Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Best of Carly (CNN Debate)

Best of Carly (CNN Debate)

Clear winner.

Carly Fiorina almost unanimously has been declared the winner of last night’s CNN debate.

It’s worth revisiting some of her highlights.

I don’t normally use campaign material for posts, but this grouping of videos circulated by CARLY for America, the SuperPAC supporting her, saved me a ton of work since I was going to put together a compilation anyway!

I’ve chosen just the few that were of interest to me, not the entire set.

(Hint to campaigns — make our lives easier!)

Carly introduces herself to America

Excerpt: “We have come to a pivotal point in our nation’s history where this nation’s possibilities and potential are being crushed by a government grown so big, so powerful, so inept, so corrupt and a political class that refuses to do anything about it. I am prepared to lead the resurgence of this great nation.” Full transcript here.

Carly responding to Donald Trump’s comments about her face
Excerpt: “I think women all over this country heard very clearly what Mr. Trump said.” Full transcript here.

Carly on being an outsider

Excerpt: “You know what a leader does? They challenge the status quo. They solve problems that have festered for a long time and they produce results. That is what my life is about. People know this is about far more than replacing a ‘D’ with an ‘R.’ This is about changing the system. Full transcript here.

Carly on Planned Parenthood and Hillary Clinton

Excerpt: “As regard to Planned Parenthood, anyone who has watched this videotape, I dare, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes.” Full transcript here.

Carly on HP
Excerpt: “I led Hewlett Packard through a very difficult time, the worst technology recession in 25 years. The NASDAQ stock index fell 80 percent. It took 15 years for the stock index to recover. We had very strong competitors who literally went out of business, and lost all of their jobs in the process. Despite those difficult times, we doubled the size of the company, we quadrupled its top line growth rate, we quadrupled its cash flow, we tripled its rate of innovation. Yes, we had to make tough choices, and in doing so, we saved 80,000 jobs, went on to grow to 160,000 jobs and now Hewlett Packard is almost 300,000 jobs.” Full transcript here.

Carly on Hillary Clinton

Excerpt: “Mrs. Clinton, if you want to stump a Democrat, ask them to name an accomplishment of Mrs. Clinton’s.” Full transcript here.

Carly talks about the $10 bill
Excerpt: “What I would think, is that we ought to recognize that women are not a special interest group. Women are the majority of this nation, we are half the potential of this nation, and this nation will be better off when every woman has the opportunity to live the life she chooses.” Full transcript here.

Carly‘s closing statement
Excerpt: “Here in this nation, every American’s life must be filled with the possibilities that come from their God-given gifts, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” Full transcript here.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Almost everything she said was finely rehearsed and scripted words that she has repeated multiple times in interviews. The one thing I heard her say that did not seem to be was her comment about not talking to Putin, which was soundly debunked by other candidates’ remarks. I would give her an “A” on preparation and knowledge, but she didn’t come off particularly likeable either, and it would be good to hear her “off-script”.

By comparison, the one person who seemed to not have even bothered to memorize a pretty little opening or closing speech, or a paragraph here or there of soundbite answers, or anything at all, was Trump, the guy under fire. The entire debate was arranged, from the hostile invited Chamber of Commerce-type audience (who periodically clapped for everyone but not one single clap for Trump), to the arrangment on the stage (why Jeb Bush in a number 2 position?), to the moderated questions to pit Trump against this one or that one. That this was a multifaceted event to take down Trump and he’s still standing makes him the real “winner”.

    “That this was a multifaceted event to take down Trump”
    If so, it’s an exercise in futility. We already know he’s a poor debater. If you want to destroy a candidate, attack his strong sides, not his weak sides.

    DaMav in reply to janitor. | September 17, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    Fia-RINO has become the overnight darling of those desperate to stop Trump. She did have a nice blurb on Planned Parenthood, but also made the dumbest comment in the debate, as you pointed out, on Putin.

    She left Trump with a tiny scratch which the Establishment is trying to inflate into a major wound. If you are scared of Trump that’s understandable, but they’re dreaming if they think she did any significant damage to Trump.

      MikeInCA in reply to DaMav. | September 17, 2015 at 5:22 pm

      It’s always funny when a Trump supporter disparages another candidate as a “RINO”. Trump is the ultimate RINO, and about as far from being a conservative as is Howard Dean. Trump is nothing but a Northeastern liberal opportunist whose only goal is to promote Donald Trump. And sadly, the “burn it down” crowd is flocking to him.

        It’s always funny when a Trump supporter disparages another candidate as a “RINO”.

        Quite so.

