Asian Americans and the Presidency | Asian American Poll

ASIAN AMERICANS & THE PRESIDENCY
(Updated Tuesday, Apr 1, 2008, 05:10:33 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,

I agree with a great deal of what you have to say yet I think you misunderstood what I was attempting to state in my first two posts. This may perhaps be to my lack of clarity so I will state it in a different way. You gathered what I meant is "the U.S uses its military as an excuse for conservatism". That isn't what i meant exactly. What i meant is that the current military/geo-political role of the U.S. naturally gives rise to conservatism. As you are an English PhD I could clearly learn a great deal in that area from you. Allow me the opportunity to explain the historic politics relationship between the values of society and military expantion and readiness as satetd by a M.A in Poli Sci. Any nation that postures a proactive military stance in its own defense or defense of allies ,and enjoys the unique role of superpower, tends to give rise to and sustain conservative ideology within its government and culture that tends to legislate in favor of internal vigilence and external readiness and tends to supress more liberal and dare I say humanitarian philosophies. This fact has been proven over and over again in human history.
As far as the antiquated nature of the English Tory party is concerned it isn't rally that curious at all. Your has helped reinforce the idea stated above. For the last 50 years or so the English have existed within the political framework of a "former" superpower. While no one can discredit the fact that the English are still possess a powerful military force, the reality is that as an independent nation on the global scale they no longer possess the conventional power to even be in the top 5 countries. Rather they now rely on strategic allies and European collectivism to help offset thier military shortcomings. Hence the social climate and political situation of England would not be conducive to sustained conservatism within thier government. However the global situation of the U.S. still sustains and produces a strong conservative culture in our country. But I would also caution you to not be so hasty in your dismissle of the conservative party in England. The brief history of modern politics has proven to be of a cyclical nature. Given the right future circumstances, such as large scale military conflict or a large economic downturn, you may very well have a Tory in power. I hope that helps explain things a bit better.
Also I would support your desire to harshly sue a surgeon who removed the wrong organ as that would fall under the banner of gross incompitence. Yet the majority (by that I mean over 80%) of malpractice suits are not the result of incompitence or physician carelessness. Rather they are the by product of a an overly litigenous culture filled with unrestrained, sharky lawyers that see a malpractice insurance group as easy money since most settle would rather settle out of court than pay for a legal defense. Statistically speaking almost every doctor can expect anywhere from 2 to 5 malpractice suits in his career from patients with misplaced anger or simply because his method of treatment differs from a seperate study. Infact it has gotten so bad that many high risk procedures aren't even attempted by most surgeons, not because fear of patient death but fear of being sued. While there is clearly a role for malpractice the fact remains that this avenue has been abused repeatedly by bullshit claimers and opportunistic lawyers.
Also I wonder if Hillary Clinton would want her daughter Cheslie to undergo the full gamet of diagnostic tests that were humanly possible if her daughter fell ill even if by chance she belonged to an HMO that deemed them unnecessary and refused coverage. "Do as I say not as I do" is the old motto that comes to mind.
The situation with the voucher system and private education is big news simply because it is a unique issue that has divided our government almost down the middle. It isn't so much a fiscal argument as it is a philosophical and ideological one. And we all know how much people like to blather on about thier personal ideologies...haha...present company not excluded....
Decon Flea Kill Wednesday, November 21, 2001 at 16:01:52 (PST)

Asian Dominatrix,

You said "I bet if we had Gore, there's a good chance 9/11 might not have happened. Or let's put it this way, the Al-Queda folks might have thought twice about thumbing their noses at us".

I agree with your statement wholeheartedly. The fact that Bush seems very inept in foreign policy and even in casual social situations gave a good hint for Al-Queda to really mess with this country.

I am very angry at the fact the 9-11 attacks were mainly directed at New York. Being a New Yorker, I feel that we didn't really derserve it, why? The fact that New York doesn't symbolize what America is. What is that? PROVINCIALISM. If you ever watched the documentaries of New York City, New York in the eyes of immigrants and foreigners is the USA, but to eyes of many Americans, New York is this sick bastard city which chose not to comform with the rest of the country. Very ironic again!

