Andrew Yang was on CNN yesterday to shill for his third party, and Jim Acosta treated him with the seriousness he deserves -- that is to say, none at all.

"People obviously worry, these lower level races are obviously important," Acosta said.

"People worry about another 2016 scenario where a third-party candidate like Jill Stein or Gary Johnson cost Hillary Clinton the election. Don't you think that putting yourself out there, putting this party out there as an alternative that appeals to some moderate Republicans, could potentially throw the race to Donald Trump, put Donald Trump back in the White House? Is that what you want?"

"I ran against Trump. I don't plan on doing anything that's going to increase Trump's odds," Yang said. But, again --"

"Why not run as a Democrat again?"

Yang said he hadn't made any decisions about 2024.

"I haven't made any conclusions about 2024 except for the fact that the United States needs a unifying, positive third-party movement because we're getting increasingly polarized. And if it's not Trump, it's going to be a successor to Trump, because the system is uniquely vulnerable to authoritarianism."

Acosta pointed out that Biden has had Republican support on a number of agenda items.

"He is trying to work in a bipartisan fashion. Why not try to support that as a Democrat? You were a Democrat ten minutes ago."

"Andrew, you're going to need policy positions at some point. How does the Forward Party feel about Roe vs. Wade? Should it have been overturned?"

"I personally think that women's reproductive rights are fundamental human rights. The Forward Party has not left or right but a forward stance on even the most divisive and contentious issues --"

"What does that mean?" Acosta asked.

"Don't you have to take a position on something? You can't just say this is a hot button issue so I'm not going to take a position on it. You want to run the country, you're going to have to make some hard decisions, Andrew."

"Again, the Forward Party is about the common sense consensus majority view which is very clear on abortion --"

"What about guns? Assault weapons?"

"-- climate change. It's clear on the issue of guns."

"Should 18-year-olds be able to buy AR-15s?"

"Again, the common sense majority is there should be some rules around background checks and access to firearms. We're not getting any of these things, Jim, because the two-party system does not need to deliver -- "

"It doesn't sound like you're taking any hard positions. it sounds like you're sort of a fill-in-the-blank party. If somebody wants a party with no clear policy positions, you're it. But unfortunately, in the real world -- in the real world you have to take a position on something," Acosta said.

"We're for the common sense consensus view on guns, abortion, climate change, but we're not getting a common sense consensus on any of those things, Jim."

"Those are not positions, those are just fuzzy, nebulous ... It just sounds like you came up with something in a focus group," Acosta said.