Part of the Bay Area News Group

Obama urged to woo Asian-Americans, not just $

By Josh Richman
Monday, May 21st, 2012 at 3:02 pm in 2012 presidential election, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Obama presidency.

The San Bruno-based National Asian American Coalition is criticizing President Barack Obama for “raising funds from super-wealthy Asian Americans rather than campaigning and educating Asian American voters,” according to its news release today.

President Obama will be in Silicon Valley on Wednesday for three campaign fundraising events. First on the schedule is a campaign roundtable to support the Asian American/Pacific Islander community, at 4:30 p.m. in Palo Alto’s Garden Court Hotel; tickets for that cost $35,800 per person. (Ed. note – I see now that since first I reported on these events a few weeks ago, the time and date of this AAPI roundtable has been changed: It’s now at 8 a.m. Thursday, same place and ticket cost.)

The coalition – formerly known as the Mabuhay Alliance – sent a letter to the president today complaining about this. Based on its recent poll of Asian-American voters in Southern California, the coalition wants the president to make a play for those voters’ votes, not just a few rich people’s money.

“Asian Americans throughout the nation are probably close to equally divided as to who would make a better president between Romney and Obama,” coalition president and CEO Faith Bautista said in the news release. “In key swing states such as Nevada and Virginia, the absence of effective campaigning directed as Asian Americans could be fatal to the campaigns of the presidential candidates.”

“Nationally, there are eighteen million Asian Americans and almost six million in California. We therefore urge the President to not only effectively raise money in California and other states from affluent Asian Americans, but to actively and vigorously campaign at the grassroots level for the Asian American vote in California and the nation.”

The coalition wants the same from GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

According to its website, the coalition “is a HUD-approved nonprofit organization, with a focus on sustainable homeownership, Asian American diversity, consumer and small business development. NAAC advocates in the halls of Congress, in the California legislature and key federal legislators such as the Federal Reserve, FDIC, FTC, FCC and SEC and among today’s Fortune 500 corporations.” Its top-level sponsors include Wells Fargo, AT&T, JPMorganChase and Comerica Bank.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • RR, Senile Columnist

    The NAAC seems like a useless, obscure organization that is barely newsworthy.

  • JohnW

    If either Romney or Obama tried to appeal to Asian Americans as a single-minded ethnic identity group, my guess is it would backfire. Like most everybody else, their political views are more likely to be shaped individually by occupation, age, religion, educational background, economic status etc.

  • Elwood

    “Day by day, the odds are improving that Mitt Romney will be the next President of the United States.”

    “It looks like Barack Obama will be the Jimmy Carter of 2012.”

    http://tinyurl.com/7kwe4y8

  • Truthclubber

    @3 –

    Go on and delude yourself with such fantasies — anything to keep yourself from imagining what life will be like when this guy becomes your president (again) for another four years…and you are so terrified, you move to Canada, and we are so grateful, we all light up!

  • JohnW

    Re: #3

    I agree. Polls be damned. Considering the short memory of the American electorate and the huge deficit in voters’ critical thinking skills, Obama is the underdog.

    Setting aside the ever-distorted and incomplete narrative about Carter….

    If you think Barack Obama is the Jimmy Carter of 2012, does that mean you think Mitt Romney is the Ronald Reagan of 2012?

  • Elwood

    @ # 5 John W.

    Time will tell.

  • Elwood
  • Truthclubber

    @7 –

    Put your money where your bloviating hole is, if you dare.

    Deposit it here.

    Let us know how many shares of Mittens you buy, and at what price, so we can enjoy the schadenfreude on November 7th…

  • Truthclubber

    @7 –

    Pick my poll(s)?

    Let’s see — how about:

    OH — Obama by 6%
    FL — Obama by 4%
    VA — Obama by 4%
    WI — Obama by 6%
    PA — Obama by 6%

    If I give every other BGS (battle ground state for the acronym challenged, not that there’s anyone on THIS blog that resembles that remark) to Mittens, that gives me Obama 297 to Mittens 241 (71 of those as tossup) in the ONLY poll that matters — the Electoral College “poll” — and I’m not actually willing to concede the 71 tossup EVs since NH, MI, CO and IA are still there for the taking.