        Radegunda in reply to MikeInCA. | September 17, 2015 at 10:44 pm

        Other odd facts about Trump fans:

        1. They say they’re sick of politicians who don’t keep their promises — and so they give their devotion to a candidate who has no record of keeping promises in office, and not to a governor (or senator) who actually has shown principle and backbone in office.

        2. They claim that Trump will focus solely on doing the right things for the country and not for “special interests” because “he can’t be bought.” In other words: someone who has spent his life aggressively pursuing his own enrichment will suddenly be more selflessly devoted to the general good than any other candidate possibly could be.

        CloseTheFed in reply to MikeInCA. | September 18, 2015 at 8:42 am

        Here’s a link to a speech Fiorino made 2 WEEKS after September 11th. Her big concern was for muslims. For companies not imposing western culture on others.

        She’s political correctness on steroids:

        http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/execteam/speeches/fiorina/minnesota01.html

I like the way she fights. She’s sharp, and has apparently learned a lot after her less than impressive campaign in CA. However, I have some major concerns:
– She is a squish on immigration, and Americans want this freaking problem fixed.
– She is an Islam-apologist. Kind of hard to win a war (and we ARE at war) if you can’t even name the enemy.
– Her history at HP was rough (30k laid off) but to give her the benefit of the doubt, it may have saved the company. If she’s the nominee, the press will NOT give her the benefit of the doubt, she will be put in the “ruthless and uncaring” corner and the LIVs will believe it.
– Did I mention she was a squish on immigration?

    Vancomycin in reply to bobtuba. | September 17, 2015 at 2:40 pm

    Not just a squish. She’s all in for H1B’s to replace Americans.

      bobtuba in reply to Vancomycin. | September 17, 2015 at 3:04 pm

      OK, you’re right. I was being too kind. She’s a Disaster on immigration.

      There is nothing wrong with the H1B Visa program IF IT IS IMPLEMENTED THE WAY THE LAW IS WRITTEN. The law says it’s only supposed to be used to fill jobs that are demonstrably impossible to fill with US citizens.

      There are, in fact, sub-segments of certain industries where there are simply not enough Americans to fill open job positions. For example, I work in the predictive analytics software field… these days often referred to as “big data.” We hire a lot of “data scientists” who need a very highly specialized set of experience and advanced degrees. Believe me when I say there just aren’t enough Americans with the qualifications to fill these jobs. There are a bunch of skilled candidates coming from China and India, among other locales.

      That being said, I also recognize that the program is being abused by some big employers to fill much more generalized positions and that many of them are doing it to drive down wages. This must stop. And the companies that are doing it should be outed and embarrassed… many of them are headed by some of the biggest-mouthed prog drone Obama sycophants in Silicon Valley.

      Once again, we have a political class that is choosing to implement the laws in the ways that they see fit. This is a symptom of a government that has simply gotten too big and too corrupt.

      But to trash Fiorina, or any other candidate, because they’re in favor of any “immigration” is silly in my opinion. Of course we need immigration… but we need a system of laws that makes sense and then a government that implements those laws instead of lawlessly going off in some direction to buy votes or placate donors or whatever illegal shit they’re doing now.

        Vancomycin in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 11:24 am

        I’m “trashing” Fiorina because she was firing American workers and replacing them with H1B’s. Wait until the stories from those workers come out about training their own foreign replacements.

          If that’s what she did then I agree it’s a major problem. All the stories I’ve been hearing about such abuse of the H1B program have been recent, and then I’ve seen a ton of knee-jerk hate being poured on Fiorina and others who express any sort of general support for the H1B program as it is intended to work.

          I went and looked at HP’s listing for H1B jobs TODAY and it’s complete and utter bullshit… all the top job listings are for general IT positions such as Systems Analyst and Software Engineer, etc. There is no way companies should be allowed to use the H1B program to fill those positions so long as there are any unemployed Americans with those skills. If they’re willing to relocate somebody from India to take a position, they should be willing to relocate somebody from Indiana.

          Did HP do this sort of thing while she was CEO?

      It’s called the Free Market. Private companies have the prerogative to hire the most qualified employee…educated and trained domestically or from abroad.

        Radegunda in reply to Aucturian. | September 17, 2015 at 11:02 pm

        You forgot something: This is a nation-state, not just a place on the map where business can be done. We have citizenship, and borders, and supposedly a lawful, orderly process for entering the country.

        Decisions about who gets to enter the country and settle, temporarily or permanently, should be made in accordance with the interests of the citizens already here.

        Those decisions should not be made by companies that want to fire a bunch of skilled employees and replace them with cheaper (and less experienced) workers they’ve brought in from abroad for that purpose.

MouseTheLuckyDog | September 17, 2015 at 2:11 pm

Oh good lord. If you are going to have a column talking about the waya person looks, then at least get a good picture.

