Clinton winning Asian-American superdelegates 3:1 over Obama

This tracks with her level of support among Asian-American voters. In California she won Asians 71-25 over Obama for instance. The Clintons are viewed with much affection among Asian-Americans. Bill Clinton is the reason why Asian-Americans are now firmly in the Democratic column after being solidly Republican for years. The Clinton/Asian dynamic is similar to the Clinton/Latino one and the Clinton/African-American one prior to Obama's swiftboating of the Clintons on race.

As a footnote to the Clinton support cutting across racial lines, Clinton lost whites but he lost them only 46-43 in 1996. That is enough for a Democrat to win comfortably (Gore lost this group by 12, Kerry by 17) given Latino and black support for the party, although the former may be up in the air this time if we run Obama against McSame, who is popular among many Latinos while Obama has been routinely losing Latinos 2:1 to Clinton (this isn't the same as the general election but I have yet to see a general election poll go beyond the black/white breakdown and reveal Latino general election preferences). Bush lost Latinos by only 9 in 2004 (Clinton, Gore, and Democrats nationally in 2006 all won Latinos big) and it wouldn't be surprising if McSame could do as well or even better with Latinos against Obama.

-snip-

Forget talk of the Asian American swing vote — those who are really poised to influence the Democratic nomination are the Asian Pacific American superdelegates.

These party leaders and elected officials each have a vote at this summer’s Democratic National Convention, where it now appears the party’s nominee will be decided in light of the current neck-and-neck delegate race between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.

The Democratic nominee must garner 2,025 out of 4,049 total delegates, but because Clinton and Obama are so close in the delegate count, superdelegates may end up deciding the nominee for the first time ever.

Out of the 796 superdelegates, only 26, or 3.27 percent, are Asian Pacific American; 12 have pledged to vote for Clinton, four have committed to Obama and 10 remain unpledged.

http://www.asianweek.com/2008/03/14/clinton-winning-apa-superdelegates-2/

So would Clinton not win any black voters in the GE? Your logic is strange.

86% along with 65-70% Latino and Asian support and holding McSame's margin among whites to the single digits is enough to win.

I work in the labor movement, so we're all the activist types. One of my black coworkers said she might suck it up and vote for Clinton in the GE, but she doesn't think her mother and grandmother would come out to vote for her. I don't think African Americans will vote for McCain, but they may stay home.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

Let's assume Obama succeeds in disenfranchising Florida, where Clinton won 38 more delegates, for the moment. What is the difference everywhere else?

And he's only 390 away from the nomination.

Hillary has about 525 delegates she needs to be nominated.

Sorry, you can't spin this as a win.

Then she won't even need delegates!

Right now she is down only 400,000 votes (including Florida) out of 27-28 million votes cast.

"Right now she is down only 400,000 votes (including Florida) out of 27-28 million votes cast."

Bzzt! Wrong. Here are the numbers, including Florida (God knows why):

Barack Obama: 14,255,616
Hillary Clinton: 13,729,224

He's ahead of her by over 520,000 votes, not 400,000.

It is time to accept the inevitable, I believe. If you accept it now, it will be much easier later on.

Drop that ridiculous meme. Obama didn't do jack to Floriday, the Florida Democratic Party broke the rules of the greater Democratic party, and as a result, shot themselves in the damn foot. After they were told that this is what would happen.

To disenfranchise them to preserve the monopoly of two small, arrogant, unrepresentative states is nonsense and an idiotic general election move. Obama, if nominated, will lose the entire South if he fights to disenfranchise Florida with his delegates. Losing the entire South plus losing Michigan. Game over before it even begins...

Go ahead and let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.

Our party is a private organization with certain rules that come with membership. If you break the rules after agreeing to them - as Florida and Michigan did - you face a penalty, just as, again, Florida and Michigan did.

So, please, get the fuck out of my party and over to the Republicans where you belong, since you clearly don't care much if the rules are followed so long as it means you get what you want.

...all thinks in one voice and sees with the same ears.
This is "our time', "our party' and the rest of you should bugger off you must be fascists.

There is the key to your warped view of the reality of the whole primary situation. You know very well that Florida and Michigan screwed themselves, and the rules don't say anything about re-votes - especially re-votes that would reward the offenders by giving them MORE influence than they would have had before breaking those rules. Obama had nothing to do with any of it, and you know it. Clinton, on the other hand, could give two shits about these poor disenfranchised angels if anyone else had "won" them. And if you don't see that, it's quite sad.

64 year-old AZ Congressmen named "Marion" vote.

How can she possible be beaten now?

