That particular feminist is Erin Gloria Ryan, managing editor of Jezebel:
“I am constantly pivoting mentally with her,” Ms. Ryan said, adding that she had not at all been torn about opposing Mrs. Palin or Mrs. Bachmann. Mrs. Fiorina, she said, is “contrary to the conservative female narrative, the way she looks, the way she presents herself, the no-nonsense businesswoman thing.”Ever think about the ways in which Carly Fiorina is the opposite of Sarah Palin? Palin had the appropriate political position that made her seem like an apt choice for VP. State governor. But then she wasn't ready to talk under the questioning that suddenly got aimed at her when she was chosen and it screwed up the confidence we were too ready to put in her because of her political credential.
Fiorina makes us wonder right from the beginning whether she's appropriate, because she's held no political position, but start aiming those challenging questions at her and she's ready to speak straight to the issues with astounding stamina and conviction that make us want to believe she can do what it takes.
Posts
213 comments:
1 – 200 of 213 Newer› Newest»I honestly don't remember seeing a politician who was so quick on her feet and well-prepared. Her answers are substantive, too, not just the empty "talking points" approved beforehand by campaign staffers. The word that pops into my head when she she speaks is "commanding."
I disagree with her pro-life positions, but she's damn impressive.
Fiorina has what Bill has and Hillary doesn't, a grasp of the issues that let's her speak directly to them.
Hillary seems like every time she answers a question, she has to parse a set of rules she has internalized imposed by each element of the coalition she imagines she has amassed, so she can never answer any question directly.
Not that the press ever asks her any questions that might give her trouble, and still she can't get it right. Carly is thrown out there and must take on all comers. Carly is thrown into the Hunger Games and Hillary is the Donald Sutherland character. Who is America going to root for?
From my view the big difference between Palin and Fiorina is Fiorina seems to have studied up on the issues and has a good command of them--even where I disagree with her stances they appear well thought out. Palin usually came across as though she thought details were for nerds and sticking to broad platitudes was all we needed in a leader--plus she really froze when she got a question she wasn't read for (and asking what newspapers you read is not a "gotcha" question--it is a softball question. Knock it out of the park!).
I realize Fiorina came from a privileged background, but it is still quite an accomplishment to become a CEO of a major company (especially in a field where female CEOs were very rare at the time) so a good faith feminist who does not care for Fiorina's politics should at least be able to respect that. It's not like she got where she is by marrying a creep and following him to the White House.
I disagree with her pro-life positions, but she's damn impressive
Pssst. The president can't outlaw abortion. All she could do is appoint judges who may allow it to be outlawed by democratic means in state legislatures around the country. But I guess if you are afraid of democracy, I can see why you would vote for the ironically named Democratics.
"Hillary seems like every time she answers a question, she has to parse a set of rules she has internalized imposed by each element of the coalition she imagines she has amassed, so she can never answer any question directly."
Hillary is too insecure to be honest. She has to focus-group, and calculate before every one of her "extemporaneous" remarks. That's why she always rings hollow.
If she ever did face real questioning (i.e., not Lena Dunham) she would crack and break.
Jezebel. The same folks who gave us the attack on the journalist who doubted the Rolling Stone/University of Virginia rape story.
http://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-asks-idiot-1665233387
Jezebel has a special place in journalism hell.
"I disagree with her pro-life positions, but she's damn impressive."
Substantively I don't care what a presidential candidate thinks of abortion since they can only affect abortion policy in the margins and even then it has to track public opinion more than anything. Their opinion on abortion only matters as a way of social signalling, and their justifications for their positions reveal how they think.
Today's blog theme that unexpected feeling of sympathy you get for someone you dislike when they are attacked by someone you dislike more.
Before Palin really showed herself as an empty suit, the feminists hated her because of her five children, most notably the son that should have been aborted.
I'd say the knives also come out for Bachman because, she too, has five children.
To most Coastal Feminists, an outrageous number of children equals Patriarchal oppression.
Fiorina starts out too much like them, so there's an opening to not automatically call her awful things.
Off-Topic
Be sure to watch NASA TV on cable or online today at 11:30 EDT. There's supposed to be a major planetary science announcement regarding Mars (liquid water? evidence of life?)
Yes, CF is good at presenting herself - duh - she was HP CEO. Bachmann was certainly as good, as was Palin once she found her feet. It would've been much better for her if McCain had not picked her for VP and she could've gotten elected Senator and then ran for President.
It didn't help her that McCain's staff was full of RINO's who were looking after themselves and their future jobs in the liberal MSM.
I watched her interview with Todd and the following discussion. Most revealing were the venomous attacks the panel members used on her following the interview. Since Todd couldn't land a punch they must have figured their only chance was to hit her when she couldn't respond. What a group of cowards. They were almost hysterical in their reaction. I've never seen so much fear on one television screen before.
Wow. That article is heinous. Abortion is the Leftist Feminist Sacrament. The woman at the top of the article will be so disappointed when her daughters end up pro-life.
If you asked me which newspapers I read, I would say "all of them." It has been many years since I got my news from a single newspaper delivered to my door. I think her failure there was to perceive the malice with which her answer would be received.
Palin eventually was personally destroyed by so many of those attacks. She was not rich, so it when, for example, she was forced to spend her own money to defend herself against an ethics attack for wearing an Arctic Cat jacket to an event, among so many other things, she folded. Hillary knows you need massive amounts of cash to defend yourself, and the way you get it is by selling out. Palin didn't sell out, so she was destroyed. Like the proverbial "good cop" in a crime movie, "if you can't buy him, you have to put him down."
CF actually is like them, except for her opposition to abortion and a some Conservative fiscal positions. She's a member of elite, her father was Dean of Duke Lawschool and after her firing at HP she found insider positions in the Republican party. Plus, she mad $100 million as CEO.
I'm not surprised that MSM feminists like her a little.
@tim in vermont: I know the president can't outlaw abortion. What's your point exactly?
When it comes to abortion, a pro-life president can do more than appoint federal judges. We are seeing right now what abortion politics means on the federal level with the threatened government shut-down over funding Planned Parenthood. I favor de-funding Planned Parenthood because it's a corrupt organization undeserving of taxpayer money, and in any event I view abortion as a highly personal, individual issue rather than a public "health" issue (i.e., society is better if you make it cheaper and easier for poor, disproportionately minority women to have abortions). If a woman wants an abortion, she can pay for it herself. Whatever the cost -- even if it means driving hundreds of miles -- it's much cheaper than actually raising the child.
Why do you assume I vote for Democrats?
Since Walker bowed out she is by far my favorite candidate. She seems calm, collected, well prepared, and presidential. I dislike the sort of emotionally charged base populism that seems to have seized the edges of both parties that has given rise to Sanders and Trump. Fiorina seems to be a potential antidote to that.
If you have never done it, listen to a quarterly conference call of a big public company. The questions range from the compound to mind-numbing. (e.g. What's your third quarter projections for sales and gross margins for printer ink in Japan?)
That's part of the reason she handles the political press with such ease.
"Palin usually came across as though she thought details were for nerds and sticking to broad platitudes was all we needed in a leader-"
Palin was sabotaged by McCain staffers like Nicole Wallace, worse than a RINO. I liked that she came up through local government where the nuts and bolts are located. I agree she would have been better as Senator but Alaska politics is weird. She had run against the GOP establishment there and had no allies.
Carly is doing very well and it must panic Democrats who see the feminists drift away now that Hillary is a stinking corpse of a candidate.
" Fiorina seems to be a potential antidote to that."
I agree. She and Carson have done amazingly well so far.
"she wasn't ready to talk under the questioning"
True, and unforgivable in a Republican. Dems not ready to talk are fine.
Cinco de quatro, Neil Kinnock's bio, we-have-to-pass-it-to-see-what's-in-it, if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor, all fine.
I defended Palin when she was being attacked unfairly. The attacks weren't so much unfair later on.
The most salient difference between Fiorina and Palin is that Fiorina is smart and Palin is incandescently stupid.
She wasn't a very good candidate for senator, but it was great practice for her on a very big stage. The position really was vulnerable so there was a lot of media pushback and money poured into the fight.
She learned from that and jumped to an even bigger stage.