In that first picture she loooks like some kind of plastic android invader you see in episodes of Doctor Who.

Fiorina is a failed CEO who failed upwards her whole life. Failed at Lucent, failed at HP, and failed in her Senate campaign.

The media is declaring her a winner because she’s pro amnesty. There’s no substance here. Any why does she seem to want to go to war with Russia? USA ought to be cooperating with Putin vs Isis, not demonizing him.

Her record as CEO looks terrible. Bad stock market performance and both lots of outsourcing of American jobs & Insourcing of HB1 Pakistanis to take American jobs at HP. It will not be hard for the Democrats to find ex HP employees about how they had to train their replacements before they were fired.

Here’s how bad she was at HP.

She let one of her HP computer subcontractors, who had a good reputation for quality and getting stuff done on time, gain control of all of manufacturing all of the important components in an HP computer.

That company then walked, and took its IP, skill, employees and knowledge with it. Today, Asus computers is now the #1 computer seller in the world (which HP was) and HP had to desperately complete a disastrous merger with Compaq to buy its way back into a business they once dominated. This is an IBM loses control of Dos to Bill Gates level fuckup that destroyed billions of shareholder wealth.

    Vancomycin in reply to rotten. | September 17, 2015 at 2:42 pm

    Yep, I won’t vote for her. Her H1B problem should sink her.

    Valerie in reply to rotten. | September 17, 2015 at 2:44 pm

    Former Hewlett-Packard Board Member Backs Fiorina
    http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/former-hewlett-packard-board-member/2015/08/27/id/672310/

    Tom Perkins was a member of the Hewlett-Packard board that fired CEO Carly Fiorina in 2005, but he now calls that move a “mistake” and defended her actions in a full-page ad in The New York Times.

    Your “failed” stories sound like a Journolist hit list. The entire tech industry took a beating during her tenure at HP… remember the dot com bubble? It popped while she was CEO. Of course they laid off workers after a huge merger… that’s what happens in business. It’s what NEEDS to happen to our Federal Government too… a major haircut. These are not indicators of “failure” to me. They are war stories of someone who was playing in big-league corporate America and had to make tough business decisions. That is leadership.

    HP made the strategic decision to stop building desktop and consumer PC’s. So what? So did IBM and a bunch of others. That business became completely commoditized and negative margin. That happens in tech product life cycles. Getting out of it was a good decision. The part of the PC business that still has profit margins in it, servers, is where HP is now #1 globally, largely in thanks to the strategies that she put in place.

    Regarding the H1B visa program and her usage of it, see my post on this thread above. That program in and of itself is not bad if the companies follow the rules. In a company as large as HP I can imagine quite a few positions they needed to fill that they couldn’t find qualified Americans to fill. If, on the other hand, you or anyone else can prove they used it simply to drive down wages then she has a problem. But I’m going to have to see the facts.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Paul. | September 17, 2015 at 6:36 pm

      You mean like Dell whose stock fell 2% during the time that Fiorina was CEO? Yep real hard times.

      People let us get this straight. It was a dotcom crash not a tech crash. The companies that were mostly affected were — surprise — dotcoms. That is to say companies that existed for the internet. Companies like http://www.spoiledfood.com . Other businesses like Quaker Oats, General Motors, GE, the NFL, were still buying computers.
      People in homes were still buying computers.

      Excusing HP for losing half it’s value during the dotcom crash is like excusing Grainger for losing half it’s value during a slowdown in some industrial manufacturing sector.

      BTW even if you believe that the tech bust gives companies an excuse, consider this. HP had something most other computer manufacturers a highly profitable printer industry to bouy the rest of the company up. In the same period, Lexmark’s stock went up about 6-8%. If HP’s printer division were a separate entity it’s stock would have gone up a hell of a lot more then that.

        The NASDAQ, a generally accepted barometer of the high tech industry, went from over 5,000 at it’s peak to under 1,300 after the crash. Sure, cherry-pick individual stocks all you want, but the fact remains that the tech industry as a whole took a giant dump during and after the dot com crash.

          jayjerome66 in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 1:30 pm

          Your NASDAQ assertion though true is deceptive.
          (like Carly’s PP misrepresentation at the debate – I’ll expand on that below, where you commented on it).

          The NASDAQ actually dropped to a low closer to 1200, but by the time Carly was dumped it had almost recovered half of the spiked ‘Bubble’ high: it was up to 2200 by 2005.

          And of course she was in charge at HP during the two years of the Bubble drop. As were CEOs of other major tech companies, who reacted to the steep fall and the fast recovery way better than she did.

          By 2005 tech profits were rising again, throughout the sector. Yes, the stock market fell 15% during the recession, but HP’s competitors were still managing to be profitable. Not so at HP. Stock value under Fiorina’s leadership was a disaster – falling 65% during her nearly 6 years, and profits flat-lined during that time. Plus, her business decisions resulted in massive debt to HP’s books.

