A lot of people worked very hard to build that bridge from the flash of the POTUS run to a more typical "movement" structure, but even in those efforts the disconnect between the motives and trust of the volunteers vs Andrew's crew was omnipresent. Humanity Forward couldn't even convince the volunteer orgs to adopt their name or charter without some extreme pushback due to their treatment of volunteers during the campaign. They further picked that network clean during the mayoral run, either disillusioning members with his poor, corporately-controlled campaign, or trying to leverage supporters that had nothing to do with NYC.

The path from A to B has already happened IMO. Andrew gave a certain group of people the ability to rise above their cynicism and feel politically useful for once. That feeling frees people and makes them uppity in the face of entrenched power, which is great. The next step of this whole game is YG ownership of this "party" instead of acting like it's Andrew's property, leading to a distribution of power throughout the network. Then you attack localities, like city councils and mayoral races, and build a new narrative closer to a "people's party" than "Andrew Yang's Party"

The party has to feel like the internet did: Anyone with the grit and intelligence can break through, meritocracy be damned.

Sorry to write a book about it lol.

UBI isn't a pipe-dream for NEETs, which is what it was in 2016.

Second on doing a second take of the drama 1-3 years later. I bet you'd have some insights into politics, movements, and the nature of collective power that others don't.

> The party has to feel like the internet did: Anyone with the grit and intelligence can break through, meritocracy be damned.

just fyi - meritocracy is the ability for people with grit and intelligence to push through, I think you mean autocracy?

It would be interesting to hear your take on the whole drama a year or three from now. I imagine it's all a bit fresh for retrospect.