Carly Fiorina is rocking it
She needs to run, regardless of the chances.
Yesterday we featured Carly Fiorina’s instantaneous reaction to Hillary Clinton’s announcement. Or should we say John Podesta’s announcement followed up by Hillary.
Fiorina exhibited what is becoming her trademark: Taking the fight right to Hillary Clinton’s supposed strength, the gender card.
Fiorina, as the only woman likely to become a Republican candidate for President, is uniquely able to make the argument that Hillary is abusing the gender card to cover up lack of actual accomplishment.
It was only a matter of time before Fiorina’s audaciousness would make her a target. So when I read Jazz Shaw’s tweet that Mika Brzezinski on Morning Joe went after Fiorina, it didn’t surprise me one bit.
Impressive. @CarlyFiorina just batted away a viscious attack from @morningmika with a smile. 🙂
— Jazz Shaw (@JazzShaw) April 13, 2015
What’s most important is not that she was attacked, but that she responded well:
Mika to Fiorina: "You say Hillary has a bad track record, but let me list yours." Then goes on for a full minute. #FairAndBalanced
— Drew (@FigDrewton) April 13, 2015
Here is the video:
Fiorina is an important voice in the race. Her record is what it is, and she’ll need to defend it.
But she also can speak like no one else to Hillary’s abysmal record, which is devoid of any meaningful accomplishment.
That voice needs to be public and part of the Republican primary, as miserable as it makes the media.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“But she also can speak like no one else to Hillarys abysmal record, which is devoid of any meaningful accomplishment.”
I think that’s both a bit broad (no pun) and a bit sexist, Prof.
On the first point, Palin or Martinez or any number of other ladies could speak to Ol’ Walleye’s resume effectively. I DO agree that Fiorina is doing remarkably well at that, though.
On the second point, I thought we were past the point where the girl couldn’t be dealt with just like anyone else.
We have to insist on it being one way or the other.
I think he meant out of those who are running (or expected to run).
The point the good Professor is making is that the MSM doesn’t see it that way. One unfortunately has to fight on their turf with their rules. Ms. Fiorina is able to swat away the ‘sexist’ argument in a way that Ted Cruz can’t. It’s not right but those are the rules.
Ms. Fiorina is very impressive. I like her more and more.
Sorry, Doc. I could not possibly DISAGREE more strongly about your “rules” conclusion.
Breitbart thought…and DID…the opposite. Skeeee-ru their rules.
Absolutely right. This is how they keep winning, by convincing the world their “rules” are divinely immutable. Subvert their rules; shatter the paradigm. Incidentally, I’ve heard that Rand Paul has “apologized” for his heinous transgressions of behavior in media relations. Another one bites the dust.
There’s more than one way to fight these people, and I’ll use every way that’s available to me. If Ms. Fiorina can strip away the “sexist” argument and make a cogent case as to why Hillary should be stopped, great.
She’s not playing by the rules, she’s using the rule to her (and our) benefit. I don’t see the problem with that. Then again, I have plenty of tools in my kit.
Their ‘rules’ are only there if we toady to them.
Candidates need to learn from Muhammad Ali. (The ‘technique’ starts at 1:15):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnYCTh_DSLM
Exactly! You’re never gonna win playing someone else’s game!
Carly Fiorina is one of those rare candidates that I like better as her campaign went on (US Senate race, 2010, which she sadly lost to Babs Boxer). 100% agree!
Oh, and having watched the video, Steve Ratner is SUCH an asphole…!!!
Ratners was useful because Fiorina responded effectively. Additionally, Ratner, with his defense of Mika, probably revealed that she was using talking points.
This woman knows how to answer. Also, Hewlett-Packard under her produced great products, and no longer does so. Firing her was a huge mistake.
The Lisa took four years from concept to market. The Macintosh took five. Android took five.
The things that HP produced in the early years of Fiorina were already in the pipeline. HP produced good products since it was created. This is because of a focus on good engineering.
When Fiorina became CEO, HP was creating great equipment. I know that every tech person who I knew would recommend most of their equipment over others.When Fiorina was fired/left I knew of no tech who would recommend their equipment over others,
Shew was a disaster for HP and no amount of talk will change that.
On point: CEOs as well as presidents are hired/paid to generate results, not excuses.
So, the MSM will be all over these bullies for their tough treatment of a woman, right? She beat them soundly.
Terrific interview.
There’s no denying that I was an early critic of Carly.
