Andrew Yang Promotes Bipartisanship By Citing A Legendarily Terrible President
Andrew Yang didn’t do so well as a presidential candidate, and he isn’t so hot at being a presidential historian either.
The former Democratic presidential hopeful wrote a tweet Monday that he might have assumed would be the ticket to inspire a massively polarized nation to come together in unity.
Sadly for Yang, the only unity he inspired was unified mockery on social media at the example he chose to represent his dream of bipartisanship.
“Lincoln won the presidency on the brand new Republican ticket in 1860 with 39.8% in a four-way race,” he wrote. “He took a Democrat, Andrew Johnson as his running mate in 1864.”
Lincoln won the presidency on the brand new Republican ticket in 1860 with 39.8% in a four-way race. He took a Democrat, Andrew Johnson as his running mate in 1864.
— Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸 (@AndrewYang) April 11, 2022
Apparently, Yang didn’t know or care that Johnson was a terrible example for promoting a bipartisan government since he has long been cited by historians as a leading contender for worst president.
Despite being against secession, Johnson owned enslaved people and was against allowing Black Americans to vote, writing, “This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men.”
Oh, and he was the first president to be impeached.
Naturally, Twitter users felt obliged to fill in the blanks for Yang.
Then Lincoln was murdered and Andrew Johnson sabotaged Reconstruction—leading to a Confederacy that never truly died, the Jim Crow Era, the Southern Strategy, and ultimately culminated in Trumpism and a white supremacist insurrection at the US Capitol… So yeah… not great. https://t.co/pxMlplgO1E
— Ahmed Baba (@AhmedBaba_) April 12, 2022
I love how frequently you source your tweets by reading the first 3 sentences of random Wikipedia pages and your dedication to never reading a single sentence more. https://t.co/303hNm8DFe
— Kendall Brown (@kendallybrown) April 11, 2022
The way you don't mention *ANYthing else* about what was happening between 1860-1864...... https://t.co/V7zD3B82s8
— D. Russo (He/Him) (@DRusso97) April 11, 2022
Did John Wilkes Booth write this tweet?
— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) April 11, 2022
TFW you are live-tweeting reading a history book about how great ye olde times were before reading the next chapter https://t.co/ZB9EZjRm6B
— Don Moynihan (@donmoyn) April 11, 2022
If you think Andrew Johnson was a good choice, then maybe you think Joe Biden should've taken Don Jr. as his running mate in 2020. This is daft. https://t.co/bD0KogBhkp
— Grant Stern is boosted! (@grantstern) April 11, 2022
You gotta get better interns, my dude. https://t.co/8tDmg5zFc1
— G O L D I E. (@goldietaylor) April 11, 2022
As I’ve said before, Andrew Yang is like fudge, the first bite is great then you’re like what am I doing?
(Andrew Johnson is a fascinating character, also considered the worst US President for basically attempting to reinstate slavery.) https://t.co/50h5JR9f0T— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) April 12, 2022
On Tuesday, Yang attempted to double down by suggesting that just because the example he used to support his idea was terrible, doesn’t mean it was a bad idea.
Andrew Johnson was unfortunately a terrible, destructive President. It only heightens the tragedy of Lincoln’s assassination. It doesn’t mean a unity ticket is a bad idea.
— Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸 (@AndrewYang) April 12, 2022
But that didn’t work out so well for him either.
American historian here. No you are completely wrong. Please read a book. https://t.co/C7nPXIgJ7a
— Michele Dauber (@mldauber) April 12, 2022
For crying out loud, stop referring to it as a "unity ticket." It was a political calculation that reflected specific challenges facing Lincoln and the Republican Party related to the progress of the war in 1864. Historical context matters. #historyteacherhttps://t.co/OhtfzzrNKY
— Kevin M. Levin (@KevinLevin) April 12, 2022
This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.