          Perhaps events out of her control conspired to undermine her stewardship at HP; but when you’re a ship captain at the wheel of a passenger ship that hits an iceberg, afterwards you don’t praise your sailing acumen because the ship didn’t entirely sink and only half the passengers drowned.

          Carly’s best talent is speechifying, not producing. The opposite of Trump, who trips all over his tongue, but gets things done.

          May the forces of socialistic-communistic-liberalistic-statist-leftist-alcoholism be with you, Obi-Wan-Breitbart

          Paul in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 3:44 pm

          How many times have Trump and his companies filed for bankruptcy?

          jayjerome66 in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 6:16 pm

          Four bankruptcies, out of hundreds of other deals — all four related to Atlantic City casinos. And all Chapter 11 bankruptcies.

          You understand the significance of that, correct?

          Paul in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 10:51 pm

          Duh… he owed several hundred million dollars he couldn’t pay back so he went groveling to the court for protection. I imagine his creditors felt that was fairly significant.

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Paul. | September 17, 2015 at 6:54 pm

      It popped while she was CEO. Of course they laid off workers after a huge merger… that’s what happens in business. It’s what NEEDS to happen to our Federal Government too… a major haircut,
      Does the US need a reduction of GDP by 50% too.

        Every dollar the government contributes to GDP must first be confiscated from its original producer. Drastic reductions in the size of government should be accompanied by drastic reductions in taxation… those dollars will be spent elsewhere instead of confiscated and pissed away by the government. Net effect on GDP theoretically equals zero.

      jayjerome66 in reply to Paul. | September 17, 2015 at 6:55 pm

      Paul, you offered the same Dot Com rationalization/excuse on a Sept 8th LI thread about Carly, and I posted back that though tech stocks fell during the Dot Com Bubble, HP stocks and company value didn’t just fall – they plummeted.

      But during the ‘bubble’ other big tech companies, such as Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, and Oracle, were still profitable. And if I remember correctly, overall the tech sector was also profitable. Isn’t that incorrect? HP would probably have remained profitable too during that time, if Carly hadn’t fuc*ed up the works as she did.

      Opinions of people who worked with her at both CEO positions is not complimentary. Both her people-skills and decisions making skills were below par. She’s often described as an annoying *unt (and synonyms thereof) – and a pushy one if her numerous interruptions at the debate last night are any example.

      Plus she’s willing to distort facts to curry voter favor — her lie on camera last night about the PP video showing a live fetus on a table being prepared for organ harvesting was pure bullshit.

      And her reference to Steve Jobs as someone who once was fired as she was is ironical, in light of the fact that Jobs suckered her into making a horrible deal with Apple that came back to bite her in the ass. Talk about Obama being a rube with deal-making; analysts have described it as one of the most lopsided dumb deals in tech history, and that was among the reasons she got dumped. More on it here:

      http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/carly-fiorina-got-suckered-so-badly-by-steve-jobs-that-hp-fired-her-over-it/21679/

        jayjerome66 in reply to jayjerome66. | September 17, 2015 at 6:57 pm

        2nd paragraph typo should read:
        “Is that incorrect?”

        Sorry if I hurt your feeling by not responding to you last week. But quite frankly you often sound like a drunken Media Matters troll cutting and pasting inane progressive bullshit. Regarding tech industry valuations, see my response to Mouse above.

        So you’re saying you don’t like Carly because somebody says she’s a pushy c*nt? All I can say to that is wow. War on women indeed. Have you ever been in a board room during a heated discussion?

        Regarding your claim that she “distorted facts” in her diatribe about Planned Parenthood, you are quite literally parroting the progressive line of bullshit on that. You go watch the videos and tell me that they’re not harvesting organs for income. Tell me that they’re not aborting babies that are viable. Tell me that they’re not callous in their disregard for human life. And tell me that the government doesn’t force people to pay for these abominations through their subsidizing of these heinous acts with tax-paper money.

        Your’re the one that is full of pure bullshit.

          jayjerome66 in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 3:32 pm

          RE: “Regarding your claim that she “distorted facts” in her diatribe about Planned Parenthood, you are quite literally parroting the progressive line of bullshit on that.”

          I’m not parroting anyone. I read the transcript of the CNN debate. Here’s what she said:

          “As regards Planned Parenthood, anyone who has watched this videotape, I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, it’s heart beating, it’s legs kicking while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain.”

          There is no video showing that scene taking place in a Planned Parenthood facility.