I’m coming around. The more I see of her in the role she’s single-handedly created for herself in this primary, the more impressed I’m becoming.
Fiorina wrote “Tough Choices” in 2007
Hillary followed with “Hard Choices” in 2014
Fiorina can speak clearly to our financial mess, and doesn’t have to rely on talking points. Palin and Martinez may be good, but Palin is marginalized and it is Fiorina out there doing it, for now at least.
This is the third Carly interview I’ve seen in recent weeks. In every interview she comes off as though she is running against Hillary, not that she is running against the GOP field for the GOP nomination. By employing that strategy of focusing on Hillary she has not alienated a single GOP primary voter. Smart.
On a side note, this is the third time I’ve seen the interviewer try to use her tenure at HP against her. She clearly has anticipated that line of attack and is prepared. She always recites that same list of quantifiable, measureable facts as accomplishments. I assume the yellow journalist “fact checkers” are diligently trying to figure out how to write a clever column to twist those facts as wrong, but so far I have not seen that column written. But apart from the anticipated questions, when faced with questions she may not have anticipated, she seems to be able to spontaneously respond quite well.
She’s good.
Excellent point. It’s what Reagan did in 1980 — focusing only on Carter.
Smart, savvy and smart. Clearly devoid of guile.
Carly could be president , VP or secretary of state or anything she put her mind to.
Early in the interview, Fiorina defends her charge that Hillary Clinton has no accomplishments by identifying the distinction between titles and achievements while holding those titles.
That is a good angle to take on Clinton – say she’s had titles as First Lady, US Senator, and Secretary of State, did nothing with them, then ask the attacking reporter to name one accomplishment, just one, when the inevitable whining begins.
Whoever eventually gets the GOP nod would do well to take lessons from the others on what is working to shut down the MSM onslaught against them. Paul was brilliant in his response to the abortion question. Fiorina was equally brilliant in presentation of who/what Hillary is.
Don’t forget Clinton’s other titles: the first great American contrivance; alcoholic; bi-sexual; and, liver-challenged.
“Hi, I’m Carly Fiorina.
You know, I was CEO of Hewlett-Packard and we made servers. But I didn’t see any reason to have my own private server.”
Fiorina is a cancer survivor. She had a double mastectomy.
I’d like to hear what she says about Obamacare, as, I imagine, millions of Americans with cancer or loved ones with cancer would.
Mika fears Carly. Point for Carly.
Note to Rand Paul: Fiorina did it with a smile. That’s how it’s supposed to be done. I don’t like making excuses for candidates – it’s not what draws out the best from them.
I’m not really a fan of Fiorina, but every party needs able and willing bomb-throwers.
Ms. Fiorina did a masterful job of taking back control of the conversation. She didn’t let the interviewers dictate the course of the conversation. She rebuted their assertions and then she elegantly got back on her turf. Good for her.
I would like to see her as governor of CA. I doubt she could win a POTUS run, but agree she would add great value, being the one candidate who could take on Rodham without that sexist/misogynist card being thrown.
Since Condoleezza Rice is apparently the frontrunner for replacing Babs in the US Senate, governor of the state to undo (at least begin to undo) the leftists’ damage to the Golden State would be sublime.
Carly for VP? Seems entirely feasible. I look forward to her running for President and hearing her on the podium in the debates.
You go girl! (Hate that phrase, by the way, but it seems appropriate.)
Carly Fiorina – are you joking Mr. Jacosbson? That’s all we need another “private citizen vanity candidate” to suck the oxygen out of the room (why not resurrect the pizza salesman from 2012?). She is a woman who has no political experience at all and also who has shipped thousands of jobs overseas. Sometimes I think the Right has lost its marbles.
That Fiorini is praised for negotiating interviews is a sad statement on those candidates who cannot. To me, if you don’t possess that basic skill you shouldn’t be running in the first place.
Fiorini has her business record, mostly for taking HP high and then low and then fired, and a thousand other American business people have a better record in business. She talks well, but they all do. What can she do? They all talk well. What can they do? Talk’s cheap.
Those in the CEO realm that DO, are busy doing and don’t want the downgrade to the corrupt world of politics. But then again, at CEO level there can be a lot of push and shove that looks pretty vicious, destroying competition, not just building a better widget.
Talk is cheap? Come on Henry … the Soviets spent more on propaganda than their military, by some reports. And jusging by Hollywood, the MSM and our current president, they were pretty effective.
Carly has more executive skills than most, but I’m really seeing her as a weapon, using those “cheap words” to slice up the leftist enemy.
