Asian Americans and the Presidency | Asian American Poll

ASIAN AMERICANS & THE PRESIDENCY
(Updated Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 05:10:34 PM to reflect the 100 most recent valid responses.)

Which of the following Asian Americans would you most like to see elected President?
Governor Gary Locke | 56%
4-Star General Eric K Shinseki | 24%
Senator Daniel Inouye | 1%
Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta | 10%
Former Calif Treasurer Matt Fong | 4%
Yahoo! Co-founder Jerry Yang | 5%

When will the first Asian American President be elected?
2004-2020 | 31%
2024-2048 | 34%
After 2048 | 35%

Who of the following would get your vote for President in 2004?
George Bush | 28%
Al Gore | 32%
Colin Powell | 14%
Hillary Clinton | 26%

This poll is closed to new input.
Comments posted during the past year remain available for browsing.

CONTACT US | ADVERTISING INFO

© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.

WHAT YOU SAY

[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]

Asian Dominatrix,

My post was an analysis of the reasons why America still firmly clings to conservative solutions. It should explain most of the decisions we as a nation have made when it comes to domestic policy as well. Remember the days of Thatcher were higlighted with conversative domestic policy. The rhyme associated with her government as "Thatcher Thatcher milk snatcher", because she killed a school program to make milk free or more affordable in elementary schools all over the U.K.
The nature of conservative decision making is as follows. 1 stimulate private sector and big business 2. reduce all non-essential government spending 3. Tough on crime 4. upper crust tax breaks. This is core of legislative conservatism the world over. This conservatism is especially heightened in our own country due to the complete lack of social programs. Our medical system is a business. Our higher education is a business. Our care for the elderly is a business. In European nations these areas are seen as the humanitarian or social responsibility of society. If it were up to ultra-conservative they would privatise our entire primary and secondary educational system and make it a for profit business.
My point is that conservatism is strengthened in America because of our situation internationally as the big gun of democracy. The recent decisions of who gets what tax break is classic conservative policy making.
Also the medical plan of Hillary Clinton was flawed from the beginning. It wanted to cap physician intererests but keep legal interests wide open. She wanted a cap on the amount medical facilities charged but wanted no caps on the amount someone could sue a doctor for. If you study the financial structure of medicine, a huge chunk of medical profit goes to fund physician insurance companies in the event the physician is sued for 50 million dollars for human error. huge settlements and unchecked mal pratice suits are one of the major factors that drives up the cost of medicine. But what would you expect from a lawyer made medical plan in the first place. Also she failed to realize that over 70% of our nation medical resources are consumed by patients 65 and up. Those 2 dozen patients that are 80 years old kept alive by sophisticated machines that you can find in any hospital ward don't come cheap and the services are not usually covered by medicare. Hillary's plan did not address medicare in any way to help aliviate this financial burden from the government either. Nor did it address the realitiesPharm. reserach costs vs. profit margins with any real insight. It also wanted to streamline spending by doing less sophiticated and expensive diagnostic tests as they were deemed in her infinite wisdom as a waste of time or resources.
Anyway, my point is that our situation globally dictates a lot of the philosophy behind our policy making. I would love for America to be only concerned with normal domestic issues. But the fact that we spend billions on military readiness fuels conservative political platforms. Infact the amount America still spends on defending Western Europe from a now fictitious enemy could be enough to send every state school college applicant to college for free.

Decon
Tuesday, November 20, 2001 at 09:50:44 (PST)

Decon, Provincial America, and others:

How 'bout we move our debate to the AA and the presidency board here?
Asian Dominatrix
Monday, November 19, 2001 at 14:27:24 (PST)

[A copy of your earlier discussions have been moved there. --Ed]

Decon,

It's true America has assumed great military responsibility, but I think in large part, 'we' have used that as an excuse for poor social planning.

For instance, look at Hilary Clinton's health care proposal which was nearly passed in 1994 but was botched at the last minute over a few minute details (correct me I'm wrong): I don't think military expenses were even being figured in here.

Then look at the whole sorry issue of tax rebates. Why do we continue to fund the rich and well-off, whose pockets are already well lined? Why doesn't this money go to PUBLIC health care or education?