    Canada is calling…but in November, it gets cold, so be sure to pack some extra…mittens!

    China and Europe are in economic freefall, so that means a very strong dollar, and that means lower gas prices, and real cheap money (lower than low interest rates), and even cheaper imported crap than before, and a rising housing market in spite of Bush’s hand-picked obstructionist, (Fast) Eddie DeMarco at the helm of the FHFA, trying to fulfill McConnell’s wet dream of defeating TOTUS* in 2012 — which is why the “jobs, jobs, jobs!” rhetoric just left Mittens’ campaign like a bat out of hell.

    *Toker Of The United States

  • Elwood

    “Mr Romney and his campaign have displayed the kind of efficiency and ruthlessness necessary to win presidential elections and combat Mr Obama’s own well-resourced and hardened machine.”

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/80235712-a8b7-11e1-a747-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1wEO8bkso

  • JohnW

    #10

    Yeah, but he’s looking pretty stupid getting on the stage with The Donald just after he has renewed his Birther crap. I mean, come on Mitt, Trump’s support isn’t going to gain you a single vote. If there was ever an opportunity for Romney to appeal to independents with a Sister Souljah moment, this would be it. But he can’t bring himself to do it. His explanation for not doing so: “I’ve got to get 50.1%.” First, that’s really dumb of him to admit that’s his reason. Second, not taking Trump to task is a good way NOT to get to 50.1%.

  • Truthclubber

    @11 –

    That is TOO funny –

    ==============================
    Asked on his charter plane whether Trump’s questioning of President Barack Obama’s birthplace gave him pause, Romney simply said he was grateful for all his supporters.

    “You know, I don’t agree with all the people who support me and my guess is they don’t all agree with everything I believe in,” Romney said. “But I need to get 50.1% or more and I’m appreciative to have the help of a lot of good people.”
    ==============================

    Etch, meet Sketch. Sketch, Etch.

    I can hardly wait to see what Adelson (Newtie’s own private ATM) wants from Mittens during their Las Vegas meetup in order to open up Adelson’s Pandora’s box of moola…perhaps a Kenyan monkey zoo on the moon with children as janitors to clean up the cages?

    That and the Richie Rich fundraiser later this week — off to a greeeeeeeaaaaaat start, Mittie! Way to show real leadership, courage, and empathy for the commoners who still (as of THIS year) get to vote you in or out…

  • Truthclubber

    @7 –

    My bad; I said that MI was still a tossup in my earlier detailed scorecard (see @9 above) — but I was WRONG!

    MI is now stated by Real Clear Politics as leans…wait for it…Obama!

    My new totals: Obama 313, Mittens 225 (with 55 of that total as tossups that I am not willing to concede).

    Can we get an “amen”, brothers and sisters? Can we get to 350? Can we get a blowout?

    I love this new “pick your poll” game, Elwood — can we play again before you move “up north”?

  • Truthclubber

    @11 –

    Let the good times roll — as we see with the first of many ads on this!

    Looks like the two of them (Mittens and the Hairpiece) have at least one thing in common — they BOTH like being able to fire people!

  • Elwood

    Here’s an interesting one:

    Repeal of Health Care Law: Favor/Oppose Rasmussen Reports Favor Repeal 55, Oppose Repeal 39 Favor Repeal +16

    Gee, the shining accomplishment of the Kenyan, Obamacare, doesn’t seem to be very popular.

  • Truthclubber

    @15 –

    Neither was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when LBJ signed it into law — but that’s what we expect leaders to do; L-E-A-D, not follow like Mittens apparently likes to do when the Donald is in the room…

    [Blogger Note: In this photo on FauxNoise.com, it looks like "the Hairpiece" just got his "Donald" squeezed REAL hard by his latest "teenage bride" wife (what is she, his third? Great family values, there!)]

