[an]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea][quote=UCGal]Back to the original topic:

Gaspar (GOP candidate for county supervisor) voted for trump.

Last night at the GOP election party, @KristinGaspar explained to me why she cast her vote for @realDonaldTrump. pic.twitter.com/X5lXy5zaEO

— Andrew Bowen (he/him) (@acbowen) June 8, 2016

[/quote]

Damn! I voted for her this primary. So I am voting for Dave Roberts in November…[/quote]
I didn’t catch that either. Thanks for posting UCGal. I too voted for her but will be voting for Dave Roberts in November.

[an]

Scott Peters won with 51% of the vote in 2014 and got 58% yesterday.

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]I just scanned through the report, and on page 12, I was surprised to see that Vietnamese Americans have 46% preference for Sanders (the highest amount the Asian groups) vs 24% for Clinton.

I was always under the impression that Vietnamese-Americans were staunchly anti-communists and could not stand even a whiff of socialism. Maybe the younger generations are taking over, or influencing the elders. Of course, since the late 1990s there has been more immigration from communist Vietnam and that might have diluted the power of the earlier refugees.

Among all Asians (page 13) native born (54%) and under 34 group (61%) seem to love Sanders.

On page 21, we see that democrats hold a big advantage on the environment. Among my Asian connections, it seems like food safety is very important. Even Chinese people from China don’t like to buy stuff made in china because the products could be tainted.

Page 28 shows identification as democrat strongest among Japanese 62% and lowest with Vietnamese 28%. no surprise there.[/quote]
Simple math… 46% of 28% is 12.8%. 12.8% is small enough where it can be easily explained that 12.8% are probably 2nd or 3rd generation. Which mean they’re no different than any other American.

[an]

[quote=no_such_reality]LOL, 11% when polled by IBD and when presented as a third choice to two unpopular candidates.

Come election day, people will see about 8 candidates. They wonder who the ____ are six of them.

I’ve looked at the LP over the years. Sounds good on paper until you really start to think about it.[/quote]So, what you’re saying is I should sell my soul to vote for one of the 2 crappiest option ever in my life time, just because they’re part of the two most popular party? If I’m gonna sell me soul and do that, might as well go with the guy that get my richer (Trump). Yeah, thanks but no thanks. I was never a follower and follow the popular kids.

[an]

[quote=no_such_reality]That says nothing. And we aren’t going to let people die in the street so it’s empty prattle. There’s a reason why they got less than 1%.[/quote]John & Weld got 11% on the latest pole. But whatever, most of the country are independents and both Hillary and Trump have >50% unfavorable rating, so we’ll get there eventually. I don’t expect Libertarian party to win over night. But 11% is a lot more than 1%. I definitely see a lot more coverage of the Libertarian party in the MSM this cycle. Which is great.

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]AN, your vote is one vote. Thanks for your explaining your voting reasons.

Question is: as an Asian, what does your intuition tell you about general Asian voting patterns? Consider the facts that Asians are moving to the Democratic party, and that Asians voted 73% for Obama. Why?[/quote]
Because they’re helping breaking a glass ceiling?

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Sure, there are nuances but there are broad demographics trends. I’ll refer you back to the wapo article, a piece by an Asian-American professor.
Read some of the comments from Asian-Americans.

Talking about anti-communism, the most vociferous and influencial group was Cuban Americans. Socioeconomically, they are “unnatural” Republicans. But they vote Republican nonetheless because of anti-communism. As the older generations pass away, they will turn Democrat, probably by 2020.

Another thing, Korean Americans are predominently Christian. Church attendance is strong. But Koreans in Fort Lee, NJ voted for Obama.[/quote]Causation vs Correlation.

I’ll refer you back to flu’s post earlier. Although I voted for Scott Peters, I won’t vote for any Democrat for CA local politics. SCA-5 is still fresh in my mind.

[an]

[quote=no_such_reality]Yea, we tried that before, it was called the gilded age at the end of the 1800s. Company towns, “the jungle”,, Rockefeller refining oil and dumping the by product, gasoline, straight into the rivers and streams, rivers in Penn literally catching fire and monopolistic business practices pre Sherman act.

Recently we have CDOs, long term capital management and the S&L fiasco.

Seat belts, air bags, safety standards. Coal power… With no pollution controls. And of course Shkrelli.

Yea, I’ve seen Laisse faire.

Trump tends not to take properties via eminent domain, he buys them and then uses courts and money to force the neighbors to let him do what he wants.[/quote]Again, your understanding of the Libertarian platform is incorrect and Gary Johnson’s policy specifically. Go here to see where he stands on those issues: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Gary_Johnson.

Your examples is as correct as me pointing to Venezuela as what would happen if we let socialism run rampant in the US. Just because we want small government doesn’t mean we want no government. That’s as false of an assumption as saying Democrats want Communism because they want government to take care of the citizens cradle to grave.

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=AN][quote=FlyerInHi]Huh? I was answering the notion that Asians are natural Republicans. I provided data to show that in 2008, they were not, except for Vietnamese Americans. Maybe Asians are Republicans when they live in non predominantly Asian areas, but there is no data to prove that.

On the democratic side, Asians are being won over by Sanders according to several reports by John Yang of PBS which I watch everyday.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/can-bernie-sanders-pull-off-upset-win-over-hillary-clinton-in-california/%5B/quote%5DYou tried to draw a line between social economic vs party affiliation. That line doesn’t really exist. You’re also assuming all Asians are the same, so it must be their social-economic status that’s determining their party affiliation and also explain why certain group are anti-communism vs another. To phrase it another way… “You guys all look the same”.
[/quote]

We are talking demographics here. People are lumped into groups for that purpose.