This is why there is such disparity in the education offered ti the rich and poor. Yes, we continue to lead the world education-wise, but only a small select population will be able to enjoy these benefits. This is why primary and secondary school students in the States are now lagging behind students from so-called 3rd world countries, especially in the sciences. Those lucky enough to attend a public school in a privileged neighborhood, not to mention those at prestigious preparatory/boarding schools, are the ones who will receive the full benefits of what America has to offer.

These are only a few points. I don't believe in a socialist state, but I do think that we plunge ourselves into greater trouble as we continue to heighten the divide between the well-off and the not-so-well-off.

Asian Dominatrix
Monday, November 19, 2001 at 09:17:40 (PST)

Provincial America,

Spot on again.

I don't think I said anything to the effect that the American economy is necessarily better than any other; I was just saying that there is more emphasis, or rather, more verbiage about it. During the Kyoto treaty, Americans could only question in a puerile manner over why it was OK for 3rd world countries to pollute, and not the US--even tho' the US has done more than its fair share of polluting many times over, considering that it's been industrialised for a far longer period of time.

You're right in that America is deteriorating culturally. It's called the influence of Mammon: let's see who sells the most, quantity over quality, etc. That means selling to the lowest common denominator like you said in your earlier post. (Yet, even LCD can be done well, if you consider silly but sometimes imaginative shows like Mr. Bean.) The more special mind-blowing effects, the better--so long as the public doesn't realise how short of plot and character that extravagant piece of 1 trillion dollar rubbish is. And as long as it conforms to basic Republican propaganda BS. And Hollywood is doing its best to reduce America to an icon: blond, blue-eyed, slim, virtually indistinguishable looking....ever wonder why there are no longer real American actresses of QUALITY like Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, or Katherine Hepburn (to name a few)?

Academically, grade inflation is rampant. If Americans relied on more serious testing like in Asian countries and the UK and not those dumb Mickey Mouse SATs and GREs, they wouldn't produce so many half-educated morons who can't locate small nations or add and subtract. Or lag behind so many countries in math and science at primary level education. Or unwilling to learn non-Western languages. There was a recent article in the Boston Globe and another in the Princetonian about 90% of students receiving Latin honors at elite universities: tell me, what sort of honor is that??? No wonder there are so many from so-called elite schools whose spelling is less accurate than that of a older generation highschool grad!

I have to admit I'm not very knowledgeable on rock, but what you said was interesting. As long as there is a patina of Western Europeanness, everything is hunky dory here. Just look at all the T-shirts and jeans with the Union Jack or the royal insignia emblazoned across them--and I'm talking about before Sept. 11 (so before the British pledged their support.) Can you imagine Americans manufacturing T-shirts w/ the rising sun, or any other Asian symbol? Or even Germany, Italy, and France? The 'cool' nations it seems, are anglo nations.

You're definitely right about embracing our Asianness. I've always wished that my primary school and highschool taught Asian literature and history. I think more Asian-Americans would have more of a sense of Asian pride if they could read Tale of a Gengi, Adventures of Monkey, Dream of the Red Chamber, I am a Cat, and many others alongside of Romeo and Juliet, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Crime and Punishment, etc.

P.S. If I've been laying stress on the UK, it's cos' I've lived there for 7 years...
Asian Dominatrix
Sunday, November 18, 2001 at 16:29:27 (PST)

America is more conservative then Western Europe.....true. Part of the reason is because the burden of defending democracy and western society for the last 50 years has fallen squarely into Americas lap. While Europeans have been spending much of thier budget on free health care, free tuitions and services of the elderly; America has easily spent a quarter of its budget on their military since WW2.
With an emphasis on military readiness and action in the defense of the free world compounded with geographic isolation, American society is only following the natural sociological progression in the face of its responsibilities. You don't give rise to free love, socialist compassion and a love for the high arts when its your job to be the toughest guy on our block.
America has been the attack dog of England as all of her former colonies and common wealth children have been. But America was also charged with the responsibility of being Englands (and W. Europes) watch dog many years now as well. When you don;t have to worry about building up a huge military becasue your big friend next door has promised to back you up if you get in a jam, it kind of allows you to focus your resources on other more important things.
We have even taken the responsibility of keeping Israel afloat even though its original creators were the English. While the ENglish were able to walk away we have inherited all of the political fallout that is born of the tension over there.
I'm not saying that there aren;t areas where we could improve, but lets be honest no one has really had our kind of responsibility. As far as our poor sciences are concerned, we still seem to lead teh world in nearly every field of science and technology. If it weren't for the devastatingly advanced nature of our military science, there is a strong possibility that the entire European continent would have forfited all of its lovely freedom, social programs and high art to a red govt. for the workers.