          There is a heavily edited segment showing a stock clip of a fetus on a table from some other anti-abortion propaganda video, spliced into the interview with the technician who worked at StemExpress. She’s saying she witnessed a scene similar to Fiorina’s distorted account, but there’s NO PROOF her story is true. And NO PROOF the fetus was videoed at Planned Parenthood. Or that it wasn’t a fetus spontaneously expelled during a miscarriage.

          Even the Conservative apologists for Fiorina’s distorted assertions at Breitbart admit that: “Fiorina might have trouble finding this video to show to Clinton… No video has surfaced showing the scene Fiorina describes taking place inside a Planned Parenthood facility..”

          All of the Center for Medical Progress’s videos are heavily edited. ALL OF THEM are cut, spliced, and reedited with conversations taken out of context to change the meanings of what was said. Or conversation parts omitted entirely. Like these snippets left out of the unedited first tape:

          Nucatola: “Affiliates are not looking to make money by doing this. They’re looking to serve their patients and just make it not impact their bottom line… No one’s going to see this as a money making thing.”

          And later:

          Nucatola: “Our goal, like I said, is to give patients the option without impacting our bottom line. The messaging is this should not be seen as a new revenue stream, because that’s not what it is.”

          By bottom line she means Planned Parenthood doesn’t want to lose money when they fulfill the requests for fetal tissue for LEGIIMATE medical research – though they probably do lose money at it, as affirmed by numerous medical professionals:

          (about 10 paragraphs down)

          http://www.factcheck.org/2015/07/unspinning-the-planned-parenthood-video/

          And so when you say: “You go watch the videos and tell me that they’re not harvesting organs for income” I say this:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaiSHcHM0PA

          So where is it? Where’s the big PROFIT?

          Do you even know how many states with Planned Parenthood Clinics provide fetal tissue? Or how many offices in those states are certified to do that?
          Do You?

          Obviously not: only two states; only 6 offices total, which is why

          “Your’re the one that is full of pure bullshit.”

          Paul in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 3:49 pm

          In my opinion anyone who attempts to justify what those tapes expose is mentally deranged. The degree to which you and your fellow drones will contort yourselves and the facts to rationalize what those tapes show is astonishing. What happens in those “clinics” is pure evil.

She has a bitter countenance.

    gasper in reply to Lee Jan. | September 17, 2015 at 2:29 pm

    Men with bitter countenances are assertive; women with bitter countenances are bitches.

      #banbossy!

      Anybody who isn’t pissed off after 6+ years of this clown-car administration is an idiot.

        gasper in reply to Paul. | September 17, 2015 at 11:13 pm

        Well, I had never heard that idiotic word before, but I guess this is today’s jargon. I had to look it up to find the meaning and totally disagree with that concept of “banning bossy”. I have worked for several superb women and they didn’t need to compensate for anything. They were true leaders. People need to find their own way in this world. Hash marks don’t do it.

          Sometimes tongue-in-cheek doesn’t come across very well this way.

          gasper in reply to gasper. | September 18, 2015 at 12:36 pm

          Not directed at you Paul – just the word. I am not a fan of this new language. I really didn’t understand the reference at first. My comment should have had a sarc tag on it I guess.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    So, haters…

    Do the polls put her winning (and I don’t mean Drudge, which you can Ronulize just like Ronulans had done)? Yes or no?

    Did T-rump lie about his Florida crony capitalist adventurism?
    Yes or no, please.

    Feel free to apologize and rationalize following your answer.

      janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 4:57 pm

      The Seminole tribe lobbied for casino gambling, not Trump. And not surprisingly, when they were considering who might be a good person to build these for them, they started talking with Trump.

      While Jeb Bush was adamently against expanding gambling in Florida beyond the Seminoles’ et al.’s bingo games, voter referendum approved gambling in or around 2004.

      There is no reason Trump would have lobbied for competition for his own established gambling venues. And that Trump raised around $50,000 for Jeb boosting him into the governor’s office, that’s not a phenomenal amount for Trump, and Trump had multiple other interests to protect in the state.

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 6:12 pm

      Huh. So I should put you down as a apologist.

      BUT…

      “It’s not even a secret.” The gaming industry is so cutthroat in Florida that lobbyists from different companies have almost come to blows protecting their turf and trying to get an edge in Tallahassee. But when Trump said during the debate that he didn’t want gambling, Adkins said the old foes started texting each other in disbelief. “Trust me: everyone is an agreement about this,” Adkins told POLITICO Wednesday night, laughing. “And we don’t really agree on anything else.”

      So, when you say…

      “The Seminole tribe lobbied for casino gambling, not Trump.”