  • Truthclubber

    @10 –

    How’s that “it’s still the economy, and we’re not stupid” slogan thingie workin’ out for ya, eh, Mittens?

    Guess it’s not gettin’ much traction, which is why it’s only May, and already you’re coordinating this ongoing birther crap with “the Hairpiece”, given the “same day” timing of this crap drop.

    Also, Mittens, in doing this piece of BS PR, you just managed to show that your father (whom you claim to adore, admire and aspire to be like) was just as ineligible for the office of POTUS for reasons that your surrogate, “the Hairpiece”, claims disqualifies “the Kenyan” — since your own BC shows he (George) was born in Mexico, not the US.

    So much for loyalty in YOUR family…but we already knew that from the way you treated your faithful dog.

  • JohnW

    Re: #15

    Considering that Rasmussen polls tend to skew more conservative than other polls, I’m surprised it’s only 55% oppose.

    What would be interesting would be to conduct a multiple-choice quiz on the health care legislation and then separately counting poll results of those scoring 70% or higher and those scoring lower.

    No question, the Dems and the administration did a lousy job of defining the legislation and let the right define it for them. They should have presented it as “insurance reform” of the non-group health insurance market (which it is and which most people support as a general concept) rather than “health care reform” (which it isn’t and which, according to GOP spin, amounts to government takeover of 1/6th of the economy). The mandate should have been a tax, for which you get a 100% credit on the tax return if you have insurance.

    It will be interesting to see how both parties spin things if the Supreme Court does or doesn’t rule against all or part of the law.

  • Elwood

    @ # 16 & 17

    Non sequitur

    Just the usual load of ranting, raving irrelevant crap.

  • Truthclubber

    @11 –

    If this kind of vetting (of eligibility) was good enough for Mitten’s father

    ==========================
    At one point, the Congressional Research Service – an arm of the Library of Congress that is supposed to provide authoritative but impartial research for elected members – advised that its analysts agreed with George Romney, according to a congressional source.

    In a paper in November aimed at clarifying presidential eligibility, the Congressional Research Service declared that the practical, legal meaning of “natural born citizen” would “most likely include” not only anyone born on U.S. soil but anyone born overseas of at least one parent who was a U.S. citizen.
    =========================

    – then why isn’t it good enough for Mitten’s opponent, the “Kenyan”?

    Oh, that’s right, I forgot.

    We are not dealing with a statesman or a patriotic leader (like McCain), we are dealing with a craven “win at all costs, country, loyalty, decency be damned” person (Mittens) who:

    1) “likes to fire people who provide services to him”

    2) “straps his defensiveless dog to the hood of a car”

    3) “forcibly holds down an innocent classmate at prep school so his hair can be cut off while he screams in terror”

    4) “says out loud that corporations are people”, just like you and me, and therefore should be afforded the same rights to unrestricted political donations, aka “free speech” under the Citizens United ruling

    God help us if such a self-serving and self-dealing monster gets his hands on the reins of this beloved country…

  • Truthclubber

    @19 –

    You’ve proven with your lame and meager attempt at brevity and ad hominen attacks that you have no comeback, no defense, and no clue — and after November 6th, no country you want to live in, so in advance of that…

    Bon vovage!

  • Elwood

    @ # 21

    Sweetie, you wouldn’t know an ad hominem attack if someone slapped you upside the head with it.

    If I wanted to indulge in ad hominem attacks, I would burn you down to the ground.

  • RR, Senile Columnist

    In re #20: Points well made in support of Romney. BHO admits he ate dog meat. Who wouldn’t fire a CFO who made lousy choices? High schoolers can be cruel at times–big surprise. “Corporate free speech” includes Planned Parenthood, the Cancer Society, green energy companies, ARF and other worthy enterprises.

  • Elwood

    @ # 23 RR

    Would you please stop making sense?

    Nonsensical rants are so much more fun to read!

  • JohnW

    Re: #23

    There’s a difference between firing an employee for incompetence or other reasons and saying “I like firing people…” I never met anybody who enjoyed firing somebody, let alone said that they did. Frankly, I doubt Romney ever “liked” firing anybody either. In fact, he probably had other people do the firing for him. It was a really clumsy statement.