Decon
Saturday, November 17, 2001 at 21:41:39 (PST)

Asian Dominatrix,

Yep, America is still focused on the old order of things.

Your point about America's main interest of its economy is true, but is somewhat superficial if you look at the bigger picture. Some countries which are regarded as the "Third World" to the eyes of some Americans, are in fact better off than the USA when it comes to individuals living in a healthy and productive lifestyle. Take the Mediterrean Countries like Spain and Greece as examples, people have 3-4 meals a day, have a nice home and a car, work less than 6 hours a day and yet somehow these people are pyschological healthier, have money to spend and worry less whether they have to pay off their debts and other "nonsense" expenses.

Hollywood is basically an American Iconic place just like Disneyland. Whether it excludes or includes minorities is not a real major concern, if you believe that there other things in life besides the movies, Hollywood is close to being non existent. Just like most of the American institutions, Hollywood today is of inferior quality. They are so many American filmmakers and yet hardly of any of them deserve any real merit. The same could be said of the American intellects, composers, and other people of creativity as well. Perhaps America is not really a place for "winners" but for underdogs. The problem with America is that the white people and the assimilated white ethnics are reluctant to accept "foreigness" and that includes things pertaining to Europe too.

Talking about Rock Music and your point about America's preoccupation with the British Royalty, there does seem a logical point why Americans embrace rock bands like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. These bands had an image of royalty/eliteness while the other bands like Pink Floyd and Deep Purple which I mentioned were experimental bands trying to captivate the universal human experience with rock music. This was said by Paul Weller who belong to a British post punk band called the Jam. His band performed a few times in the USA and was disappointed with American's crude taste of music and their ignorance of what rock music symbolizes. He later called Americans "stupid yanks" and never performed here again. Ironically, his music has influenced many American bands like Green Day and the grunge bands of the 90's.

For Asian Americans not fall into the trap, we must embrace our Asianness, accept foreign things, new innovations and ideas or else just like the Whites and White Ethnics before us, we will become arrogant and ignorant.
Provincial America
Saturday, November 17, 2001 at 13:49:28 (PST)

Provincial America,

Spot on, mate! Over the years, I've grown so tired of the platitude about America being the most progressive, modern, and accepting. If anything, it is probably the most conservative Western nation.

There are a lot of great things about this country, but it can be so infuriatingly politically, socially, academically, culturally backwards. Look at the presidency, for one: why are Americans so obsessed with dynasties like the Kennedies and the Bushes? Why are they so obsessed with the British royal family--perhaps to a greater extent than the British themselves? (My British friends have noticed that when visiting here.) Why is it that the idea of a female president/prime minister cannot be taken as seriously as in Europe and Asia? (BTW, I still think the way the way the Supreme Court selected Bush last year absolutely disgraceful. Something which I thought could only take place in a stagnant and backwards nation!)

And why is that on Sept. 11, American networks focused almost exclusively on American and European reactions to the terrorist attacks? Why virtually no attention on minority victims during the first few days of the aftermath? It wasn't until I turned to the Japanese and Chinese news that I saw their reactions: people sobbing, people giving blood.

Do you know why? Because America is only interested in preserving the status quo. That is why, for instance, the WASPy Ralph Lauren look is very popular here, but not as much in England--even tho' you'd expect it to be. That is why so many American movies revolve around upper-middle class and upper class families. Many of those fawning, servile, half-educated, wanna-be-upper-class Hollywood directors would never think of mocking them the way Monty Python and others do in England; for instance, Monty's skit 'Upper-class twit race.'

Speaking of Hollywood (which does its absolute best to exclude minorities--unless it's to play servile Chinaman or ghetto trash), you're also absolutely right about the greater sophistication of Asian and European movies vs. American movies. Personally, I think there's much more focus on personal dilemma and character development in 'Old World' movies. I'd hate to think what would happen, for instance, if 'Crouching Tiger' were a Hollyw. film: we'd have at least a schmaltzy love-making scene and a double wedding at the end. (And I realise 'Crouching Tiger' is not even supposed to be the most cerebral Asian movie either!)

