if Donald Trump loses, perhaps you can start deducting your mortgage interest from your taxes again.

          1. If there’s anything that should unite libertarians it’s taxes directed at segments of the population for political purposes.

            1. Yeah, I get pissed off at the Feds directing California’s taxes at me to subsidize their welfare paradise, too.

        3. Well, good then. You’ve got it all figured out. Don’t change a thing.


        4. Too bad the bank foreclosed on your ass. Now you have nothing.

    3. “Boohoohoo, don’t want us killing babies. Xtians are allowed to exist”

      I’m so sorry for you LTAL.

    4. Cali, the land of the homeless and the pinnacle of inequality.

  10. From an earlier thread:
    “Andrew Yang: The Capitalist Candidate Championing a Universal Basic Income”
    Proof that being a ‘capitalist’ (undefined) does not require a working knowledge of econ.

    1. BTW, the lapel pin suggests that an acquaintance with “math” also says nothing about econ-knowedge. Handing out $1000/mo to every US household says you can do multiplication; having no idea WIH that would to do inflation says you have no business suggesting it.
      Also see dead-beat scumbag above, ‘showing’ Bernie to be out-polling Trump; math is easy compared to thinking.

      1. It’s pretending that we’ve reached the age of surplus goods, a la Star Trek, or of a laborless economy due to robots. For the record, I think it’s one day possible, but, today, scaricity still rules economics.

        1. Scarcity still rules in Star Trek land, it’s just different things are scarce (dilithium… Starships of which to be Captain… Guys in red shirts…)

        2. For the record, and you can read all of my posts to reflect this: There will never will be an age of surplus goods.
          Humanity will desire I-Phones where they once desired indoor plumbing and humanity well then demand ‘free’ space travel.
          And if you suggest otherwise, I’d love to see some evidence that it be true.

      2. To be frank I’d say the MATH acronym was pretty based for Yang and in general, he was at least not outright disgusting unlike all the other candidates…

        As for the 1000$ UBI per month per capita… yeah, it was pretty bullshit, and it clearly was nothing more than a marketing catchphrase I mean… how can anyone believe even for a second that it would exactly be $1000 and not $932 or $1004? He just gives that much because… it sounds better? Or easier to remember? Ofc there was no underlying calculation, nor there was any actual way to provide that much anyway…

        As for UBI: the name itself is a misnomer, since it’s not universal (would have several condition, mainly citizenship, something that the Democrats couldn’t even comprehend nowadays), it wouldn’t be basic, since it would be just a reversed tax-benefit, not a salary per se… and finally, it’s not an income. Income, by definition is a reward of your wage. This would be a stipend. So a more accurate name would be Conditional Supplementary Stipend… or smthg similar. And for the record, the NIT by Milton Friedman is something that we could live with and it would be far less inefficient than food stamps et al, and it is a much more pragmatic and workable solution than the “UBI” being offered by Yang. He also apparently never bothered to read up on the Permanent Alaska Fund, otherwise he’d be aware of its limitations and feasibility problems… but then again, it was all just a PR trick.

    2. Didn’t Milton Freeman propose something similar like negative income tax?

      1. As an alternative to welfare.

        1. That’s the key.

          It’s one or the other.

          They can’t co-exist.

          It’s like Bat-Man and Robin. Wait. I suck at this.

      2. Was that before or after he came up with income tax withholding?

        1. “Was that before or after he came up with income tax withholding?”

          Not sure. Was your comment before or after you proved yourself a lame piece of shit?

      3. “Didn’t Milton Freeman propose something similar like negative income tax?”

        Ha and ha.
        Yes, so long as you ignore all the conditions.
        Come here from Vox?

  11. So, next election, the Democrats are going to nominate a Socialist, the Republicans will nominate a Democrat, and the Libertarians will, of course, nominate a Republican (Mittens?)
    Ok, now, for extra credit, who is the Green Party going to nominate?

    1. A lunatic?

      1. Isn’t Greta too young and not a citizen?

        1. unfair!

  12. I’m voting blue no matter who. Republicans
    politicians are some fucked up people.

    1. ^Well, obviously a well educated elite. He did manage to navigate the register page, though.

      1. He had a government grant, three years, and a tutor.

        1. You know who else had a tutor?

          1. Your mom?

    2. Vote Blue No Matter Who.


    3. Winning hearts and minds…

      1. Lefties cannot convince other people to vote Blue based on the strength of their positions, so it’s all Team play, corruption, and threats.

        1. I’m good with the threats. At least they’re honest about who they really are.

        2. What’s the meme? “Ideas so good they have to be made mandatory!”?

    4. “I’m voting blue no matter who.”

      Of course you are! No one here assumed you had more than one brain cell.

  13. Well, darn, he was the most interesting of the Dems and I was looking forward to voting for him in the primary.

    And so, one of the last sparks of sanity leaves the democratic field. Good luck, Andrew Yang.

    1. I can’t parse the parody from the trolls from the Yang Gang anymore.

      Thanks for nothing Trump!

  14. “I believe that our country has become excessively punitive and vindictive about remarks that people find offensive or racist and that we need to try and move beyond that, if we can,”

    So he really wasn’t a democrat after all – – – – – – – – – – – –

    1. What’s the Canadian version of Dixiecrat?

      1. An unapologetic lumberjack?

        1. And that’s ok.

          1. Indeed. They sleep all night, and they work all day.

    1. So you are saying she is in this until Oklahoma?

    2. That brings up a really good point. Where is Warren hoping to pick up delegates?

      1. It’s like money and healthcare. Just demand them and they are there. You don’t need to worry about where they came from. That’s someone else’s problem.

        1. I suppose she should be cheered for her consistent philosophy.

  15. Just dropping in to observe that Reason appears to have no comment on the excessive sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, a 67 year old man with no criminal history who was the target of a political prosecution in connection with a CIA/FBI hoax. I guess opposition to unjust incarceration and excessive sentences stops when Orange Hitler is involved.

    1. He’s friends with Trump. So TDS takes precedence.

    2. Did not see that; got a link?

  16. I will note that I only scanned back as far as last Friday. If there was such an article that I overlooked, I will retract my statement and apologize.

    1. unreason has not done an article on it like when he was targeted and then arrested. That was to take down Orange Man, so Let The Articles Flow!

  17. I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do. Follow details on this web page……. Read more

  18. ★I get paid over $90 every hour telecommuting with 2 children at home. I never thought I’d have the option to do it however my closest companion gains over 10k a month doing this and she persuaded me to attempt. The potential with this is unending. Heres what I’ve been doing…….Read MoRe

  19. I am making $125 per hour working online on my laptop among my family. I continue doing work in my room talking to them. Its too easy to complete it no experience or skill required. You just need internet and PC/laptop. Hurry up and join the link…… Click it here  

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.