America Votes 2010

[NorthSideSox72]

She was perhaps the greatest salesperson CEO in the past twenty or so years. She was able to sell some very savvy individuals on some pretty "interesting" ideas. I believe Jas' comment is more along the lines of being the worst player in the Hall of Fame. Hells bells, she got there, that is pretty damn sweet, and did it with multiple companies.

buh?

 

[StrangeSox]

buh?

 

She conned a bunch of people into giving her the CEO job and made a bunch of money for herself. At least that's what I got out of it.

 

Not exactly a strong defense of her record or her potential for governance, though.

[Balta1701]

Not exactly a strong defense of her record or her potential for governance, though.

Well, she was running for the Senate.

[StrangeSox]

Well, she was running for the Senate.

 

Wouldn't that be part of the government, and hence governance?

[Balta1701]

Wouldn't that be part of the government, and hence governance?

You're saying that being in the Senate these days involves governing...and not conning people out of money?

[StrangeSox]

:why you!:

[Texsox]

buh?

 

How many people can match her job for job? 50? 100? 500? 1,000? Small numbers compared to our total population. I'll agree she is an example of making mistakes at the top, but she sold people within those organizations and their boards on some of this stuff. For that she is an excellent salesperson. I also base that on my belief that she thought she was doing the right thing.

[Balta1701]

How many people can match her job for job? 50? 100? 500? 1,000? Small numbers compared to our total population. I'll agree she is an example of making mistakes at the top, but she sold people within those organizations and their boards on some of this stuff. For that she is an excellent salesperson. I also base that on my belief that she thought she was doing the right thing.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

[StrangeSox]

How many people can match her job for job? 50? 100? 500? 1,000? Small numbers compared to our total population. I'll agree she is an example of making mistakes at the top, but she sold people within those organizations and their boards on some of this stuff. For that she is an excellent salesperson. I also base that on my belief that she thought she was doing the right thing.

 

But she was, ultimately, a failure at that position and for her to campaign as a strong, smart executive is pretty ironic. Saying she had "interesting" ideas doesn't excuse the fact that they were also bad ideas.

[EvilMonkey]

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

And Democrat ideals.

[lostfan]

Let me clarify. In saying that they were angry that their representatives "did nothing," I meant that the people sent people to office to accomplish certain tasks (i.e., create jobs, fix the economy, get us back on the right path). Those people in office did not do those things, thus, they were replaced. I tend to think the electorate is not only dumb, but also slow in reacting to bad policy. To me, this "tidal wave" of reaction surprised me. The people gave their representatives a shorter leash because they didn't feel like anything was done to solve the problems they felt most pressing (the economy).

Yeah, I gotta say I agree with this

[lostfan]

Compromise for the sake of compromise and split power for the sake of split power isn't a real answer. Appeal to moderation is a fallacy. It assumes that the correct answers really do lie somewhere in the middle of the current political spectrum.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation

 

It could be that some policies are just manifestly wrong and that there's no reason to compromise good policy simply for the sake of compromise.

If this was Facebook I'd "like" this

[lostfan]

And Democrat ideals.

f*** equity and fairness for everyone!

Edited November 3, 2010 by lostfan

[mr_genius]

I don't know, Fiorina moved up in ATT, took over Lucent, and did some interesting things at HP. I'd say in general she had a pretty successful life and accomplished a hell of a lot. Was she the best CEO ever, no, but you know what, she did what most of us will never do and did it against more odds as a women (especially in the mid 90's).

 

I can definitely agree on a lot of those points. I think she had a career which most would consider an overall success. Working your way up to CEO and stinking up the place still means you got to that point. Like a MLB ball player that makes it to the All-Star game his first year, and sucks bad the rest of his career. Still was one hell of a player when compared to the vast majority that have picked up the game.

 

But her total failure at HP was just too colossal and public, as it would inevitably become a major liability during a tough Senate race.

Edited November 4, 2010 by mr_genius

[Chisoxfn]

I can definitely agree on a lot of those points. I think she had a career which most would consider an overall success. Working your way up to CEO and stinking up the place still means you got to that point. Like a MLB ball player that makes it to the All-Star game his first year, and sucks bad the rest of his career. Still was one hell of a player when compared to the vast majority that have picked up the game.

 

But her total failure at HP was just too colossal and public, as it would inevitably become a major liability during a tough Senate race.

I will also say she was highly impressive during her debates in my opinion. And I think her experience at HP and business in general made her an intriguing candidate. I also am comparing her to Barbara Boxer who I personally find to be a lousy senator based upon my political viewpoints.

 

And Fiorina was one of the few parties who for the most part (and I just might be ignorant and unaware) didn't do a lot of smear campaigning. Boxer hit her with low blows late and based upon the polls it would appear that those below the belt shots cost her at the very least a shot at the election. Fiorina spent about 5-7 million on the election with 3 to 4 million being her own and the remainder coming from the republican party.

[Rex Kickass]

I will also say she was highly impressive during her debates in my opinion. And I think her experience at HP and business in general made her an intriguing candidate. I also am comparing her to Barbara Boxer who I personally find to be a lousy senator based upon my political viewpoints.

 

And Fiorina was one of the few parties who for the most part (and I just might be ignorant and unaware) didn't do a lot of smear campaigning. Boxer hit her with low blows late and based upon the polls it would appear that those below the belt shots cost her at the very least a shot at the election. Fiorina spent about 5-7 million on the election with 3 to 4 million being her own and the remainder coming from the republican party.

 

When outside money is spending 4 million a month in anti-Boxer ads in September and October, you don't need to do the dirty work yourself.