Our Reward & Punish strategy is working in the 2016 Presidential Election
On Oct. 29 (Sat), 80-20 endorsed Sec. Clinton with reservation. 80-20's press release quoted its President, S. B. Woo, saying, "We don't like that Sec.Clinton doesn't think we are important enough to her campaign for her to talk to us. She needs to reevaluate her priorities. We will not accept benign neglect."
On Nov. 1, 3 days later, she published an Op-Ed on NBC TV:
by Hillary Clinton.
Note that she said "I will." Near the end of the above Op-Ed, she made one more explicit promise -- she'll authorize the "White House Initiative on AAPI", when elected president.
SURPRISED how she has reacted to 80-20's "endorsement with reservation"?Do you still have any doubt that
| 80-20's judicious usage of "reward & punish" in politics empowers AsAms! |
Her positive response to 80-20's "endorsement with reservation" is her STRENGTH, not weakness. That is what is required of a political leader in a democracy. The Board is more confident now that we can have a successful working relationship with Sec. Clinton, if she is elected our president.
Q&A for Doubters of 80-20's Effectiveness
Q1: Could it just be a coincidence?
A: It could, if the above were the only example. Let me give you 2 more similar examples involving 80-20 and presidential candidates.
(1) On May 7, 2016, just before the CA Democratic primary, 80-20
publicly announced that it would endorse Sen. Sanders, unless Hillary would replysatisfactorily to 80-20's questionnaire. 2 days later, she replied. (Click here & here)
(2) During the 2008 CA Democratic primary, Hillary had answered 80-20's questionnaire with 6 yeses. Obama had not. So we endorsed Hillary and bought ethnic media ads in CA to help Hillary win the primary. Additionally, 80-20 PAC sent out many e-newsletters, including 2 entitled "Call to Action - Defeat Obama". 5 days before the CA primary, Obama answered 80-20's questionnaire with 6 yeses (click hereand here)!
Pres. Obama's 6 yeses to 80-20 led to the appointment of 3 cabinet secretaries, 1 deputy secretary, many other sub-cabinet officials; the tripling of AsAm federal judges including 4 Appeals Court judges, and a 80% or more increase in the number AsAm SES (Senior Executive Service) appointees.
Could all 3 cases be coincidental? Could it be that 80-20 has a unique understanding of politics in the U.S.?
Q2: I now believe they are NOT coincidental. But these occurrences are so contradictory to my intuition of how politicians would react to 80-20. Will you help me understand the political logic in the U.S. please?
A: Here is the key: do not apply the political logic of Asia to the U.S.! The power of politicians in some Asian countries doesn't depend on elections. So they don't hesitate to use their power to punish citizens who oppose or displease them.
In the U.S., if a Congressman gets elected for the first time and carries grudges against those who opposed him but who could be persuaded to help him, then in his re-election campaign, he'll not only still have his usual oppositions but also dedicated enemies whom he had punished earlier. If he punishes more people, he will simple have even more dedicated enemies in future elections. Result? He has placed himself in a bad situation, which a smart politician could have avoided.
So the political logic in the U.S. is always to try to make friends with people who have opposed him in the past, but who may be persuadable to change sides.
Q3: Will the "White House Initiative on AAPI" do a lot of good for AsAms?
A: It all depends on who will be appointed to lead the Initiative, and how large its budget will be. When Chris Lu, the current Labor Dep. Secretary, was co-chairing it briefly, it was an good instrument to help AAPI's win equal opportunity.
Join 80-20 PAC which has unique understanding of the U.S. politics. TO JOIN, click here.