Bush has not been very solid in his promises. He should be characterized as a hypocrite and a liar. Why? He said that Americans will continue to respect Muslim Americans yet many of them have been detained for questioning without their consent. He insisted that America is safe and we should all travel and enjoy ourselves. So why doe he shut down the DC area from visitors during the coming holiday season. Besides, the guy is somewhat a coward along with the VP. Why do these guys need to constantly hide in some secret location???? It appears that the President and the VP are more like a comedy duo, such as Laurel and Hardy or Abbot and Costello than real leaders who can actually direct this country.

Provincial America Wednesday, November 21, 2001 at 15:29:46 (PST)

Decon,

Great points. Again, tho' I think we probably agree that the US uses its military role as an excuse for conservatism. We all know that conservatism exists to benefit the rich white fat cats and nothing else.

Remember when Dan Quayle was interviewed about abortion. When pressed, he admitted that if his daughter were raped, then she could have an abortion. But not other women. Also, you would think that if the gov't was so concerned about cutting down on the sums spent on welfare, surely they would support abortions as a cheaper alternative than having these women bring up lots of children they can't support? The Republicans, for the large part, just want to punish the poor. The more we burden them, the better, so it goes.

Damn right that everything is a business, even academics. Why else would we have history and English profs making close to $200,000 in some cases with very few teaching or administration commitments, much of it which gets passed on to poorly paid grad students or untenured faculty who are busy enough trying to publish so as to not perish?

Farther down on the scale, you'd think that the private and parish schools were the nation's public schools considering how much attention the gov't gives to them with the vouchers and tax incentives. (I think it was Reagan who gave tax rebates to those sending their children to private schools?)

As far as the national health plan goes, I guess it figures that Hillary, being a lawyer herself, would conveniently keep legal interests wide open... However, I still think it makes sense to be able to sue malpractice for whatever it takes. I think good health is a natural right. If some surgeon were to remove the wrong organ from me--and that has happened to others--believe me, I would not hesitate to sue that creature to the fullest extent possible. The careless and incompetent deserve to be punished. (This is probably why I've never been interested in medicine--apart from the fact that I'm squeamish!)

What I do find curious here is that even without such a marked emphasis on the military--that which Dubya's seemed to be in 2000--the American public at large still prefers the conservatives. Today in Britain, the Tories are almost dead: they had two races for leadership before one Tory finally appeared as a *clear* winner. The British seem to realise how stagnant the Tory party is, even if they're not necessarily hugely fond of the Labour party. (Margaret Thatcher is such a joke now!) Despite all of the problems encountered by Labour over the past two years--more so it seems than the Democrats in 1999-2000--Blair still enjoyed a substantial victory this year.
Asian Dominatrix Tuesday, November 20, 2001 at 20:35:26 (PST)

hilary or gore in 2001,

You got that right! I bet if we had Gore, there's a good chance 9/11 might not have happened. Or let's put it this way, the Al-Queda folks might have thought twice about thumbing their noses at us. You know, there's a reason why America is being treated w/ such blatant disrespect: it's cos we have a puppet president who's won more than his fair share of votes from an asinine public--tho' not enough in my mind to deserve winning the presidency--and the messed up Supreme Court who handed victory to Dubya. Usually, just like in the classroom, the one who seems least intelligent and most vulnerable is the one who gets stuff dumped on them.

By the way, if the Republicans hadn't been so preoccupied with what was going on in Clinton's pants in 1998 and focused more carefully on international affairs--rather than intern affairs, this whole sorry mess may just have been avoided. The Democrats were already aware of the threat posed by Bin Laden, and were not only concerned with growing terrorism, but also the lack of security on airlines--but the sorryass Repugs throught the Democrats were Chicken Little. (More recently, look what the Dems have had to do to get federalised security on airplanes.)

Unless the Repug(nant) party improves significantly, I will continue to vote Democratic.

Asian Dominatrix Monday, November 19, 2001 at 16:54:33 (PST)

NEWEST POSTS | EARLIER POSTS