At least Obamites are open about their classism, racism toward Asians and Latinos, and bigotry toward GLBT folks. Obama's "unity" claim is laughable. His supporters don't want unity but rather to send a host of groups to the back of the bus. How ironic. :(

And the long time Du'ers like you who spew venom, filth, and divisive shit like this thread should be ashamed.

But instead you'll be offered :grouphug: from your fellow losers.

I'm a racist because I pointed out that his demographic is narrow?

That takes some serious hysteria.

I'm beginning to think I should have jumped on the Hillary wagon just so I could help her rational supporters with the heavy lifting of reconciliation if she didn't win.

Someone's going to have their work cut out for them.

You still have monsters in your closet, don't you?

You Chose a narrow demographic, not me. All I did was satyrize it. And you turn around and try and call me, what... a racist?

That's the end of taking you seriously.

I don't know how Obama will ever recover from that....


:eyes:

What is the point of this post? Are you saying that Obama will lose the Asian American vote in the GE?

Talk about wishful thinking. :eyes:

Wait, he won the Asian-American majority population state in blowout proportions?

Nevermind.

Obama won his home state. What a shocker!

Obama will do worse with Asian-American voters, just as he will do worse with whites, Latinos, and Native Americans than Clinton in the general election but there is nothing to suggest that McSame will be able to make big inroads with Asians if Obama is the nominee. Latinos are a different story. Do Obama supporters realize which state McSame represents?

He won both the caucus and the primary.

"Obama won his home state. What a shocker!"

If Hawai'i is Obama's home state, isn't Illinois Hillary's? And in that case, aren't you bothered by the fact that she got crushed in her home state?

"Do Obama supporters realize which state McSame represents?"

Do you realize who two likely candidates for Obama's VP are?

OP's Ass handed to him? check.


Abandoned Subthread?

Check.

Maybe we can keep going until he gives up on his own idiotic thread.

"And Ye Shall Know Them By Their Abandoned Subthreads"

The Disruptors who dont want to discuss, but only to disrupt, and race bait, and flame bait.

I say they should go back on strike!

The race-baiters have a tendency to slip up as Herman did and get their very own granite surprise in return.

I used to enjoy reading his posts. Since Edwards dropped out Jackson Dem suddenly became fixated on race. It's all he ever talks about now.

One thread gets posted about Asians and the "unity" crowd is going bananas. It looks like the unity talk is just words and that Asians should go to the back of the Obama bus along with GLBT folks and working people, especially white working people in big states.

We also hear a lot about Obama "transcending" race. Is it okay to promote that meme and wrong to mention one of the instances where Clinton, who is white but wins Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans transcends race?

Gee maybe it is because I looked at this and realized race is a big deal in the primaries:

South Carolina

Whites: Edwards 40, Clinton 36, Obama 24
Blacks: Obama 78, Clinton 19, Edwards 1
Total: Obama 55, Clinton 27, Edwards 18

The odds of this happening by pure chance is probably one in a trillion. In fact here are the 2004 numbers for South Carolina...

White: Edwards 52, Kerry 27, Clark 7, Dean 5, Lieberman 5, Sharpton 2, Kucinich 2
Black: Edwards 37, Kerry 34, Sharpton 17, Clark 6, Dean 4, Lieberman 1, Kucinich 0
Total: Edwards 45, Kerry 30

Compare the consistency in the 2004 numbers with the inconsistent 2008 results.

We only want to put dishonest, lying fools like you under it.

"It looks like the unity talk is just words and that Asians should go to the back of the Obama bus along with GLBT folks and working people, especially white working people in big states."

It looks like you dont know your ass from a fucking hole in the ground.

And I know you don't either. I guess you're just trying to keep your thread kicked, but since it's really innocuous (wow, Clinton's winning Asian super delegates!) I'll go ahead and respond.

This whole discussion of whites (or Asians or Latinos) refusing to vote for Obama got very old a long time ago. First, it's been disproven in numerous states. You chose to cite to a state with just about the ugliest racial history in our country, but even in that state Obama got a quarter of the white vote in a three person race. Second, to the extent that there ever was any truth to the argument that certain types of people won't vote for Obama, it's completely irrelevant now. Obama is our nominee, thanks to black votes, white votes, hispanic votes, asian votes, native american votes, etc. The attempts to paint him as the "black candidate" failed.

I merely answered your question about why I look at racial breakdowns now. SC was an eye opener. Race matters, as do other things like income, age, gender, religion, etc. Unfortunately, race and gender are consistently included in polls while something as vital as income breakdown is not.

He got a quarter of the vote among one group, four fiths among the other. Edwards won one group, got 1% (1/78th of Obama's share) among the other. It is naive to ignore the elephant in the room: race played a huge role in this.