      I just sounds like total bullshit.

        jayjerome66 in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 7:07 pm

        “I just sounds like total bullshit”

        The truth, as often revealed in typos…

          Ragspierre in reply to jayjerome66. | September 18, 2015 at 12:19 am

          News about the donation came on the eve of a meeting today in Orlando between the staff of Gov. Lawton Chiles and the Seminole Tribe of Florida to discuss the tribe’s latest plan to build casinos on its reservations. Trump is teaming up with the Seminoles and wants to manage their gambling operations.

          MacKay and Chiles both oppose casino gambling, and Florida voters have rejected referendum questions to allow gambling three times in the past two decades.

          Tilley said that if Trump is banking on a Gov. Bush being more supportive of the plan, Trump “will be very surprised.”

          “He will not support this scheme that they have,” Tilley said.

          The Trump donation came during a period when Bush was scaling back his fund-raising operations and the Republican Party was increasing its efforts. Other gambling-related donations to the party included $25,000 from the GTech Corp. of Rhode Island, makers of lottery and gambling machines.

          While MacKay intends to accept public campaign financing dollars, Bush does not. So Bush is trying to avoid spending more than $5.7 million, the cap beyond which MacKay would get an additional public dollar for each dollar Bush spends.

          Trump has been a particularly active participant in Florida’s elections lately. Last year, he hosted a fund-raiser for Bush in his Manhattan penthouse, an event that raised a reported $500,000.

          And according to some sources, Trump’s largesse is even greater.

          “My information is that Donald Trump has raised in the ballpark of $1 million for the Bush campaign and the Republican Party,” said Sen. Steven Geller, D-Hallandale, president of the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States.

          “I have heard from too many sources, including Republican lobbyists, that although Mr. Bush is denying it, the deal [to allow Indian casinos in Florida) has been cut,” Geller said.

          The Bush campaign denied the allegation.

        janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 8:05 pm

        It’s the truth. It’s possible (I don’t know) that Trump’s name came up in connection with plans or talks in and around the lobbying and/or that Trump was or would have been looking to make deals with the Seminoles in connection with building their proposed casinos (I don’t know.) (And it’s also possible that Jeb recalls something about this and made an honest error. I don’t know.) But for those who were there during and then later when the Seminoles made a deal with Florida regarding the profits, it was the Seminoles, not Trump, moving this idea and lobbying.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | September 17, 2015 at 8:20 pm

        No. You’re just being an apologist here, which is beneath you.

        First, you assert that Duh Donald would not compete with his existing venues.

        That’s just stupid. Why would he NOT have a venue in Florida?

        Then you assert this was all “Seminoles”. This is also simply stupid, since you ALSO acknowledge that T-rump was (obviously) working with them to expand Florida’s law to allow casino gambling.

        Next, you try to minimize T-rump’s lobbying effort. He was still making the effort.

        Finally, you overlook the FACT that T-rump gave up when he found that Bush was not going to change his position. Which he, in fact DID do.

        http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1998-07-23/news/9807230053_1_donald-trump-jeb-bush-buddy-mackay

        That is a pretty accurate illumination of the facts on the ground at the time.

        T-rump simply lied. Deal with it.

          Rags, nothing in the article says that Trump actually lobbied Bush and Bush turned him down. “Tried to get me to change my views”.

          Bush is trying to take a personal one-up credit for something he didn’t do and — the larger issue — falsely posture as if he’s not into crony capitalism.

Carly Fiorina: “Women are the majority of this nation, we are half the potential of this nation”

Therefore the average potential of women is less than men.

Congratulations on the RushALanch

Her face doesn’t move. It’s been Botoxed out of all expression.

Plus, she ran once, here, in California. For Barbara Boxer’s seat. Or was it Feinstein’s? Doesn’t matter. She didn’t win.

Today? The media continues with the myth that there are candidates out there the public is anxious to see win. And, then? There’s Trump. Where, according to Drudge he leads the pack by double digits. Trump’s lead just continues to hold. While thanks to Trump, CNN saw its largest audience ever!

    Jesus Christ would lose to a Democrat in that prog hellhole.

    jayjerome66 in reply to Carol Herman. | September 17, 2015 at 7:36 pm

    It was Boxer.

    Carly has no choice but heavy botox usage.

    She started battling cancer right before deciding to enter the California race. The cancer was serious: she underwent double mastectomy; then was treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy; and then was re-hospitalized from complications of reconstructive surgery. Advanced facial plastic surgery is probably too dangerous for her, after the complications from the last reconstructive surgery. The stiff look is probably permanent.

    She looks way better now then she did during the Senate run. And I hope her recovery continues without future complication. But her health should be a fair topic of conversation for someone who wants to be president

    How serious was the cancer? What are the medical certainties or uncertainties of the symptoms returning, especially under the level of stress she’ll be under daily?