I liked Walker, but he's an understated leader, and couldn't keep up when the country (and media) wants emotion and rage and witty repartee. He did a great job saving himself for future runs, though. I agree that Palin should have done the same. She was building her experience and reputation in Alaska, could have expanded that. The VP shot, along with the way the media decided to portray her, ruined her whole political career. She wasn't ready to take on both the media and two-faced folks in her own campaign.
Fiorina is also the only one who has made a forceful - and sensible - statement about what she would do build up our military forces and restore our position in the world.
For Sarah Palin, it was rather a sudden transition from governor of Alaska to V-P candidate and then running with someone like Maverick. As big a surprise for her as it was for us.
Fiorina is running for president on her own hook and has had time to think about what she wants to do.
(In fact she seems to be running because she thinks there are things that needs doing rather than thinking up reasons to justify why she is running like the rest of the crowd seems to be doing.)
Palin had the appropriate political position that made her seem like an apt choice for VP.
No she didn't. She was a half term governor of a state that has fewer people than the average congressional district.
Rob said...
The most salient difference between Fiorina and Palin is that Fiorina is smart and Palin is incandescently stupid.
Apparently, you have never met a person who is actually stupid. The last thing that stupid people are is incandescent.
Most revealing were the venomous attacks the panel members used on her following the interview.
The attacks were deserved because she refused to admit that she told a blatant lie in the debate. In fact she continues to repeat the lie.
Carly is the nerdy high school debate champ who knows her subject cold. Boy, did she study up. Trump is the mean, rich girl who attacks people based on their money and looks.
"'Palin had the appropriate political position that made her seem like an apt choice for VP.' No she didn't. She was a half term governor of a state that has fewer people than the average congressional district."
You are disagreeing with something I didn't say. Read my words, all of them, and understand why we are not in disagreement.
It seems normal and ideal for a governor to become the President, so any governor seems appropriate.
Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter... etc. etc.
Carly is the nerdy high school debate champ who knows her subject cold. Boy, did she study up. Trump is the mean, rich girl who attacks people based on their money and looks."
Tracy Flick.
"If you asked me which newspapers I read, I would say "all of them." It has been many years since I got my news from a single newspaper delivered to my door."
Ok, but I'm sure if the followup was "can you name a few of them" you could come up with at least one newspaper. It was softballish as asking "what do you like to do in your free time?" A good answer would have been "our local newspaper, the Juneau Star, covers a lot of important things to Alaskans with a depth you won't get from the New York Times..." or something like that. Anyone can flub of course, but it doesn't look good and when the gaffes pile up you create a narrative. See also, Joe Biden.
"Palin was sabotaged by McCain staffers like Nicole Wallace, worse than a RINO. I liked that she came up through local government where the nuts and bolts are located. I agree she would have been better as Senator but Alaska politics is weird. She had run against the GOP establishment there and had no allies."
How true that is I don't know, as it's a lot of he said she said about that campaign's infighting--it is clear of course that the whole GOP side of it was dysfunctional. But at a certain point a candidate has to take ownership of her own saying and doings. It's not uncommon for a VP candidate to feel shunted by the presidential candidate's inner circle.
she's ready to speak straight to the issues with astounding stamina and conviction that make us want to believe she can do what it takes.
"I think women all over the country heard what Mr. Trump said."
Proof she's not a serious person, except in the fake feminist sense of serious.
Fiorina is not the opposite of Palin. She's the politically correct (or frightening, for leftists) version of Palin. Pretty, but not model material. A vibrant speaker, but not a sloganeer for the most part.
Fiorina's political positions are pretty Palinesque. That's why she scares leftists.
I go back and forth on Fiorina, too, not as a love or hate so much as a "she's great, but unelectable because she's never held elective office" to just "she's great." Sure, she's not perfect but in a field that was supposed to be brimming with great choices and, well, isn't, she's a standout.
But given how set in stone it is at Jezebel and anywhere else that claims the "prochoice" mantle that "you must never speak well of an abortion opponent" (to modify Reagan's 11th commandment), I admit to being rather surprised to read this article.
FWIW, here's (my/the)latest on the "ran HP into the ground" accusation:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/janetheactuary/2015/09/update-on-fiorina.html
"I think women all over the country heard what Mr. Trump said."
Somebody quips, "Why WOMEN?"
(in the google result but not on the page it links to)
rhhardin, it ain't bean bag. That was Fiorina's best line to date. She'd not have her poll numbers without some sense of drama on women's behalf.
Do NYT readers ever tire of the newspaper's voice? I realize the bias can be subtle - perhaps too subtle for the like-minded. Here's a good example:
"In addition to opposing abortion, Mrs. Fiorina opposes raising the minimum wage, federally mandated paid maternity leave and the Affordable Care Act, policies that disproportionately affect women."
I fail to see how Fiorina's opposition to Obamacare or raising the minimum wage makes her anti-feminist. I also fail to see how a NYT article can declare that these policies "disproportionately affect women." And if feminism is about "equal rights," as HRC says, how is federally mandated paid maternity leave an "equal rights" issue? I guess it depends on your perspective and your understanding of the English language.
Anyway, there's a mode of thought on the Left that in politics everyone should be "voting their interests," with their interests being defined by socioeconomic class, and also immutable characteristics like race, gender, etc. Poor people who vote Republican are too dumb and have had their prejudices inflamed by Republicans, who are only interested in helping rich white people. (Of course, rich white men who vote Democrat are just voting their conscience because they are good guys.)
In other words, to the Left, the concept of "interests" is very narrowly defined as "get my piece of the tax pie." Principles have no place, unless those principles cause you to vote against your wealth and help Democrats get elected.
So a hypothetical voter, a conservative, successful businesswoman who has fought for everything she's earned - and who might even call herself a feminist - is supposed to be against Fiorina because the NYT declares that her policies would "disproportionately affect women." If only Fiorina knew her proper place and what her interests are as a woman, the Left could respect her independence and her judgment.
Whatever. The Shade Queen is going have her face smeared with HP layoffs, million dollar yachts and anti choice bukkake if she gets nominated for POTUS or veep. Maybe worse than Trump would. And the Repubs arent able to win national elections any more no how for all that effort. Go figure?
When I first saw that McCain had picked Trump I was very excited; I had heard about Palin and read about her record and thought this might actually allow him to win. And then I heard Palin speak. I have never once heard her speak without wincing. I could not even watch the debates. Give me Rubio and Tracy Flick and Hillary is toast.
Like much left-liberal rhetoric nowadays, this is an exercise in disguising class-based snobbery as something else.
Whoops. McCain had picked Palin.
The attacks were deserved because she refused to admit that she told a blatant lie in the debate. In fact she continues to repeat the lie
Most of the attacks dealt with her time at HP. They were petty and partisan. It's no wonder few people pay any attention to MSM pundits these days.
As for lying politicians, it's hard to get worked up after seeing how Obama and Hillary have lowered the bar.
"The attacks were deserved because she refused to admit that she told a blatant lie"
This is why Dem panelists go after O and Hillary! so harshly all the time. They won't give dual-plagiarist Joe B the time of day. Just watch -- it's gonna be brutal.
"Fiorina starts out too much like them, so there's an opening to not automatically call her awful things."
Yeah, I agree. I think a good deal of the reaction to Palin on the left was class based. Thus, the snowbilly comments. She had five kids, her husband (while hot) was blue collar (though I do remember a rather stupid attempt to conflate him with Oil Company Executive), and she hunted and fished!!!! Did I mention she had five kids, and the accent! Oh, and she had not gone to the right schools.
So, hot husband, kids, plenty of time spent with family, runs marathons, and becomes Governor of Alaska. Apparently she really does have it all. No wonder she was hated.
As if Hillary is any warmer. Set a bonfire to get warm.
HP layoffs vs Hillary's e-mails. One was a business decision to save the company, the other was a criminal act.
Carly built her own yacht, Hillary got paid from taxpayers funded colleges to make $250,000 per half hr. speech.
The stupidity of American voters: envious of successful people...
And the Repubs arent able to win national elections any more no how for all that effort. Go figure?
By that standard, the Democrat Party should have been cast adrift on an ice floe several times. This assertion is more about hope than evidence from the Democratics. Their strategy is to dispirit Republicans. It's Democrats who are having a hard time, and electoral votes follow the Congress.
Let's see, Hillary is 15 points underwater on approve/disapprove with 2% undecided, and we are supposed to be scared of her? If I thought there was any chance the Democratics would nominate somebody else, I would counsel easing up on the attacks. Her only hope is to turn the next election into a shit storm and scare the Bernie voters into holding their noses. This is not going to be a "hope and change" election if Hillary gets the nomination.
@ Bob Ellison at 10:25
I think you might be right.
I've been thinking it over more and I forgot to add one more reason why Coastal Elite Feminists hate Sarah Palin so much now. And I think this is the kicker: Bristol and her screwed up life.
Prochoice people have convinced themselves that no one is actually prolife when a pregnancy would result in massive embarrassment or shame. They just KNOW in their heart of hearts that their "real life Bristol Palin RWNJ caricature" would have quietly made the abortion appointment. Heck, Sarah and Todd probably arranged the whole thing. That idea helps them sleep at night. So the fact that Bristol didn't do that once and now twice (and the second time being much, much more publicly awful) pisses them off to know end. How dare she!
"she refused to admit that she told a blatant lie in the debate. In fact she continues to repeat the lie."
You are doing better at lying than she ever thought of. This is the last time I will read a comment of yours.
Palin's record began when she was app[pointed by Murkowski to a panel on oil and gas and found that sweetheart deals were being made. She attacked the deals, and indirectly, Murkowski. You just don't do that in Alaska GOP circles. Then McCain picked her which poisoned any chance with Democrats. She had no political future in Alaska. Look at how Murkowski's daughter got elected defeating the GOP nominee.
Carly built her own yacht
The yacht of state.
Or, as Carline Kennedy put it in a school essay on her summer vacation, daddy's yat. (Nat Lamp? Mary Ann Madden?)
Palin...wasn't ready to talk under the questioning that suddenly got aimed at her
Are you talking about Sarah Palin the person? or Palin the media caricature? Are you talking about things Palin said in response to questions she was asked? or things Tina Fey said on Saturday Night Live that the media later reported as being said by Palin?
Fiorina seems better able to handle a hostile press, which is great. And the press has declined in influence since 2008, which is also great. And since she's running for president, she doesn't have to worry about being knee-capped by a feckless McCain campaign, which is great too.
I regret that I actually gave some thought to the meaning of the term "ice-cold shade queen debate princess."
On certain issues the ruling class sticks together. For example, free trade and immigration. That's why Trump is getting trashed by Fox news and MSNBC and by the NR and the New York times.
Palin raised the hackles of the ruling class too. Too populist. So you had all the Liberal establishment after her while people like Krauthammer, will, and Noonan took shots at her or refused to defend her.
CF doesn't raise those types of concerns. She's one of them.
tim in vermont said...
Let's see, Hillary is 15 points underwater on approve/disapprove with 2% undecided, and we are supposed to be scared of her? If I thought there was any chance the Democratics would nominate somebody else, I would counsel easing up on the attacks. Her only hope is to turn the next election into a shit storm and scare the Bernie voters into holding their noses. This is not going to be a "hope and change" election if Hillary gets the nomination.
9/28/15, 10:44 AM
I am thinking that right about now all of the Dem insiders are fixed to throw Biden in with some timing to make him the late-comer savior of the party, once Hillary! has finished peeing in her and Sander's pools (hence that debate announcement by CNN). That way Joe looks like a great white knight and snatches the nomination. With a general electorate this dumb (Obama twice!) it just might work. The key will be to watch the money pivot to Joe.
I like how Ms. Ryan's issue with Fiorina boils down to the latter's opposition to abortion, minimum wage hikes, Obamacare and mandated paid leave. So feminism to these people is not about "equality under the law" or "empowering women" or "making women more independent"--no, feminism is about two things--being free to have abortions, preferably paid for by someone else, and relying on government, again, to force someone else to give you more money.
There should be a word for that, but not "feminism". Maybe "redistributionism."
The problem with CF at HP isn't that she "ran HP into the ground" its that she wasn't a success. Usually business people run on their successful business record not on "Well, i didn't fail as bad as everyone else in the computer industry"
I think the fact that no one hired her after she left HP says a lot.
I love Slate's analysis of Fiorina's "blatant lie." Compare it to their article where they lay out the facts of the Braoddrick rape accusation, then studiously avoid coming to any conclusion.
"He didn't do it" - She changed her story and the other five witnesses were lying to prosecutors and risking jail because two of them were mad at Clinton.
"He did do it." - She changed her story when advised to by her lawyer because she, like the five other witnesses, on of whom claimed to have found her in the hotel room distressed immediately after it supposedly happened, started being questioned by Federal agents, and risked jail time for lying.
But Slate can't bring themselves to come to a conclusion. But when them make a distinction without a difference on her! It's all guns a-blazing!
Ah, yes, "ran HP into the ground." The story's a lot more complex than that but everyone repeats that talking point because it's an easy one to repeat.
Like the new talking point that "Fiorina lied" about the video rather than "Fiorina seems to suggest, if you're not paying enough attention, that the video has actual footage of a living baby being dismembered, rather than a narration and separate images."
The biggest problem for Fiorina isn't even her HP tenure (though the Dems are going to go to town on that--if you thought they were rough on Romney it's going to be far nastier if Fiorina got the nod) but rather her total lack of experience in any elected position. There's a lot of appeal in "outsiders" but the problem is you really need to know how the system works or you're likely to be taken along for a ride, or be forced to rely too much on other insiders--like how Obama did when he took office.
The problem with CF at HP isn't that she "ran HP into the ground" its that she wasn't a success. Usually business people run on their successful business record not on "Well, i didn't fail as bad as everyone else in the computer industry"
Yeah, I agree. Hillary is a paragon of successful project after successful project (Libya, Syria, Putin, Hillarycare..) and Obama was accomplished above and beyond.
We have to compare her to Hillary if she is the nominee, and I will take her accomplishments any day over the Democrat's dowager nominee.
"Ah, yes, "ran HP into the ground." The story's a lot more complex than that but everyone repeats that talking point because it's an easy one to repeat."
That's the problem--you don't want to have to be the one explaining. The Dems will hit her repeatedly with that, and they can put that on a bumper sticker.
Though even an unquestionably successful business tenure will get you attacked--just ask Mitt Romney.
So what Brando? I think that the Romney is Valdemort gambit may not work twice. I think the fact that America has sent Obama a Congress to shut him down says America is not happy with him.
Let them try it again. Hillary is going to be feeding shit to the fan no matter who it is. Let her try it in the debate.
Brando -- you're absolutely right that in a general election, Fiorina would have a lot of trouble here with the infamous Low Information Voters.
Just wish Althouse commenters wouldn't fall into this trap!
It is going to take somebody quick on their feet to deal with the Democrats' politics of personal destruction.
He's up, she's down in iowa, nh, sc, or where the hell ever. When it's all down to two, as in one Dem and one Rep, the game is over. The Dems will win POTUS. Carly. Trump, Carson, and Rubio cant likely carry THEIR OWN HOME STATES. Let that unpleasant fact sink in. what does it say about the pretentious pipe dreams of the GOP?
What is a "shade queen"?
"So what Brando? I think that the Romney is Valdemort gambit may not work twice. I think the fact that America has sent Obama a Congress to shut him down says America is not happy with him."
It may not repeat itself, but it's clearly the tack the Clintonites will use--particularly in this climate of hating rich CEOs (even Trump--a hero to a lot of Republicans!--is pushing that theme). Carly will be playing a lot of defense on that--and as they say, when you're explaining you're losing.
Obviously despite my other reservations about Carly (some of her politics but mainly her lack of political experience) would be overcome in a second if she ran against Hillary, who I think is dangerously incompetent and corrupt, but then I don't think I'm the type of voter the GOP needs to swing back into their column.
KenK,
How you guys going to do without Obama? That is an unanswered question, isn't it. Your red queen is disliked by all but the hard core, toe the line, march to the billionaires' beat Democratics like yourself.
Good luck with that, but your pronouncements of doom and gloom for the Republicans have a lot more to do, I suspect, with your limited circle of friends and choices in media consupmtion than any reality about the America people.
"What is a "shade queen"?"
I think I can speak some millenial. "Shade" as in "throwing shade" means "dagger eyes" or "bad vibes" and so a "shade queen" is totes awesome at doing that.