Read the wapo article. “Natural Republicans” implies higher social economic status. But that’s not happening with Asian Americans. As they have become more educated and richer, they have shifted to democrats. The article addresses that point.

Btw, another group that should be natural republicans are Jews. But they are not because of education and academia.[/quote]Could it possibly be that Republican have been taken over by bible thumpers and most Asians are not Christians? Could it be the reason why Vietnamese-American are more anti-communism is because those who are here feel that they lost their country to communism while other Asians did not? Point is, you can’t paint all Asian with the same brush. There are a lot of nuances that you seem to not understand. We all are not the same.

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]The problem with libertarians is that they have wacky economic notions. They believe in the gold standard, doing away central banks, etc…[/quote]
Wacky is all in the eye of the beholder. I think Democrats have wacky economic notions, especially those who support Bernie.

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Huh? I was answering the notion that Asians are natural Republicans. I provided data to show that in 2008, they were not, except for Vietnamese Americans. Maybe Asians are Republicans when they live in non predominantly Asian areas, but there is no data to prove that.

On the democratic side, Asians are being won over by Sanders according to several reports by John Yang of PBS which I watch everyday.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/can-bernie-sanders-pull-off-upset-win-over-hillary-clinton-in-california/%5B/quote%5DYou tried to draw a line between social economic vs party affiliation. That line doesn’t really exist. You’re also assuming all Asians are the same, so it must be their social-economic status that’s determining their party affiliation and also explain why certain group are anti-communism vs another. To phrase it another way… “You guys all look the same”.

[an]

[quote=no_such_reality][quote=AN][quote=flu]LoL. As of tonight, you just threw away your vote 🙂

I’m writing in Gary Johnson, heh heh….[/quote]
Good for you. I voted for Gary too,, but I check the bubble instead of writing him in. Hopefully, this will get you to register as a Libertarian.[/quote]

I’ll actually write in Bernie myself, particularly in view of NBC/AP “calling” Hillary the presumptive nominee and saying she’s “clinched” the nomination.

In all likelihood, I should be switching my registration in democrat going forward. I’ve been protest voting for libertarians or others for cycles and since we’re essentially a one party state voting for more moderate dems is probably the way to go.

Libertarians sounds appealing when you say socially liberally and fiscally conservative but when I’ve looked at them in the past, it’s really more socially Laisse faire, fiscally conservative (we’re all on our own) and property rights.

In other words, things will be decided in the private sphere and courts. Ask anyone living next to a Trump development how that works out.[/quote]Your example with Trump is the exact opposite of what Libertarian believe. Johnson opposes using the eminent domain power to benefit private entities. So, under Johnson’s presidency, guys like Trump can’t buy the politicians to use eminent domain to take properties from the little guys. If anything, it’s exactly what Democrat is fighting more. Much bigger government. Which means that those will bigger $ will be able to manipulate and have much stronger pull than the little guy. So, your example is exactly why I hate the Democrats almost just as much as I now hate the Republicans. Just look at what they did w/ SCA-5 when they have the power and a special interest group was able to manipulate.

BTW, Laissez-faire is an economic system in which transactions between private parties are free from government interference such as regulations, privileges, tariffs, and subsidies. The phrase laissez-faire is part of a larger French phrase and literally translates to “let (it/them) do”, but in this context usually means to “let go”. So, it shouldn’t be used to describe social policies. But if you like to use it in that context, you can look at Gary Johnson and his platform vs Hillary vs Trump. He’s much more socially liberal than Hillary is. So, is it really that bad to be Laissez-faire when we can get the government out of our bedrooms and not putting people who use pot in jail?

[an]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Im off to be now, but this map for 2008 is interesting. you can see by race/predominant population.

Fort Lee, NJ (expensive suburb across the river from NYC) heavily Korean American is Democrat.

Flushing, NY, the predominant Chinese area is Democrat.

Westminster, CA, mostly Vietnamese, is Republican.

Incidentally, Vietnamese are generally of lower socio-economics than Korean or Chinese. That explains anti-communism in Vietnamese-American voting patterns.

Off to bed… play away. Please post if you find a similar map for 2012

http://storymaps.esri.com/stories/2012/precincts-2008/%5B/quote%5DDude, seriously? That’s as logical as saying the cow farted, so that explain why Hillary is the nominee.

Also, that’s racist.

[an]

I don’t have enough data to say which way it has moved. so, I’ll just trust your data source. I can only talk for myself. I’ve been a Libertarian for a couple election cycles. I’m socially liberal and fiscally conservative. So, for presidential, I’ve been voting Libertarian. For other races that doesn’t have Libertarian on the ballot, i tend to lean Republican. However, because of Trump, I specifically ask all the Republicans about their thought on Trump. If they support him, I would disqualify them. So, I voted for Scott Peters this year.

I really hope the Libertarian party can get more exposure. I think there would be a lot people who align with the Libertarian philosophy if they only know about it. Hopefully, this year, with Hillary vs Trump, it might be the year. Since both of them are hated by a lot of people.

[an]

[quote=flu]LoL. As of tonight, you just threw away your vote 🙂

I’m writing in Gary Johnson, heh heh….[/quote]
Good for you. I voted for Gary too,, but I check the bubble instead of writing him in. Hopefully, this will get you to register as a Libertarian.

[Author]

Posts