    No one is posing those questions yet, but if her numbers stay high, indicating she’s a serious candidate for president or vice president, someone should start asking.

“(Hint to campaigns — make our lives easier!)”

The same assertions are going to come up over and over, throughout the campaign. So, you might as well have a list of links handy. That way, people can go back to the original video and documents, instead of hunting through a lot of inaccurate commentary.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | September 17, 2015 at 3:26 pm

I flipped between a baseball game and the debate several times, so I did not see it all. But the vids are devoid of substantive policy. She presents well enough and has a confident vibe, but in terms of policy we know that she doesn’t like the Iran deal and she thinks Congress ought to vote on a budget that defunds Planned Parenthood so Obama can veto it. And she’s happy leaving Hamilton on the $10 bill.

Based on those positions, the only difference I can see between her and Ted Cruz is that Cruz prefers Rosa Parks on the $10 bill.

So why isn’t everyone wetting themselves over Cruz the way they are over Carly?

    MikeInCA in reply to Amy in FL. | September 17, 2015 at 5:29 pm

    It would be interesting to see the number of duplicate IP addresses for each candidate. I bet Trump’s would be yuuuuge!

      CloseTheFed in reply to MikeInCA. | September 18, 2015 at 9:12 am

      I voted only once. I was also disappointed they didn’t include anyone is the early debate. Santorum is really a great candidate, as shown by his performance in 2012.

      All the campaign dynamics are so manipulated by so many people, with so many diverse but converging methods, it’s disheartening.

Don’t confuse saying all the right words at all the right times on camera with leadership.

In my book, both Cruz and Walker are way ahead for going toe to toe and winning against forces set to destroy this country. Compromise is the language of the devil and they don’t speak it.

Carly has sharp elbows in the corporate world, but piloting from a position that is essentially an unelected dictatorship is not the same as governing.

    janitor in reply to Andy. | September 17, 2015 at 5:03 pm

    And Carly — contrary to the media’s (mostly media women’s) clapping about her making the face comment into an ad — made a whopper of a mistake doing this. First interview question about Trump’s comment about her face should have been laughed off quickly with a quip like yes dear i’ll try to smile more and then a demand for an interview question about something important. Instead there’s a media meme, successfully planted by Trump, that will follow her forever: Carly’s face, Carly’s expressions, Carly’s inability to get people to like her, etc. And it all looks like she fell for the woman thing of being sensitive about her looks.

    Radegunda in reply to Andy. | September 17, 2015 at 11:39 pm

    It’s passing strange how the candidates with a record of standing up to stiff opposition and keeping promises in office are being spurned by the same people who complain most loudly about politicians not keeping their promises.

    Somehow the candidates running on promises are favored instead.

Join the Fio-RINO network! Immigration is a substantive issue and Fiorina is one of the worst Republican candidates on it. Foreign Policy is critical but her plan was “I won’t talk to Putin”, one of the stupidest lines of the debate.

But whether or not Trump was not politically correct about her face — wow! Break out the Pom-Poms. The Carly fanbois think American women are going to decide based on this kind of shallow nonsense. Wages, illegals, and the conduct of foreign policy is small potatoes compared to who denigrated someone’s face so woo woo squee, Carly Won!!!!!!

Carly did debate well, and made a lot of great points. That said, I never saw her smile once; she appeared to be pushing her way into many questions that she wasn’t asked; she reminded me of Nurse Ratched being nice. Very stiff demeanour.

She didn’t appear to enjoy being there. I was hoping to like her better, but I didn’t. YMMV.

Politicians love wonkish policy questions, they practice constantly with each other. For this, Jeb Bush was the wonkiest wonk of all; he even wrapped up by talking about “4% sustained growth in GDP” which he obviously thought was a killer point. Right. A real barnstormer, that.

Trump isn’t a debater. He is a man of action that gets things done. His closing was pretty much a statement to that effect, which is why I like him. He’s still the only one who “gets it” that much more illegal immigration is the end of this country. I know that: I live in San Diego, Los Estados Unidos de Mexico Norte!

Apparently, your requirements for winning the debate
consist entirely of someone’s skill in memorizing
facts and figures and delivering them with a snooty,
“look at me” attitude.

MouseTheLuckyDog | September 17, 2015 at 7:43 pm

we tripled its rate of innovation.
Hiow exactly did HP innovate while she was there?
Did they invent the mp3 player? No.
Did they invent the PDA? They bought a company ( Palm ) but that’s it.
Did they invent smartphones? No.
Did they invent a programming language like Java? No.
They did invent the “must buy a new Hp cartridge” chips they put in there cartridge, but I think that was before Carly.
Did they invent the tablet? No.
Did they invent the netbook? Guess what ASUS the company that picked the bones of HP did that.
Did they invent the chromebook? The natural evolution of the netbook? No.