Look, too, at the pernicious influence of right-wing religion and the way those backwards Southern schools are treating evolution. No wonder American pre-college-level education, esp. the sciences, lags behind third-world countries. And do you know why? It's because those idiot fundamentalists like Fat(ass) Robertson and Jerry Foul-well are only slightly more forwards than the Taliban with their contempt of women. (BTW, do you know that many of these so-called Christian societies have been sending anthrax threats to birth control clinics?)

And about America seeing only one side of things: yes! This is why we are the only country doing so little about global warming--all because our *economy* is more important. And why we continue to waste gas: or is it because fat Americans cannot be stuffed into anything smaller than a SUV? The asinine Republicans, stuck way back in the 1950s, never stop to think what it would mean for economy in the next century when Asia and the middle East suffer from drought or flood. Of course, they're not 'anglo' countries, so what does it matter?!)

OK, we have a few things right: affirmative action. And we're beginning, only beginning to understand multiculturalism--that is, when some dumb half-educated cracker doesn't wave his/her hands in fear, shouting 'Loss of Western civilisation!' But even there, much reform is needed before we can attain any real equality.

Maybe we ought to call the 'New' World, the 'Old' World.

Asian Dominatrix
Thursday, November 15, 2001 at 19:10:46 (PST)

Asian Dominatrix,

In truth, America is a very conservative country. If you look at the old world (Europe) and the New World (USA), the former is much more open with certain lifestyles and manners. Europeans are much more expressive and perhaps even more creative than Americans when it comes to the arts. In Europe, women can be topless on the beaches, people can smoke in the restuarants, dancing in the streets and being jovial are more encouraged, obscene art (to eyes of Americans) are accepted...etc.

You would assume America being the land of the free and that freedom is cherished so dearly that it is a place of openness and full creativity/expression, but ironically, it isn't.

Take rock music as an example. The British Invasion bands of the 60's and 70's have captivated Americans more than our homegrown bands of the heyday and today. Bands like Pink Floyd and Deep Purple being truly creative and experimental bands who have fans throughout the world (Asia is one main region as well), however, are not well-liked in the American soil. Many Americans opt for the more conservative bands, like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. In my opinion, they lacked the talent and skill/complexity of the former 2 bands. But again, America cherishes provinciality and conservatism despite its so called "worldliness".

Creativity, to a certain degree like that of Europe , is also found in Japan and HK especially in film production and pop culture. Americans tend to focus more on special effects as oppose to the story line. There is more emphasis on an actor's action than his or her disposition. Chow Yun Fat movies made in America are more about his body language than his personality. Again, Americans like to see things with one side.

America still has that "opressor" mentality back from the colonial days. Better yet, the whipper's complex. If you make any inappropriate body language, I will whip you. I hope you get my drift regarding America's overall mentality.
Provincial America
Wednesday, November 14, 2001 at 21:08:26 (PST)

Worldly Political Analyst,

Correctomundo. I've noticed that the coverage of anti-Muslim sentiment was much more carefully covered by the Beeb than by the dumb US TV networks. The latter still seemed reserved about Muslims, making it appear as tho' even apparently innocuous storefronts could harbour terrorists.

There has also been more of an attempt to show Asian movies on the telly in Britain--something you rarely ever see here. (Granted, they're usually put on late in the evening, but you could still videotape them.)You also see movies and telly shows--even soaps--featuring interracial couples.

I'm not a Europhile by any means, but I think the US could emulate Europe more in appreciating non-Western cultures. Instead, the US is just hung up on the dead colonial past of America and Western Europe. Old World means posh European houses and clothes, or colonial East Asia when whites ruled.
Asian Dominatrix
Wednesday, November 14, 2001 at 09:15:12 (PST)

It's typical of American media to have a one-sided portrait of anything. It lies deeply in the culture - such as politics, education, etc. When was the last time something major happened that the major networks provided radical views of two opposing sides? Point is, in the movie industry, how can we expect more? The only driven part behind the studios is not the quality or the depth of the film but how much it might generate for them. Europe seems to be much more creative and free when making movies about other cultures. The movie industry is like the record industry - they sell popular culture, for the lowest common denominator.
Worldly Political Analyst
Wednesday, November 07, 2001 at 19:02:52 (PST)

NEWEST POSTS | EARLIER POSTS