"Trump, Carson, and Rubio cant likely carry THEIR OWN HOME STATES."
If the GOP goes with Rubio I have a strong suspicion he will wipe the floor with Hillary.
How does one call oneself a feminist - ostensibly for equality and a woman's right to make her own choices - and yet believe in something called a "conservative female narrative", wherein one must oppose and disempower any woman who fits this particular set of characteristics?
Oh, right...
Palin and Bachmann were too good looking to satisfy feminists and had accents and backgrounds that could be easily parodied.
Okay Tim. What states that Romney didnt win in '12 are the top five GOPs going to win in?
Tracy Flick.
I read that and pictured Tracy Lord.
"What states that Romney didnt win in '12 are the top five GOPs going to win in?"
If the GOP has a good candidate--and doesn't "Romney" him during the primaries--I see picking up VA, FL, OH, NV, and CO at least. If the Dems pick an uninspiring choice (like a hobbled Hillary, or out of the mainstream Sanders) then add Iowa, and perhaps Wisconsin and Michigan to the list. Any other states only move into the GOP column if there's a total Democratic meltdown next year.
@Brando
The Obamanation and the media are being hard on HRC right now, cuz theyd rather have someone else, but should she secure the Dem nominatation, they will both drop their opposition into the memory hole and fall in behind her. Do you doubt it?
Sorry, Ken. Not going to play your game. You tell me how Hillary is going to get to a positive approval rating with only 2% undecided. I know her claim is that trustworthiness doesn't matter, because nobody trusted Bill either, but Hillary is no folkloric trickster, like Bill is, and we are not talking just trustworthiness, we are talking about approval, and she is low low low. You think people are going to march to the polls like they did for Obama, or will they have to be dragged? Clue for you, young people don't like Hillary.
Regarding states, sinking approval rating like Hillary's will show who has been swimming naked.
Well, given it is Delaware and Vermont we are talking about here, I don't doubt both Biden and Sanders can carry their home state.
But the question is, how many, if any, other states?
Nobody is going to be able to "memory hole" the bathtub ring of dislike for Hillary. It will not be scrubbed.
"Trump, Carson, and Rubio cant likely carry THEIR OWN HOME STATES."
I don't think the Republicans expect (or need) to win NY, CA or MD. As for FL. I think Rubio or any of the Republican front runners will easily beat Hillary there.
Besides, I think that a lot of young people still think that Clinton's scandal was about a consensual blow-job. Guess what? Even blacks don't believe anymore that O.J. was innocent. Time has a way of washing away spin, and as Hillary knows well, facts are stubborn things.
Rubio easily wins Florida, so does Bush. I don't know where that is coming from except as a propaganda gambit. I live half the year in Florida, and I know Jewish Democrats who like Obama a lot who have said they would vote for Bush. Just sayin'
One thing that a Bush candidacy would do is bring back Schiavio, and the Democrat death cult (not their most attractive side) will rear its head again.
"The Obamanation and the media are being hard on HRC right now, cuz theyd rather have someone else, but should she secure the Dem nominatation, they will both drop their opposition into the memory hole and fall in behind her. Do you doubt it?"
I don't doubt that, but it obscures the fact that she is going to have a very tough time energizing her side to come out and vote for her as well as winning over the moderates that are necessary to swing the election her way. Besides, much of the problem she's having is symptomatic of her weakness as a politician, which isn't really something she can cover or change overnight.
The GOP can certainly blow this, of course, but Hillary is a profoundly poor politician and is certainly the wrong candidate for the 2016 environment--where the Dems would have benefitted from a younger, more genuinely liberal candidate without the ties to corruption and '90s triangulation that will dog her.
Carly Fiorina is the perfect feminist icon as far as non-politics go. She isn't pretty, like Sarah Palin, so other women don't have to be jealous of that. She chose career instead of children, so she doesn't make the feminists feel guilty about that. She is divorced, instead of married to one hunky guy like Sarah Palin. She doesn't have a blue collar accent to mock.
It has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with culture and perception. Sure, Fiorina doesn't have the same political views as the feminazis, but she is one of them. They can identify with her.
At the same time, she turns off women like my wife, who doesn't identify with her. And I suspect my wife makes up more of the Republican Primary vote than feminists. My wife would rather have Ben Carson.
The instinct of a conventional politician is to talk as long as they can get away with talking. That's true of Sanders, Biden, and both Clintons every bit as much as it's true of the Republican field, except one. Fiorina is different. She says what needs to be said and shuts up. Even Trump talks too long. I'd like her as a candidate even if that's all she had going for her.
eric said...
At the same time, she turns off women like my wife, who doesn't identify with her. And I suspect my wife makes up more of the Republican Primary vote than feminists. My wife would rather have Ben Carson.
9/28/15, 11:39 AM
Ah but the questions becomes, if it is between Carly and Hillary!, does you wife run to the polls or get dragged?
The most salient difference between Fiorina and Palin is that Fiorina is smart and Palin is incandescently stupid.
I love that someone who has parlayed a glimpse on the national stage in an electoral loss into a very successful media enterprise is considered stupid.
Take a careful look at the EC maps.
http://metrocosm.com/us-presidential-elections/
"[...] 80% of the states, and also 78% of the counties representing 81% of the population, have been either red all four times or blue all four times in the last four Presidential elections. Furthermore, in the last four goes, the highest and lowest popular vote percentages for major party candidates has been 52.9 and 45.7, both in 2008, for Obama and McCain, respectively, the other six numbers, Bush-Gore, Bush-Kerry, Romney-Obama, have been tightly within that range. This means that the election is basically a function of the maximum 7% swing vote, most of those are in the 20% of swing states and 22% of swing counties."
Ps.
I hate people who use all three names. Most of them are murderers put to death.
If I was to use all three of my names in print, I would hope somebody would beat the shit out of me.
Thankyou.
"I've certainly heard she ran it into the ground," sort of like Obama ran the Annenberg Challenge into the ground.
FIFY
Ann Althouse said...
It seems normal and ideal for a governor to become the President, so any governor seems appropriate.
Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter... etc. etc.
Thomas Dewey, Mitt Romney, Mike Dukakis, Howard Dean, Mike Huckabee, Jerry Brown, Lamar Alexander, George Wallace, George Romney, Pete DuPont, Pete Wilson.
I'm not picking on you, Professor Althouse. I think there is something to the "governor to president" pathway. And there is something about "a record of votes as a Senator" that handicaps a Senatorial presidential candidate. But there's an awuful lot of gubernatorial roadkill out there.
And the funny thing is, looking at the list of governors who ran for President, I'd happily take Mitt Romney over a second term of Obama. I'd take George Romney over Nixon. And I think I'd take Tom Dewey over Harry Truman. Pete Wilson and Pete DuPont would have been great Presidents. We did miss out on some good presidents who were good governors.
"its that she wasn't a success. "
In hindsight, the Compaq deal was not only a success, but a necessary step to ensure HP's growth in the server market.
"I hate people who use all three names. Most of them are murderers put to death."
That's not actually true. Authorities use all three names to help be more specific which people they would like to bring to justice. It's for clarity's sake.
Repeating my take from yesterday on whether Carly's tenure at HP was good or bad for the company:
"@Freder, it's not what I read from academic analyses, it's what I experienced at the time as a designer of computer systems. I don't know how far down the ladder HP servers for N-tier client server systems came; pre-Compaq merger they hardly ever made our trade study space. Pre-Fiorina HP's operating system was HP-UX, a proprietary version of Unix System V and IMAO a dog. The firm I worked for never delivered a system to the federal government based on HP-UX due to its lack of openness and poor standards conformance. I note that while HP-UX is technically still alive, the HP-Integrity line of servers supports other operating systems such as both Red Hat and SUSE Linux. Pre-Fiorina HP tried to peddle a proprietary RDBMS named IRIS(which they marketed as an object-oriented DBMS but it was just a wrapper around a relational core). At a data management conference I heard the head of an HP data management research talk about her group's work, which was based on a different commercial product and not on IRIS. So pre-Fiorina at least one research group was doing research for the sake of research and not for the sake of improving their product lineup. You would criticize Fiorina for putting a stop to that?
What I saw when Fiorina came in was a company that was not a competitor in any area except printers. When she was forced out, it was a company whose products we were buying for ourselves at home, the corporation I worked for was buying as our standard desktop, and we were incorporating into the systems we designed and built for the federal government. There was a lot of bitching from within HP about Fiorina overturning "the HP Way," but nothing in the tenets of the HP Way says anything about guaranteed lifetime employment, and HP was scarcely the only IT firm to lay off employees and lose market value during the dot-com bubble burst. After the climb-out from the bubble bursting HP found itself in the position of #1 vendor of personal computers. If you can figure out how they would have gotten there without buying Compaq, let me know. They certainly weren't going to do it with the HP-9000 line, HP-UX, and IRIS.
Fiorina may suffer when compared to Silicon Valley rock star Mark Hurd, who immediately followed her, but so would nearly everybody else. Fiorina looks very good when compared to Leo Apotheker, who followed Hurd. Under his tenure HP lost 25% in one day and over half its market value before he was forced out. HP, like any other major IT vendor is continuing the sort of restructuring and layoffs that began under Fiorina. It's a natural part of the business. Fiorina laid off 30,000 people as a consequence of the purchase of Compaq. Between 2012 and 2014, which comes three CEOs after Fiorina, HP laid off 34,000 and announced the impending layoffs of another 11,000 to 16,000 and no one seems to care. Because it's a man who laid them off?"
"She doesn't have a blue collar accent to mock."
It's as unfair as some of the BS this article's author brings up..but her accent is beyond "blue collar". It's just very difficult to run for national office with such grating voice.
But to me, that bus fiasco and charging "grass roots" Tea partiers $90k to show up rubbed me the wrong way as well.
Can't the feminist crowd give Carly props for her snarky Buzzfeed clip?
Today's blog theme that unexpected feeling of sympathy you get for someone you dislike when they are attacked by someone you dislike more.
Isn't there a German word for that?
HP and Compaq were disputing about who had the fastest computer and both were faster than IBM which they ran into the ground and they were cheaper because they used AMD CPU's. So HP buying the opponent (Compaq) should have been a good move by Fiorina. Unfortunately around the time of the merger, Intel came out with a CPU chip that blew AMD chips out of the water and neither HP nor Compaq was then able to be faster AND cheaper. They had to use expensive Intel chips or slow, cheap AMD chips. The game changed.
That's what I believe happened. The computer world changes all the time.
But anyhow Fiorina spent her life in the corporate business world with clever, aggressive players circling each other like sharks and slashing like gangs in West Side Story whereas Palin was matched against Alaska politicians. So Fiorina is able to slash with a smile and has never thought she would have to do otherwise. She would have control of the White House staff and would not be a lazy spoiled brat moaning and shirking when work was needed like the current inmate. And just picture her taking on the media then - I am sure the media is picturing it. Careful, Chuckie boy, she might have power soon.
And to the above I might add that only a few years before Fiorina was brought in to turn around HP, a fellow named Louis Gerstner was brought in to rescue an even sicker IBM. Just as Fiorina had to change "the HP Way" or see the company go down the tubes, Gerstner had to change the IBM corporate culture set in place by the hallowed Thomas Watson Jr. and Sr., including the layoffs of 100,000 employees.
Hillary seems like every time she answers a question, she has to parse a set of rules she has internalized imposed by each element of the coalition she imagines she has amassed, so she can never answer any question directly.
That, for me, is a huge issue. I don't WANT to have to sit there and parse every syllable a President says to find the way they will get out of their statement or promise.
People can say Bush mangled English --- but I understood him way better than I ever did the Clintons.
That's the problem--you don't want to have to be the one explaining. The Dems will hit her repeatedly with that, and they can put that on a bumper sticker.
The problem the Dems have, though, is that the Clinton Foundation is unbelievably filthy. It's exceptionally easy to tar Clinton for doing markedly worse than Carly dreamed of doing.
"Why did countries that paid for Bill to speak get deals approved by State soon afterwards so often?" is a question that Hillary is never going to be able to answer.
The media has a Goldilocks complex about Republicans.
Romney was too successful and Fiorina was too unsuccessful.
Palin was too attractive and Fiorina is too steely.
Trump is too loud and Carson is too quiet.
But Hillary, wife of rapist, seller of her country's secrets for cash, woman of no accomplishment anyone can remember. Hillary is just right for America.
Big Mike @9/28/15, 12:15 PM:
Thanks for taking the trouble to write and re-post that. I'm not a Fiorina fan (in any way, shape, or form), but this "she ran HP into the ground" stuff is tiresome.
Brand said...
"I realize Fiorina came from a privileged background, but it is still quite an accomplishment to become a CEO of a major company (especially in a field where female CEOs were very rare at the time) so a good faith feminist who does not care for Fiorina's politics should at least be able to respect that."
You know she started as a secretary and worked her way up right?
Brando: I think I can speak some millenial. "Shade" as in "throwing shade" means "dagger eyes" or "bad vibes" and so a "shade queen" is totes awesome at doing that.
Thanks, Brando. Saved this old fart the trouble of having to look that up.
KenK, you explain to me how Hillary is as attractive a candidate as Obama and Bill Clinton, and I will look at your figures on elections involving them.
For now, Hillary is underwater with almost nobody undecided, and her path is predicated on some plan cooked up by consultants that can maybe overcome that.
Forest, trees.
The problem the Dems have, though, is that the Clinton Foundation is unbelievably filthy. It's exceptionally easy to tar Clinton for doing markedly worse than Carly dreamed of doing.
Yes! How much money did they collect for the relief of Haiti, and how much did they disburse?
@Angledyne, but if the election 13 months and one week from now is Fiorina versus H. Clinton, will you vote for the better woman?
You all need to stop concerning yourselves with Hillary. She is done. Obama is going to force her out. He would put her in jail if it wouldn't tarnish his legacy. He has all the ammo he needs to finish her campaign. He is just trying to do it with minimal fallout for the Dem party.
"Ah but the questions becomes, if it is between Carly and Hillary!, does you wife run to the polls or get dragged?"
Neither. We can only vote by mail in ballot here.
But, my wife will most likely end up voting for whoever the Republican nominee is. She would never vote for Hillary.
The tech billionaires and Hollywood rich have chosen Hillary. The Democrats will fall in line.
Yes! How much money did they collect for the relief of Haiti, and how much did they disburse?
None of that matters because the Clintons solemnly believe in a woman's right to choose.
I'll go with Big Mike's view of Fiorina's tenure at HP. It's a tough world out there and I've watched companies merge and fold and go through waves and waves of downsizing/right sizing.
The thing about being CEO of a major company is that you are rarely allowed to simply vote "present". The business cycle won't allow you to sit on your keister.
I had the unpleasant experience of watching what happened at my old Fortune 50 oil company when it ran out of ideas and competent CEO's at the same time. The Board elected a CEO who had risen through the ranks, always preparing for the job he would have after his next job. I.e. he was preparing for two steps up the ladder. Which was great until he reached the top rung and didn't have a flippin' clue as to what to do. We were acquired two years into his tenure.
So Fiorina made some moves and changed her company's direction--and steered it through some rocks and shoals. And then the Board decided it was time for a change.
That doesn't change my view; she's a smart woman; she's been prepared very well on foreign security issues. She's quick on her feet. And she's actually had to run things and to make decisions that have consequences. I doubt that she ever voted present in her life.
Will she get to the Oval Office? Who knows. If it's a choice between Fiorina and Hillary Clinton my vote is already cast.
“contrary to the conservative female narrative, the way she looks, the way she presents herself, the no-nonsense businesswoman thing.”
Erin Gloria Ryan really meant "conservative female stereotype, didn't she?
If my daughter turns out to be like Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, or Carly Fiorina I would be proud.
If she turns out to be a Eugenicist like Margaret Sanger, or liar and rider of coattails like Hillary, or a militant, bitter, man-hating campus feminist, and falsifying her race and being ashamed of her family, I will be severely disappointed.
"The HP Way" = "The Wisconsin Idea"
Both old fashioned ideas that had to be confronted. HP could easily have gone the way of Data General and Wisconsin could go the way of Illinois, which is having trouble paying lottery winners and pensioners (How they tell them apart is anybody's guess.)
Maybe she can compare HP's difficulties vs Solyndra's failure and Tesla's 5 billion in subsidies..
If the Republicans nominate a female Romney, how do they ensure she doesn't share Romney's fate?
"You know she started as a secretary and worked her way up right?"
That's true, and I'm not taking anything away from her achievement as I noted--but she did have a privileged background--her father was a Duke Law School Dean.
"The problem the Dems have, though, is that the Clinton Foundation is unbelievably filthy. It's exceptionally easy to tar Clinton for doing markedly worse than Carly dreamed of doing."
Hillary is absolutely in a glass house and throwing stones all over the place. This is why she is going to have to do everything possible to poison the image of Fiorina as a (a) failed CEO and (b) heartless CEO who caused job loss while taking big bonuses (whether that's true or not is immaterial, as this is Clintonism we're talking about).
It's why I'm betting a lot of Dems are less than thrilled about Hillary being their standard bearer--her own past and corrupt ties only complicate their standard attack. But either way, if Fiorina starts looking like the nominee, expect a deluge of attacks that will make what Obama did to Romney look like kid gloves.
And that's just the stuff the Clintons will do openly. Their "surrogates" (the same sort who started the "birther" crap that Hillary pretended she had nothing to do with) will come up with far slimier stuff. We might be entering the ugliest campaign season in a long time.
If the Republicans nominate a female Romney, how do they ensure she doesn't share Romney's fate?
Not being a Mormon will certainly help.
she refused to admit that she told a blatant lie
The gall of that woman, to claim that she had seen something in that video which plainly did not exist: the provocation behind the attack on the Benghazi consulate.
I suspect Palin thought that being born again would guarantee success.
"In hindsight, the Compaq deal was not only a success, but a necessary step to ensure HP's growth in the server market."
Yeah, probably right. Sadly, that's not very persuasive to Low information voters. Saying her stock price fell by 1/2 under here watch is. Bottom line: its like a football coach claiming he did a great job when the team when 7-9. He probably did a great job under the circumstances but all people care about is he lost 9 games and didn't make the playoffs.
Re Fiorina and PP. We forget her essential challenge was to "watch the videos" then talk about federal funding for PP.
Just listening to high officials in PP discuss fetal parts over cocktails is disgusting. We can argue over the images but the words themselves are compelling.
"Yeah, probably right. Sadly, that's not very persuasive to Low information voters. Saying her stock price fell by 1/2 under here watch is. Bottom line: its like a football coach claiming he did a great job when the team when 7-9. He probably did a great job under the circumstances but all people care about is he lost 9 games and didn't make the playoffs."
That's also true about politics--a governor could be doing a lot of smart and beneficial things that prevent say the local economy from getting worse, or that help the state out in the long run, but instead people will point to an uptick in the unemployment rate as if that's proof the governor was a failure. A voter who takes the time to pay attention will be able to see what the governor did under the circumstances and judge whether they did a good job. But for the low information crowd or the ideological crowd, none of that matters.
Paco Wové said...
"If the Republicans nominate a female Romney, how do they ensure she doesn't share Romney's fate?"
Did she write and pass obamacare as a governor? Romney didn't fail because he was rich and successful. He failed because he was a big government shill the GOPe tried to foist on the country after they visceously trashed every other candidate that might have cut the size and scope of government.
The conversation here should be about the differences between Fiorina and Palin/Bachman.
The GLARING differences are between Fiorina and Hillary Clinton. If Hillary is the best the left-wing feminists have to offer for the first female President, what a let-down.
And I have always been baffled how feminists can claim to speak for, and claim to know what's best for all women. Can you even imagine someone making the claim that they represent the views or best interests of ALL men? That's just asinine.
Abortion would always be legal in America. We are entrenched in it. I don't think President Fiorina would touch its legality, but it is refreshing to hear her say that it does affect our national character. There is a difference between 6 weeks, and 20 weeks, and harvesting organs.
I'm glad she has the guts to say it, and I would be proud to vote for her.
But either way, if Fiorina starts looking like the nominee, expect a deluge of attacks that will make what Obama did to Romney look like kid gloves.
And this will be different than any other candidate how? Hillary is so underwater in her approval ratings that her only option is the mother of all shit storms for a campaign.
It is not true that she worked her way up from secretary, in the way most of us understand that phrase. I consider myself reasonably well informed, and I, too, bought that line she peddles every chance she gets. I wish she would stop, because when people find out, it looks like she's slumming and puffing.
Skim her bio on Wikipedia. She worked as a secretary in the summer when she was in college, and again very briefly after college. She started her career at age 25 with a prestigious education: B.A. from Stanford (sound like most secretaries you know?) and an MBA--as a management trainee at ATT. Her father was a federal appeals court judge and as noted above, a Dean at Duke Law School. She had about as privileged an upbringing as it gets. She taught English in Bologna, Italy, too, after Stanford. Typical smart, rich, sheltered 20-something. Nothing to be ashamed of. She clearly is very smart and worked hard to rise through the management track at a tech company (ATT, although she was in marketing), and I credit her for doing that herself. But the incredibly difficult leap from genuinely low-status worker to the C-suite? No.
I can't wait until Hillary explains how her status as dowager president, on which basis she is running for president, was earned in a way that Carly's rise to the top of HP was not.
"Romney didn't fail because he was rich and successful."
Romney didn't fail because he was rich and successful. He failed because Obama successfully painted him as rich and out of touch and callous, quite unfairly but effectively. Post election polls showed that Romney consistently scored better than Obama on most key issues (economy, health care) but Obama beat him handily over the "cares about my problems" question.
Romneycare hurt Romney because it made it difficult for him to effectively attack Obamacare, but it's not as though voters who didn't like Romneycare decided to instead vote for the guy whose health plan emulated it.
"And this will be different than any other candidate how? Hillary is so underwater in her approval ratings that her only option is the mother of all shit storms for a campaign."
Oh, they'll attack viciously and nastily no matter who it is--I'm not naive enough to think even Pope Francis would get a free pass by the Clintons if he stood in their way. I'm just noting what the nature of the attack will be, and that any GOP rapid response team had better be ready for it as Romney's was not.
Likewise, if Carson were the nominee? Just wait for a Clinton ad where they quite literally say the man botched someone's surgery. You'd think that would be too low, but then remember who these people are.
"Romneycare hurt Romney because it made it difficult for him to effectively attack Obamacare, but it's not as though voters who didn't like Romneycare decided to instead vote for the guy whose health plan emulated it."
Romneycare hurt Romney because a lot of us stayed home. Voting for a republican because he will grow government slower than the democrat is not motivating.
Paco Wové said...
If the Republicans nominate a female Romney, how do they ensure she doesn't share Romney's fate?
9/28/15, 1:07 PM
There is no comparison between the way Romney responded to those attacks and way Fiorina will. That alone will make a huge difference.
"Romneycare hurt Romney because a lot of us stayed home. Voting for a republican because he will grow government slower than the democrat is not motivating."
You stayed home in 2012? You had a choice between Romney who passed a health care plan as governor that you didn't like and which he later disowned, and Obama who proudly passed the national version of that plan--and which Romney promised to repeal and Obama promised to implement--and you decided there was no difference between the two?
Mind you, I'm not doubting you or criticizing that decision, I'm just doubtful that a game-changing number of potential voters made that decision.
Fiorina is great but I lost a lot of respect for her over the alleged Planned Parenthood footage she so vividly denounced at the last debate. The footage is not from Planned Parenthood and she won't admit it. She keeps bluffing her way through and refusing to answer quite reasonable questions from Chuck Todd, who was persistent but very polite.
Paul Ciotti
Glad to hear your concern. But you might look at it this way. Fiorina has adopted a tactic that has worked for years for the left. She is lying to your face. So sorry you are offended, but guess what? Most of the undecided voters who heard her are convinced. So a win for Fiorina. I hope she keeps it up because low information voters are low information voters and if they can be persuaded with lies then so be it. The end, as you know, justifies the means.
And that's just the stuff the Clintons will do openly. Their "surrogates" (the same sort who started the "birther" crap that Hillary pretended she had nothing to do with) will come up with far slimier stuff. We might be entering the ugliest campaign season in a long time.
Partly why I have few problems with Trump. If he wins the nomination, even if he personally likes the Clintons, he likes winning way more. He will carpetbomb Bill and her as much as anybody humanly can.
And I think GOP supporters would be wise to start making sure her friends' names become public. Have her explain how anybody can be friends with a sub-human slug like Blumenthal or Brock.
That's also true about politics--a governor could be doing a lot of smart and beneficial things that prevent say the local economy from getting worse, or that help the state out in the long run, but instead people will point to an uptick in the unemployment rate as if that's proof the governor was a failure.
Don't even need that much. Gingrich was working to fundamentally change America, it appeared, in 1994-5. Then he made one asinine comment whining about Air Force One or something and it was over. He's the still the most effective Speaker the GOP has ever had.
And this will be different than any other candidate how? Hillary is so underwater in her approval ratings that her only option is the mother of all shit storms for a campaign.
She's hoping to copy Harry Reid's last election strategy.
And if a Republican ignores it, then the press will report on the attack. If they fight back, the press will bemoan all of the "mud-slinging".
The footage is not from Planned Parenthood and she won't admit it.
The facts of her case are correct, but Planned Parenthood wasn't stupid enough to provide actual footage of things we all know happened, so I am voting for Hillary!
"Mind you, I'm not doubting you or criticizing that decision, I'm just doubtful that a game-changing number of potential voters made that decision."
How can the republican party dominate every off year election and have nearly twice as many governorships as well as state houses but so thoroughly lose one electoral race? How do you explain if you add up support for the "establishment" candidates it comes to 30ish percent? How do explain Trump?
We are watching our country get torn apart by people who hate us and hate our freedom. We are tired of people who are selling us out so they can feed at the government trough. Romney promised to manage leviathan. We want it burned down. There are a lot of us.
Sorry, Althouse had the issue covered in her original post. Those of you upset with Fiorina's "blatant lie" should read it again:
most will be horrified by the story and want to know if it’s true, and those who want to say but Carly was wrong about seeing the incident in the video will seem morally unbalanced, perhaps monstrous. That’s what you want to talk about?!
"Carly Fiorina is an ice-cold shade queen debate princess and I’m in love with and terrified of her."
That sentence is a symptom of premenstrual dysphoric disorder, which, of course, doesn't exist.
The most salient difference between Fiorina and Palin is that Fiorina is smart and Palin is incandescently stupid.
See, this is the stuff that just rankles me to no end. The robot who says stuff like this says it because they heard it from someone else that they agree with, so hey, who needs verification?
Being not ready for the big time doesn't mean anyone is stupid. You don't have a single shred of evidence that she's stupid in any way.
Paul Ciotti said...
"Fiorina is great but I lost a lot of respect for her over the alleged Planned Parenthood footage she so vividly denounced at the last debate. The footage is not from Planned Parenthood and she won't admit it. "
And the people who work for planned parenthood who discussed how they harvest and sell baby parts won't admit they harvest and sell baby parts.
"How can the republican party dominate every off year election and have nearly twice as many governorships as well as state houses but so thoroughly lose one electoral race? How do you explain if you add up support for the "establishment" candidates it comes to 30ish percent? How do explain Trump?"
A lot can explain the difference between GOP off-year election success and the Dem advantage at the presidential election level--GOP voters being more spread out and having a district/state advantage, higher presidential-year turnout and a big-state firewall helping the Dems in White House races, advantages over different demographics--and the big debate lately among those on the Right seems to be whether they would do better picking a more moderate candidate or a more conservative one. The last two cycles they got the worst of both worlds--relative moderates who never could excite the party's right, but who tried to paint themselves as very conservative and helped the Dems drum up their own vote.
Neither the "we need a moderate" nor the "we need a serious conservative" wings are going to convince each other, as they interpret evidence differently anyway (note the argument over whether Romney lost because conservatives stayed home or whether he lost because he couldn't appeal to enough minorities and moderates). For my part, the GOP will need to find someone who is a good enough politician to do both--maintain cred among the Right and appeal outside that group. Otherwise, they are just arguing over which under-50% block they will get.
The Democrats were able to paint Romney as out-of-touch and rich because he WAS out-of-touch and rich. He not only refused to go after Obama too hard for fear of being called a racist, he continued to justify his support for TARP while criticizing the Auto bailouts. As you might imagine, that went over just great with the working class independents in the Midwest. Like someone said, Romney acted like he was Boss who fired your father so the profit margin would go up .00001%.
Throw in his obvious support for free trade, open borders, amnesty (despite his lying flip-flop during the primary) and large numbers of Republicans just said 'no thanks' and stayed home.
There's a lot of appeal in "outsiders" but the problem is you really need to know how the system works or you're likely to be taken along for a ride, or be forced to rely too much on other insiders--like how Obama did when he took office.
Obama, the self-proclaimed "smartest guy in the room", didn't rely on ANYONE, other than Val Jarrett. He's the type who would listen to those insiders, but make the decision himself. And he's done quite a few things over the last 7 years that went outside the norm. People on the Dem side suggested he not push the national health care thing, since the vote was as close as it was and the polls were against it. He didn't listen, for one example.
The Dems will win POTUS. Carly. Trump, Carson, and Rubio cant likely carry THEIR OWN HOME STATES. Let that unpleasant fact sink in. what does it say about the pretentious pipe dreams of the GOP?
Got some insider information to back this theory up? Last I looked, you actually have to count actual votes to verify this.
"Obama, the self-proclaimed "smartest guy in the room", didn't rely on ANYONE, other than Val Jarrett."
That's not really true--he deferred a great deal to Rahm Emanuel, Joe Biden to some extent, but Congressional Democrats (like Reid and Pelosi) a lot during his first two years. It was particularly the latter that shaped his agenda and led to policies like the stimulus and the ACA.
"He failed because he was a big government shill the GOPe tried to foist on the country after they visceously trashed every other candidate that might have cut the size and scope of government."
No, he was attacked incessantly and was unable to respond because the GOP convention was late in 2012. The Romneycare slander has been as effective as the KGB nuclear slander of the 50s. He was willing to try the individual mandate that Heritage had been studying. After it passed and he vetoed the employer mandate the D legislature had added, Deval Patrick signed it and more. Meanwhile the D legislature overrode Romney's veto.
Romney was chiefly trashed by Gingrich who had run his "campaign" out of a suitcase.
I'm sure you're pleased with Obama who you helped elect.
I don't doubt that, but it obscures the fact that she is going to have a very tough time energizing her side to come out and vote for her as well as winning over the moderates that are necessary to swing the election her way. Besides, much of the problem she's having is symptomatic of her weakness as a politician, which isn't really something she can cover or change overnight.
This kind of hits what I'm thinking. In addition, however, is that blacks turned out in droves for Obama. Their participation rate was record-setting in both 2008 and 2012. Hillary is NOT going to get that kind of participation, not after Obama.
It makes sense that Jezebel loves Carliebel's style since they are birds of a feather.
The mystery is how quickly her spells have worked on the men and women of both Parties. But she did HP in as quickly using her talent.
"(ATT, although she was in marketing)"
The marketing background might help her more than the C-suite experience.
"But she did HP in as quickly using her talent."
I forgot HP went completely under during her tenure. I miss them so much.
" I miss them so much."
Me too. Funny how the HP disappearance was done so quietly that nobody knew.
Her tenure at HP MAY work against her, but otherwise she does come across as very well spoken. Compare her responses for example to Trumps views on a host of issues. But she also has some of the same passion that he exhibits, without as much foolishness.
I wouldn't mind her as the VP candidate with Rubio as the frontrunner. First Hispanic/women combo.
In regards to Carly Fiorina and her HP tenure here is some truth:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/21/technology/fiorina-layoffs/index.html
She ended up having more people working at HP after she left than when she was hired, so though she laid off workers they also hired workers. Note the timeline. She was hired in 1999 and 8 months later had already laid off more than a thousand. Because the PC makers at the time were jettisoning workers, since no one was buying PC's. HP wasnt' the only company that was losing jobs. So to blame Fiorina for it solely is perhaps propaganda.
In regards to the HP/Compaq deal there's this:
http://www.crn.com/news/mobility/231601009/the-hp-compaq-merger-partners-reflect-10-years-later.htm
Ten years on, according to this op ed, it achieved the results and was a net gain for both companies. Not stating my opinion on whether this oped is correct, since I don't in fact know.
But, that's what CEO's do. Try to right the ship. If it doesn't work out it doesn't always mean they made mistakes.
I'm actually holding out for a Rubio/Carson ticket. As I really want to be able to accuse any liberal opposed to their policies as being straight up racists. They not only hate blacks but also Hispanics! Fiorina would work too. If you oppose her you are a sexist and also hate Hispanics and/or African americans (whoever wins)
Playing the race/sexism card is fun.
"But she did HP in as quickly using her talent." 9/28/15, 4:09 PM
@Trad Guy: This is ridiculous. Your posts used to be entertaining. What happened?
Trump/Fiorina!
Two things:
- Mrs. Fiorina, she said, is “contrary to the conservative female narrative, the way she looks, the way she presents herself, the no-nonsense businesswoman thing.”
I have worked with a variety of conservative professional women, mostly in silicon valley, and the "no-nonsense businesswoman thing" was the norm among them. How is this contrary to any "conservative female narrative"? Or is the progressive model of conservative women stuck back at Anita Bryant (or more accurately, Anita Bryant's reported public persona)?
- The language. Oh boy, the language:"ice-cold", "queen", "princess", "in love". The author must have some kind of switch in her head that says this is an appropriate way to talk about a candidate woman, as long as she is on the Dark Side. But, it IS from Jezebel, hardly a hotbed of intellectual rigor. Apparently the NYT is on board, too.
If Fiorina gets the nomination, it will be interesting to hear the public comments of the Board members who voted to fire her. 😈
What's your dream ticket?
The USA needs and wants passion and wisdom and experience.
Jim DeMint for President. Marco Rubio for Vice.
The footage is not from Planned Parenthood and she won't admit it.
The facts of her case are correct, but Planned Parenthood wasn't stupid enough to provide actual footage of things we all know happened, so I am voting for Hillary!
The company that provided the footage does not identify where the filmed it.It could be PP.
>> What's your dream ticket?
Fiorina/Palin
I'd settle for Fiorina/Rubio.
Ten years on, according to this op ed, it achieved the results and was a net gain for both companies. Not stating my opinion on whether this oped is correct, since I don't in fact know.
But, that's what CEO's do. Try to right the ship. If it doesn't work out it doesn't always mean they made mistakes.
Good comment. I think her time there os defensible and she is much tougher as an interview than Romney who let it get away from him. I was very, very pessimistic after he lost. I am seeing a tiny gleam of hope now with Carly and Carson.
Any combination of Rubio, Fiorina, Carson or Cruz would work nicely for me.
Also, I'd vote without hesitation for a ticket including Bush, Christie, Graham, Huckabee, Jindal, Kasich, Pataki, or Santorum.
Only Trump or Paul would inspire third-party fantasies. It it too much to ask to have a conservative to vote for?
Fred Drinkwater wrote:
Oh boy, the language:"ice-cold", "queen", "princess", "in love". The author must have some kind of switch in her head that says this is an appropriate way to talk about a candidate woman, as long as she is on the Dark Side.
Such negative terminology when it comes to ladies in power. Almost like they are implying something. are they insinuating she's bossy?
Is it ok to call her ice cold so long as the word bossy isn't invoked? I know the feminists have a problem with the b word.
While we're wondering whether someone else could have done a better job than Carly Fiorina at Hewlett-Packard, let's also wonder whether someone else could have come up with a better policy on Libya. At least no one died because of Fiorina's term as CEO of HP.
Rubio is a liar and a betrayer. He cannot be on the ticket if you want to win.
I am not even particularly angry about immigration, but to get elected he said no amnesty and promptly joined with schumer to pass amnesty. Zero integrity outweighs pretty face. A huge chunk of the base will stay home if Rubio is on the ticket.
As a PC/tech guy in the oil industry in the 80s and 90s, I can remember going to the local HP office for technical and sales meetings and noticing how stale, dull, and static they were. They'd happily flog their minicomputers and small laboratory computer systems and talk about their glorious past in the instrumentation business. If their laser printer business (built around a Canon laser engine) hadn't taken off, they would have disappeared sooner or later. The Compaq purchase together with the systemic changes that Fiorina made eventually turned them around -- but the institutional inertia in the company and resentment of Fiorina for forcing them to be a business (instead of the HP Country Club) caused enough foot-dragging that the board finally had to replace her (but kept the new policies in place).
“On Saturday, women wearing pink, some of whom were paid by Planned Parenthood, protested Mrs. Fiorina at a campaign appearance in Iowa, throwing condoms and chanting, ‘Women are watching, and we vote,'” reported the New York Times.
Where our tax money is going.
It is so nice to know that liberals will not vote for anyone who has less than a stellar record of leadership!
At least no one died because of Fiorina's term as CEO of HP.
I'm sure they'll find someone whom she gave cancer.
It it too much to ask to have a conservative to vote for?
Paul is the actual small government conservative you're looking for.
Jim DeMint for President.
Who? ; )
"I'm actually holding out for a Rubio/Carson ticket. As I really want to be able to accuse any liberal opposed to their policies as being straight up racists. They not only hate blacks but also Hispanics! Fiorina would work too. If you oppose her you are a sexist and also hate Hispanics and/or African americans (whoever wins)
Playing the race/sexism card is fun."
A Carson/Susanna Martinez ticket would hit the trifecta. Hopefully Susanna is a closet lesbian.
Irrelevant questions, but of course, the Solon not understanding that FDR wasn't president or
on tv in 1929, never registered here,
odd, how she was so prescient then:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sarah-palin-on-russian-action-in-ukraine-told-you-so/
I say that Fiorina is more like Palin than unlike Palin. That's why they attract and repel the same people. The feminist Althouse quotes here is an outlier. They will all march in lockstep against Fiorina when the sisterhood calls.
On the other hand, "pro-life" used to be a progressive position -- at least in Madison, WI back in the day: link
"I am seeing a tiny gleam of hope..."
Wow, from Stage 5 all the way back to Stage 1.
Women!
Althouse doesn't brink up the legendary conniption fit, that Jezebel had when she was picked, I wonder why that is?
"A huge chunk of the base will stay home if Rubio is on the ticket."
Given the fractured and contentious state of the Republican party these days--i read the comments all over the web thingy--huge chunks will stay home no matter who the nominee is. I myself will not vote for a couple if nominated (for the first time in my life).
Here comes Hillary! Embrace the Decline. Welcome the Fall.
Todd started out as a staffer for Tom Harkin, probably one of the five most left wing senators in the body at the time,
Hillary isn't likely to get the nomination Obama was the excuse, last time, Sanders or Biden will the beneficiary next time,
Hillary or whomever. Like there's a difference on the Left. Stalin or Trotsky. What difference at this point does it make?
here's a thought, if you showed footage of the Haitian disaster, and showed how her scam had defrauded that trajically accursed isle,
Carson and Condi. Watch the Left spontaneously combust.
she was a CEO in a tough era of consolidation, Beldar has described the particulars, her successors haven't hard a measurably easier time of it,
"I am seeing a tiny gleam of hope..."
I see this with Carson and Fiorina. Both are hopeful.
The politicians, not so much.
BN said...
"A huge chunk of the base will stay home if Rubio is on the ticket."
" Given the fractured and contentious state of the Republican party these days--i read the comments all over the web thingy--huge chunks will stay home no matter who the nominee is. I myself will not vote for a couple if nominated (for the first time in my life).
Here comes Hillary! Embrace the Decline. Welcome the Fall."
First off Hillary will be out of the campaign by Iowa. Obama will have her indicted if she doesn't go "willingly."
Second if one of the non establishment candidates are the nominee, i.e. Cruz, Fiorina, Trump or Carson, then the only GOPe voters staying home will be the Virginia Maryland Delaware residents. The GOP will get more voters from everywhere else in the country than have ever come out.
This isn't ideological. This is class. Political class vs. the country. If the Dems are not smart enough to nominate someone outside the political class and the GOP does it will be a landslide.
This isn't ideological. This is class. Political class vs. the country. If the Dems are not smart enough to nominate someone outside the political class and the GOP does it will be a landslide.
Agree. But who does the DNC have in their quiver who isn't quivering?
When she has some quick answers about the embargo'd tech she sold Iran through a shell company, then I'll be impressed.
now why was her statements not given due credit at the time, this might be why?
http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2008/06/mccain-campaign.html
Post a Comment