That’s a weird thing to post in a thread about about Fiorina, who did the exact opposite in all 3 companies she broke.
Do you know what an externality is?
I’m not sure I’d vote for Hillary, anyway. There’s just something (or maybe a few “somethings”) about her that just rubs me the wrong way. Or maybe it’s more (and I’ve mentioned this in other threads) that I don’t think it’s right to have aNOther Clinton (or aNOther Bush) in the White House, at least not so soon after one’s husband (and the other’s brother) occupied it. Ridiculous. So, no - Hillary can’t automatically count on MY vote (either in the primaries OR in the general election) just because the letter “D” precedes her name. But the "R"s stand even LESS of a chance of getting my vote because of what someone else referred to as a “clown-car clusterf*ck” (or words to that effect) that IS the ReTHUGliCON Party these days. For 2016 I might just have to consider a 3rd party candidate for President. Or just not vote at all.
Though she probably thinks it’s clever.
Fiorinaactslikeatwoyearoldwithatantrum.com might be available.
Hint: It’s something that business leaders can pretend exists, but not public servants.
For the sake of the immediate future of the country, I put all that aside. The alternative to Hillary (and in the real world, assuming she is nominated, there is only one – the Republican candidate) would be so dangerous to America, Americans, and the world, that I will very gladly vote for her. She is very far from perfect, but the alternative would be so, so terribly worse.
Fiorina owed $500,000 to her campaign staff for four years after her 2010 Senate campaign until she finally paid them off late last year. I guess that golden parachute from HP didn’t last her very long.
I agree with DJ Motorbike. Fiorina is highly qualified to win the GOP nomination: few can top her incompetence. HP stock lost half of its value during her tenure, the merger with Compaq made no sense and she made Portfolio’s list of Worst CEO’s of All Time. The wonderful bonuses she paid herself as the stock plummeted were a nice touch.
She’s probably less of a human failure than neoconservative GOP Presidential hopeful John Bolton though. I mean Carly only laid off 30,000 people. Bolton was a leading cheerleader for a $2 trillion pointless adventure in Iraq. It will be hard for Fiorina to match that record.
Well, that cinches it. I am totally not voting for Seth Meyers, Tech Candidate.
Even though Fiorina has to beat a couple dozen GOP hopefuls before even getting a chance to take on presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, her “strategy” (loosely used in this case) seems to involve stalking her and telling us all how horrible she is.
This didn’t work out as well as she might have hoped recently:
Bringing this thread back to life.
This ad is spot on. It’s the perfect response to the Donald.
“Look At This Face”
That’s an excellent ad.
That’s a mostly excellent ad, but she lost me when she said “Democrat party”. It’s stupid to take a cheap shot when you’re defending yourself against a cheap shot, IMO.
Fiorina’s got political skills. But what makes her good in campaigns and at ladder climbing does not make her a leader.
Fiorina strikes me as someone who is just driven by ambition. She spent all that money one her Senate campaign, lost badly, but came right back try for an even bigger job. She doesn’t seem to have much in the way of policy ideas. Now all the candidates are driven, but they all seem to have a governing philosophy, bad as some of them are.
Didn’t Carly get herself the eleventh chair at the ten-chair Big Boy table tomorrow night by whining and bitching that she was left out due to sexism? Doesn’t she claim that she was shitcanned by Hewlitt-Packard after running them into a ditch purely because of sexism?
Screw her. Trump can sexism her all he wants, for all I care.
Political skills? Not in evidence. She botched her Senate campaign worse than she had to (she’d have lost anyway, but not so badly) and got fired by McCain for shooting off her mouth.
And HP (both parts) laying of 10% of its workforce in the next few months is going to remind everyone of her layoffs.
What I meant is that she’s good at debating, and her positions are right down the middle of the GOP mainstream across the board. She’s running a very conventional campaign and doing it fairly well.
The problem for her, as always, is that she has a shitty record.
I think her biggest problem is her HP record. Trump’s opinion of HP’s performance in recent years is in line with most of Wall Street, not to mention consumers (their PC’s have gone downhill since last '90s). Did she really think Trump wouldn’t mention the recent job cuts there and attribute them to the downward slope begun with Fiorina? Her only thing is that she’s a woman; she’s this year’s Alan Keyes or Herman Cain (in terms of sheer tokenism). She’s not Carson, who actually has the conservative credentials.
Also, call this “sexist,” or whatever (I’m not a PC liberal, I’m an unPC left-centrist); she is ugly as hell and you need to be somewhat good or acceptable looking on camera to win the election. If it were her vs. Hillary (who has worked on her likeability, and at least has a pretty smile), Fiorina would get smoked.
The Clinton team seems to disagree. They released some oppo research on Fiorina, basically backing up Trump. they obviously would rather face Trump.
You’re basing this on a single instance of Team Clinton’s releasing negative info on one candidate?
One data point is not a pattern.