    Where did the term “Corporate free speech” come from? We have laws limiting individual (real citizen) contributions to presidential candidates to $2,500, with a requirement of online public disclosure for any contribution greater than $200. Various states have similar restrictions for state and local candidates. So, why is it unconstitutional (courtesy of Citizens United) to have ground rules and caps on supposedly independent spending on behalf of candidates (or smearing opposing candidates), or to have robust disclosure requirements for spending on behalf of or in opposition to ballot initiatives? I don’t care whether it’s an individual billionaire citizen, Chevron, the SEIU, Planned Parenthood or a SuperPac. If Chevron wants to run TV ads supporting a candidate, fine. But they should be subject to the same limits and disclosure requirements as anybody else. The CEO should be required to appear in the commercial and say “I’m the CEO, and I approved this ad.”

  • RR senile columnist

    What is so wonderful about campaign spending limits? The usual level of ability in our pols is measured by what they can get away with in a campaign.

  • JohnW

    Re: #26

    Contributing reasonable amounts to a campaign is participating in the process. Unlimited spending by high rollers amounts to buying access and influence, rendering us low rollers irrelevant. If you’re a billionaire and give spend $25 million in support of a candidate (or to defeat a candidate), you expect something in return and will probably get it. Let’s say you’re a billionaire in Texas who owns land close to ground water that you are trying to turn into a dump for nuclear waste, from which you hope to make hundreds or millions or even billions. You think the $25 million investment you spend for a candidate might increase your odds of getting approval if your candidate wins the White House? This is not a hypothetical.

  • Elwood

    @ #27

    SCOTUS disagrees.

    They’re not final because they’re right, they’re right because they’re final.

  • Truthclubber

    Ah, the thread that never ends…unless or until someone invokes Adolf’s last name to bolster their argument, and invokes Godwin’s Law.

    Just checked our fave source (RCP) for polling data, and much to my delight, using the latest BGS polls, I get a result of O’Bammy 303, Mittens 235 if the election were held today.

    But we know it won’t be — we have another 5+ months of eye- and ear-rot to go through, as well as these latest macro- and global-economic developments, since we know that the American sheeple tend to vote with their wallets.

    My Bloomberg app on my Droid tells me that:

    1) WTI Crude just broke under $88 a barrel, and is falling faster than Mittens’ approval with independents — so we can expect much lower gas prices for many months to come, giving American consumers a much needed “tax cut” that they can spend

    2) The dollar continues to roar against the Euro and Yuan — so we can expect to see import deflation for many months to come, allowing American consumers to see “price cuts” of 20% or more for all that imported crap sold by Wal-Marts across this great land

    3) The US 10Y Bond just reached an all-time, historic low of 1.62% and shows no signs of letting up on that fall, so we will see even lower interest rates for everything from mortgages, to car loans and leases, to consumer credit card debt — all adding to the spending power of the American consumer as they head into the polling booths this coming November

    Looks like some troglodytes are goin’ be stuck with “O’Bammy the Pothead Kenyan Muslim Commie” for another four years, unless…they heed the call of the North!

    Better apply for your passport now, since I suspect the lines are goin’ lengthen considerably come November 7th…and that assumes that Eric Holder and Hillary Clinton will even issue them; perhaps they’ll MAKE YOU STAY HERE AGAINST YOUR WILL!

  • Truthclubber

    @28 –

    Two words. Dred Scott.

  • Truthclubber

    @23 –

    So much for the argument being made by Mittens that “O’Bammy the Pothead Kenyan Muslim Commie” can’t create jobs that lead to lower unemployment rates — Si, se puede!*

    Excerpt from the above link:

    The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Wednesday that jobless rates were lower in April 2012 than a year earlier in 342 of 372 metropolitan areas. Unemployment was higher in 25 areas and stagnant in five.

    [*Spanish for "Mittens is f**ked!"]