Bill Gates was successful, also taken to court for anti-trust violations, after which he allegedly learned the value of lobbyists and buying our government. He (allegedly) used the same style tactics against small entrepreneurs where he’d steal their ideas and add them onto his product “for free”, so they’d get screwed. Is that what we need? Maybe so, as long as they are on our side, and not selling our tech to our enemies for his own agenda (e.g. Chinagate).
A lot of tech people say Fiorina didn’t listen enough to the workers, and that’s probably true. But the dotcom bubble was a rough time, and a lot of big stock names back then fared no better or worse than HP. Maybe she was not cut throat enough, but she knows about “the game” and handles those “expensive talk” show leftists pretty well.
Neither Obama nor Hillary can really DO anything, except make secret dirty deals apparently. But we don’t have the luxury of Hollywood and the media on our side, so we need someone that can go into talking head enemy territory and slice and dice with their “cheap words”.
Rand tried that and looked a little off, but will get better. Walker wasn’t quite ready on all subjects but will come around. Cruz is probably most prepared but also lacks that experience you want. So far Carly has delivered the best body blows to Hillary, as I see it, using those “cheap words”. 🙂
You miss my point completely. Comparing American candidate happy talk with Soviet government communist propaganda is… huh? Of course some candidates are better than others at talking, but what happens once in office and the doing starts? Compare what Obama said before election in 2008 as a gross example. What matters is what he’s done, not what he said. His talk was cheap.
Rubio talked one immigration plan before election, but did (attempted) quite a different immigration plan once safely elected. His talk was cheap.
US Rep. Renee Wellmers (R-NC) – same thing. Cheap talk to Tea Partiers before election only to immediately hop the fence into the RINO pen upon election.
George Bush spoke well enough to win, citing ‘compassionate conservatism’ which wasn’t conservative at all upon application.
We all could name one hundred other examples. It’s endemic to American politics, but it seems to get worse because of entrenchment once elected, that is, it pays.
Speaking well is insufficient for me. I need a record. Fiorini has no political office experience and a mundane business record. I hear what she says, but nobody has any idea what she’d actually do without a record to give us some sort of clue.
“Comparing American candidate happy talk with Soviet government communist propaganda is… huh?”
We are fighting a war of words first, or else we don’t defeat Hillary, like we didn’t defeat Obama.
The left depends on their “narrative”, supported by the globalists, media etc. So our candidates are not fighting just “happy talk”, they have to penetrate the narrative.
The centralized control of the narrative reminds me of Soviet style propaganda, five year plans, etc. The PC religion is the narrative, happy talk does not penetrate it. It has to be dismembered.
I guess I’m not being clear … Walker has results, he is the front runner for me. But it sounded like you were complaining that Fiorina has no record to run on, so “stop promoting her”. I’m saying we need her attacking, “stop trashing her”.
Carly is already performing the attack dog role well, let her run.
I’m just confused. No where did I say stop supporting her, nor did I trash her. She doesn’t have any record in political office – cold fact, not trashing. I only said that with Fiorini all we have is words, standard candidate happy talk, albeit bulldog style in her case so far. Let her bulldog all she wants, fine by me, that’s one way to run, but it says absolutely nothing about how she’d govern. Renee Wellmers was a Tea Party ‘bulldog’ – until she got elected. She too had no previous experience in office, meaning no record.
Mine is merely a caution.
OK … do we need caution? Where is she in the polls?
If she works her way up from here, it will prove she is really worthy. I guess I don’t see her as a viable contender at this point, so have gotten weary of those that must have lost money on HP stock in the tech bust, so feel they need to remind us how terrible she was.
She’s out there doing well taking it to Hillary .. no need to warn us. So that’s my position … and why I bother to retort. No big deal … but watch the man spreading … and I’ll put trigger warnings on my posts. ha …
I agreed with your comment until you came to the part where you thought Cruz lacks experience. I’m assuming you haven’t seen his full resume. His experience is exactly what we need in a president.
http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=about_senator
True, he has some awesome resume, but I don’t put that in the executive experience column. Walker is highest on my list in that category.
Cruz made a name for himself in the senate and that was good. I do have doubts about whether he could have worked with others privately more, marshaled forces, and had a better outcome. Maybe it was just that Boehner and McConnell were too ready to cut him off at the knees, I don’t know.
Walker, then Cruz for me, at the moment. Carly is a potent weapon … and she adds a lot to the conversation. If she keeps it up she could work her way up, but is helpful regardless.