So exactly how did they innovate? making up excuses for why their CEO is not as bad as she looks. ( Get your heads out of your, well I guess — behinds. I’m referring to the appearance of her business acumen or rather lack thereof. )

    Patent filings is one commonly used measure of a tech company’s “innovation”

    http://patentvue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/hp_issuance1.jpg

      MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Paul. | September 18, 2015 at 1:02 am

      I know how the sausage is made. In particular I know many people who have been granted patents ( or were in the past ). I know that most of those people consider their patents worthless. The few that don’t are self important twits. ( I would use a different but similar word, but let’s keep it clean. ) I know that it is very easy for a company to increase it’s patent portfolio. Just offer a bounty to their engineers for patents.

      I know that Microsoft went around to Android makers with a list of 127 patents they held that they claimed Android violated and demanded royalties. I know that eventual they were forced to reveal those patents to the Chinese government, that China then published the list and engineers made short shrift of it. MS’s 127 best patents patents against Android.

      I know that until recently the patent office has been granting patents that were created by the thousands, using a simple formula. Take an existing patent. Doesn’t matter if it’s expired. Find someway to add the words “do it on a computer” or “do it on the internet” and submit it. You don’t even have to hold the original patent.

      I know that Apple has been granted a patent on a feature they call “slide to unlock”. Strange when I was a kid we called that a latch.

      In other words, I know what most techs know that most business people and lawyers probably know but pretend it’s not. An increase in patents at a company is not an increase in innovation it’s a foray into seeing if making toilet paper is profitable.

      So instead of pulling some number out of your backside, tell us some innovations that HP actually created. If as Carly claims, HP became more innovative under her reign, then you should be able to tell us three or four innovations that Apple created under her watch.

        MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | September 18, 2015 at 1:29 am

        Sorry was thinking of a real innovtor. It should read “HP created” not “Apple created”.

        Pulling numbers “out of my backside?” Those numbers came from the US Patent and Trademark Office! LOL. All you do is spout anecdotes and spew logical fallacies, and then when faced with evidence that any tech industry person would acknowledge as a common measure you… spout more anecdotes and logical fallacies. No wonder you get you ass handed to you so often on this site, and others I’m sure.

        Bruce Hayden in reply to MouseTheLuckyDog. | September 18, 2015 at 11:13 am

        Sorry, but merely computerizing something that was known by hand has been obvious for at least 20 years (and thus not patentable under 35 USC 103(a)). Sure, a patent might have issued, but that would have only been if the examiner had not realized what was going on, and it is likely that most such patents would have been found invalid during litigation.

        Yes, though, most patents do not advance the state of the art very much, and most are probably not infringed.

          Believe me, I know our patent system has huge issues. Patent trolls are a problem all over the place, and the very existence of software patents is a joke… copyright law was doing just fine in that industry before they started issuing patents and now things are majorly screwed up, especially for little companies like mine.

          But I stand by my response to Mouse which was simply that numbers of patents is a generally accepted measure of “innovation” for a tech company. “HP didn’t invent the iPhone so therefore they suck man!” is not. At least not by any serious business person or technologist.

          MouseTheLuckyDog in reply to Bruce Hayden. | September 19, 2015 at 12:08 pm

          First.
          The question is about whether patent count is a good metric. With the general incompetence of patent examiners, that is simply not true, and 103(a) generally is not used until a trial. Patents coiunt includes many patents never tested by trial.

          Second.
          In ideal world what you say about 103 (a) would be true. But in a world which includes (included ) East Texas, Randall Rader and the CAFC that simply isn’t. If it were true, then Alice would never have been heard. Furthermore, it is only now after Alice that the patent office has given instructions to examiners on treating “on a computer patents” skeptically. For the most part “on the internet” has barely been tested.

          Third Gene Quinn argues that despite Alice, new valid patent claims can be filed: http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/06/19/scotus-rules-alice-software-claims-patent-ineligible/
          Applications that have yet to be filed can still be created to satisfy even this exceptionally naive ruling, but software will need to be described as it is a machine on a granular level, describing gates, switches and relays.

MouseTheLuckyDog | September 18, 2015 at 2:11 am

How is Carly going to deal with Gernaby after what she did to the Deutsche Bank?

And the super-patriot Carly wasn’t so patriotic at HP when they sidestepped Bill Clinton’s executive orders on sanctions on Iran for their support of international terrorism and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and through a Middle East distributor sold hundreds of millions of dollars of HP printers and other computer equipment to Iran.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-09-14/under-fiorina-hp-earned-millions-from-sales-in-iran

Carly, fool us once, shame on you..
Fool us multiple times, and proudly continue doing it.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend