Do you know the 2016 election Part (4)?

Info on 2016 election that you may not know

About the 2016 Election    In Parts (1), (2) and (3) we cited Hillary Clinton's (HC's) huge advantages in money raised, endorsements by media, and party unity.  We also discussed why all that didn't help her.  In part (3), we also cited facts to show that HC was not a good campaigner, although she is highly respected by her fellow politicians.  We now focus on a more sensitive topic -- Did HC make good political decisions? .                Does HC Make Good Political Decisions?    The answer to this question is subjective.  Hence, I provide NO answers, ONLY questions. I hope that each of you will examine the facts, then rely on your own prowess at logic and deduction to form your own conclusions. 1) Was her vote for the optional war in Iraq, to support the Arab Spring, and to actively interfere in Syria's civil war good decisions? 2) Did she ever look at her campaign rally videos & compare them with those of Sanders & Trump in terms of audience size & enthusiasm? Did she do self-evaluation - a necessary exercise because subordinates normally hesitate to point out what would really hurt the boss emotionally? 3) Did she have the ability to walk in others' shoes, including her opponents' shoes? Did she have a sense of "entitlement" causing her to use "a basket of deplorables" to describe DT's supporters?When Madeleine Albright, standing next to HC, stated  "There is a special place in hell for women who don't help each other," did she get HC's approval first? They were both pros in campaigns.  Fold the above into the fact that her campaign planned to explode fireworks over the Hudson River the night of the election. 4) HC is "candor deficient", yet she hid her health situation when diagnosed to have pneumonia. Did she know that she must protect her weakest flank? 5)  Did HC apply her immense resources wisely?  She received 65 million  votes nationally.  However, had she applied her resources to drive out an additional 11,000 votes in Michigan;  23,000 votes in Wisconsin; and 45,000 in Pennsylvania, she would have been the president. Look at the following shocking facts.        State         Electoral votes  DT's winning margin in votes        Michigan            16                                10,704        Wisconsin          10                                22,748        PA                      20                                44,292     Total:                     46               77,744 or 1.2/1000th of                                                      HC's total 65.8 million                                                      votes.          Were HC to get those additional 80,000 votes, then in terms of electoral votes:                    DT would have (306 -  46) = 260              HC would have (232 + 46) = 278, making her the winner!   Answer for yourself:  Did HC make good decisions? Was she a good strategist?

Do you know the 2016 election Part (3)?

Info on 2016 election that you may not know

REMINDER: S. B. Woo has stepped down from the presidency of 80-20 PAC, although he is still the president of 80-20 Educational Foundation      About the 2016 Election           Hillary Clinton (HC) had such real and presumed advantages over Donald Trump (DT).   Click here to read Part (1) and (2) about what the advantages were and why many didn't work out.  Even though the election was over, looking back at the facts (mixed with some opinion) can help us understand America and American elections.       Why didn't the Overwhelming media endorsements for HC Work?       The HC/DT endorsements ratio was 500/27.  Shouldn't that have had a huge impact?  Apparently not.  Why? 1) HC benefited from the fact that the media intellectuals disliked DT intensely. Voters sensed that media bias.  So the endorsements didn't carry as much weight.  2) Most of the media were into "identity politics" just like HC.  They favored diversity over qualifications when it came to hiring or admissions to schools and colleges.  Such over-emphasis has lessened American voters' respect for the media.        Why Didn't the Overwhelming Endorsement of HC by the Top Political Leaders of BOTH parties Work?       All past and present Democratic officials endorsed HC.  Many of the most prominent past and present Republican top officials rejected or refused to endorse DT.  In effect, the top political leaders of BOTH parties had endorsed HC.  Why didn't that work?      Most politicians knew that endorsements by famous political leaders helped in their fundraising efforts. However, such endorsements were never very effective in getting votes for the candidate.  Ordinary voters didn't read or cared about a candidate's press releases which touted such endorsements.                                      HC's Weaknesses      Every candidate has pluses and minuses. HC's strength was that she was very well respected by elected officials of both parties -- being known as a hardworking colleague who knew the issues, was willing to discuss compromises, and share credit.  Her weakness was that she was a very poor campaigner, and yet ever confident of her imminent victory.  She lost 2 of her 3 national campaigns in-spite-of huge initial advantages over all 3 rival candidates.   1) In the 2008 Dem. primary, everyone said it was "her campaign to lose." At the early stages, her campaign was lavishly pretentious.  At the end, she lost it to Obama, who was almost an unknown initially. 2) In the 2016 Dem. primary, she faced a real unknown, Sen.Sanders. At the end, if it were not for the unshakable loyalty of her 500+ Super Delegates - all elected officials - she came close to losing that one as well. The final pledged delegates ratio between HC/Sanders was 1/0.84.  3) In the 2016 General Election, she was the overwhelming odds on candidate to win over DT.  She enjoyed huge real and presumed advantages. Her campaign planned to have fireworks over the Hudson river on election night, costing $7 million, according to DT.  But she lost that campaign too.      In part (4), we'll ask if HC had make good political decisions.  Please don't construe these e-newsletters as favoring one or the other former candidates.   The election was over.  The real purpose is to help AsAms understand America and American politics.               S. B. Woo  President and a volunteer for the past 18 years 80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization, http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/index.php PS:  Acknowledging another great supporter of my "Swan Song' campaign:  Tina Liu Jen, Parsippany, NJ        $1,000      To know more about 80-20, view these videos : https://youtu.be/dB3eGVqG-wA  (Ignore the last 35 secs. The election is over.) http://youtu.be/h781_ECSJYM  80-20 EF Mission Statement

Do you know the 2016 election Part (2)?

Info on 2016 election that you may not know

REMINDER:  S. B. Woo has stepped down from the presidency of 80-20 PAC, although he is still the president of 80-20 Educational Foundation.  Did the outcome of the 2016 election surprise you?  Understand why.          The 2016 election is over. Please don't misconstrue the info presented as plugging for one or the other of the former candidates. Knowing these facts could help us better understand America and American elections.       Last Friday, I presented this talk to a group of prominent retired senior professionals, including many former government officials.  Both facts and opinions were very well-received.  Part (1) of this series was on H. Clinton's (HC's) real advantages over D. Trump (DT).   Part (2) is on her presumed advantages, and how the presumed advantages didn't match up with the reality, seen via NYT's exit poll.            Presumed HC Advantages When Compared With Reality 1) The possibility of electing the historic first woman President would induce over-whelming women support for HC.      Truth:  Women voted more for Obama in 2012 (55%) than for HC in 2016 (54%). 2)  Educated whites would NOT vote for Trump       Truth:  Whites with college degrees voted 49% for DT and 45% for HC. 3)  Minorities would be HC's firewall, given HC's identity politics and DT's politically incorrect statements.       Truth:  Blacks, Hispanics and Asians all supported HC by 5 to 8 pts. than they supported Obama in 2012.          2012(Obama/Romney/Others)    2016(HC/DT/Others) Blacks                      93/07                                        88/08/4 Hispanics                 71/27                                        65/29/4 Asians                      73/26/1                                     65/29/4            Why Didn't HC's Real Advantage in Money Raised work?    HC had almost a 2 to 1 advantage over DT in money raised. But it didn't win the election for her.   Why?        Of the $1.4 billion she'd raised, only $102 million or 7% came from donations of $200 or less.  In comparison, Obama raised $214 million from donations of $200 or less in 2012, more than2 times more.  Let's say that the average small donation is $102, then HC has 1 million donors who are ordinary citizens, while Obama had about 2 million such ordinary donors.  The enthusiasm of such small donors is very important to winning an election.  Most politicians have valued that.  Some campaigns were willing to lose money in order to raise this kind of small donations.  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -     In the next few EF e-newsletters, we'll continue to explore why HC didn't win in-spite of all the real advantages. S. B. Woo  President and a volunteer for the past 18 years 80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization, http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/index.php PS:  Acknowledging great supporters who responded so generously to my "Swan Song" appeal to raise money for 80-20 PAC.  About $32,000 was raised.  Besides the ones already acknowledged, there are also Alec Y. Chang, Pound Ridge, Ny                          $2,500  Chen Chen & Tuohui Zhong, Greensboro, NC   $1,000 Jerry J Zhang & Weili Fan*, Dana point, CA       $   500 Louisa and Benjamin Chu, Stonybrook, NY        $   500    James and Constance Liu Chen,                        $   500 Billy and Lydia Yeh, Coral Gables, FL                 $   500 THANK YOU, THANK YOU to all the other donors whose names are not listed, owing to space considerations. *Weili Fan is the author of a wonderful Chinese book about the noble but sad lives of a mixed couple who masterfully translated the "Dreams of the Red Chamber" and many other Chinese classics into English.  The book brought tears to my eyes many times, and I am not such an emotional person.    To know more about 80-20, view these videos : https://youtu.be/dB3eGVqG-wA  (Ignore the last 35 secs. The election is over.) http://youtu.be/h781_ECSJYM  80-20 EF Mission Statement

Do you know the 2016 election Part (1)?

Info on 2016 election  that you may not know

REMINDER: S. B. Woo has stepped down from the presidency of 80-20 PAC, although he is still the president of 80-20 Educational Foundation.          Shocking Facts You May NOT Know About the 2016 Election         The following facts (NOT opinion) about the 2016 election may be shocking since most people didn't know it, to my best knowledge .  These facts could be educational in helping AsAm understand how elections are won and lost.        These facts are all referenced.  They are from a talk I'll give on coming Friday to a FL group of which I am a member.  The members are composed of generals, one admiral, many CIA officials, diplomats, medical doctors, physicists, and other professionals with "distinguished" careers, who have retired.     To whet your appetite, here is a "table of contents" plus the details of part (a) of item 1: "HC's Incredible real & presumed advantages in the election."  HC and DT stand for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump respectively.                                   Table of Contents         1. HC's Incredible real & presumed advantages over DT         2. Why the advantages didn't work out         3. Michael Moore, a very strong HC supporter, had 5 fears that HC'd lose         4. Dem. could easily win back the White House in 2020, if .....         5. Worrisome implications to our democracy.             Part (a) of Item 1: HC's Incredible advantages over DT *Money Raised  (as of about Nov. 8).  Click here to know more.        HC has a  2 to 1 advantage (HC:  $1.4 Billion ; DT $870 million) *Endorsements from Major Media     Click here to know more.          500 to 27 in favor of HC. 37 papers didn't endorse, but published editorials advising "No Trump" e.g. The USA Today. 37 was 10 larger than 27. *Party Support     Click here to know which Republicans opposed DT.            HC enjoyed the united support of the Dem. Party, including that of Sen. Sanders, Pres. Obama and all past Dem. presidents and all immediate past presidential nominees (J. Kerry & W. Mondale) DT faced a Terrible Disunity of the Republican Party. He was publicly disowned by the 2 immediate past GOP presidents, rejected by the 2 immediate past presidential nominees (Romney & McCain),rejected by GOP heavy weights Colin Powell, Condo. Rice, even the Koch brothers didn't financially support DT.      How could HC possibly lose???  For clues, look for EF's e-newsletters in the next days and weeks.  They may help you to understand America and American election of the modern days.                            Help Recruit  to Get Matching Funds     41 big Corporations will match donations to EF.  If you work for one of these companies, please recruit your AsAm colleagues to financially support 80-20 EF.  $1 from you or your colleagues will mean $2 to $4 dollars to 80-20's war chest.  To donate, click here.     The names of these companies are:   1. Adobe  2. AIG  3. ALLSTATE  4. Am Eep  5. American Express 6. Amgen  7. Amylin Pharmaceutical LLC  8. Apple  9. AT&T 10. Baxalta 11. Boeing  12. Bristol-Myers Squibb  13.Chevron Employee Funds  14. Citrix System  15. Emerson  16. EOG Resources 17. FMC Technologies 18. General Electric Foundation  19. Genetech, Inc. 20. Google 21. Illinois Tool Wooks Foundation (matching $3 for $1) 22. JP Morgan Chase Foundation  23. Juniper Networks  24. Merck 25. Microsoft  26. Monsanto  27. Morgan Stanley  28. Prudential 29. Qualcomm  30. RBC Capital  31. Rockfeller Foundation 32. Saba Capital Management  33. Sana Capital  34. Sempra 35. Takeda 36. TE Connectivity  37. TripAdvisor  38. UBS  39. Verizon 40. VMWare Foundation  41. Workday, Inc.     S. B. Woo  President and a volunteer for the past 18 years 80-20 Educational Foundation, Inc, a 501 C-3 organization, http://www.80-20educationalfoundation.org/index.php To know more about 80-20, view these videos : https://youtu.be/dB3eGVqG-wA (Ignore the last 35 secs. The election is over.) http://youtu.be/h781_ECSJYM 80-20 EF Mission Statement

An Unprecedented Statesman-like Move

Unity is Asian Americans' Salvation

A Statesman-like Precedent: Crossing Ethnic Boundaries  NFIA, Nat'l Federation of Indian-Am Associations, Honors 80-20  NFIA is the largest Indian Am organization in the US (http://www.nfia.net/). It recently paid 80-20 a tribute: It is indeed an honor for NFIA to be able to recognize the tremendous effort put forth by 80-20 to support causes affecting our diverse communities. Thank you Lt. Gov. Woo for your leadership and service.          80-20 is indeed, at once, honored and humbled.        Why Is This Crossing of Boundaries So Significant?                            If and when we, one of the smallest minority together with Native Americans, UNITE to fight for equal opportunity of the 19 million AsAms, equal opportunity will be there for us the NEXT DAY. It'll be a million times more efficient than 80-20 or any other single organization and individual can do today.      Even the combined number of all components of the AsAm community is too small when compared with that of African Ams and Hispanics. However, when we are united, the n-fold increase in number plus the other attributes of AsAms - mostly well educated, financially relatively adequate, & a wonderful work ethic - will definitely give us sufficient political clout to win equal citizenship!      Inspired by NFIA's statesman-like precedent, the Board of 80-20 Educational Foundation voted to focus, starting next year, much more time and financial resources to forge a Grand Asian American Unity Coalition. We will welcome all national and large regional organizations to join us as equal partners. 80-20 will NOT claim, nor wish leadership. 80-20 just wishes to be a main workforce to help turn the dream of unity into reality. All AsAms will greatly benefit.       This project will take years if not decades. However, it is most significant and we need to get it started today. If we plant the seeds, our children will enjoy the shade. We'll either be equal citizens together or be discriminated against separately.  Comments are welcome. S. B. Woo    President and a volunteer for the past 18 years 80-20 Initiative, Inc. http://www.80-20initiative.com/index.php    PS:  Beware of these demographics when discussing forging unity: Chinese-Ams (24% of the AsAm population), Indian-Ams(20%), the Filipino-Ams (also about 20%), the Vietnamese-Ams (10%), the Korean Ams (9%),the Japanese-Ams (8%), and all other AsAm communities (9%) .   To know more about 80-20, view these videos : https://youtu.be/dB3eGVqG-wA  (Ignore the last 35 secs.  The CA primary is over. An EC is to decide whether to endorse Trump or Clinton.) http://youtu.be/h781_ECSJYM (Ignore the appeal for funds.  SELF has succeeded.) 80-20 Mission Statement