As I said up thread, he will do as well with Asians as Clinton would in the general election. Among blacks he will do slightly better, with whites and Latinos worse. The x factors are the last two if nominated. How much worse? Thus far in general election polling he loses a high percentage of white Democrats but offsets it with white indies. Latinos are an even bigger x factor since we have no GE polling regarding this group, which will be extremely important if Obama is the nominee. Given the likelihood he will lose a few points with whites (even 5% of 73% is a big deal in a likely close election) he will need to perform very well with Latinos to offset it.

It is a myth, though, that Obama performs well among all Democratic primary voters. He loses whites solidly nationally and loses Latinos, Asians, and Native Americans badly. Fortunately for him the one group he does win, his own, gives him 85-90% support and that offsets his losses among everyone else (much smaller percentagewise). These are facts and amusing in light of the hype about Obama "transcending" race. It is Clinton who wins groups other than her own, although granted as a black person Obama had a tougher starting point than Clinton (this does not explain why he loses Latinos 2:1 and Asians 3:1, though...).

Obama is not the nominee. He is well shy of the 2,024 delegates needed to win at this point.

As to the thread it is amusing to see Obamites, the professed "unity" yearners, go bananas over ONE thread about Asians. How many Obamite threads are there about whites and blacks? In particular I didn't see whites being attacked for posting a thread on whites, blacks for threads on blacksp--but how dare an Asian post one thread about the invisible minority! :eyes:

His "gook" comment may not have had a big impact nationally, but it caused a big stir in the Asian-American community. And not in an endearing way. Asians are not as politically liberal as other minorities (esp. Asian males), but percentage-wise Asians will back Obama in the GE against McCain. If Hillary had been the nominee, she would not have received a significantly larger Asian vote than Obama will.

In 2004 Kerry did better with Asians than with Latinos (he won Asians 56-44) and in 2006 Democrats won Asians 62-37.

I agree, though, that Obama is as strong a general election candidate with Asians as Clinton. If he does worse it will be by a tiny margin, say 5 points and 5 points out of 2% is irrelevant. I will be disappointed if the Democratic nominee doesn't get at least 60% of the Asian vote.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It keeps your idle hands busy i guess.

To make a difference. Not for nothing.

3% of superdelegates matters given how close things are. In the general election 2% doesn't make much of a difference but the Asian-American population is larger in some states, including New Jersey, which would become a swing state if we nominate Obama. To ignore groups like this is a mistake. The thread is more an update on how this group is swaying and about Clinton's broad appeal than the Asian-American role in the general.

"Oh..... and Death to the Infidels"

Paid for by

Obamite talk about a post-racial politics=just words?

...

I almost had my drink flying out of my nose on that one!

:rofl:

And much of that is probably age and name recognition.

Age? What does age have to do with it?

The Clintons have a record and impressively are able to transcend racial lines. They are almost seen as "one of our own" by Asians and Latinos.

:rofl:

:sarcasm:

For Most Motivated Shillary Shift Leader
Special Mention in the Race-Baiting Derby

I guess they can join working class folks (especially working white folks), GLBT folks, and a host of others at the back of the Obama "hope/change and unity" express.

...

The OP blows it all the time around here.

Just asking.

you are not worth taking off ignore, ignorant little spud.

lol

WTF?

in the Lincoln bedroom. I should know, since there is
so many of us and we need a place to sleep and trade.

:eyes:

Enough said.

No American of Asian descent would conflate the unique history, situation of Asians in Hawaii with those of us stateside. For one, we are minorities. Small minorities. In Hawaii Asians are and have long been the majority.

anyone that stirs the race/gender honeypot has questionable motives

another shallow and obvious ploy, unworthy of a response, despite references and pretenses to objectivity

no exceptions

i thought this post was a joke but it`s serious...

what about the rest of the "minority" of voters in the states that still have primary elections...

seems you are getting way ahead of reality or day dreaming

When you are the OP.

I think.

Thanks!

Hmm?

only Asian Americans count now

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

There's no exit polling because it was a caucus, but Hawaii is heavily Asian and he won 76-24, so I assume he won the Asian vote pretty handily.

.

Hillary's been losing ground in polls, votes, delegates, and any conceivable dynamic since the start of this race. The 71-25 number you pointed to in the second sentence has closed since Feb 5th. California statewide, now polls better for Obama. I'm not mad, it's a fine stat to pluck, but Obama is gaining increased support from all segments these days.

Many subsets and groups. For example, those who trace their heritage to Japan, China and Korea evidence quite different voting styles internally and between themselves. IN Houston, we have a large vietnamese community that splits more on socio-economic lines than cultural.

I hear she's also winning amongst left handed former presidents whose surname starts with "C".