ADVERTISEMENT

Fiorina hype

BIGOSUFAN

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2001
25,453
22,893
113
Upper Arlington, OH
Don't get it at all. Her performance as a company CEO has not been good. She owns yachts on both coasts. Some of her foreign policy answers border on insanity. She has the personality of a robot. She strikes me as the female version of John Boehner: an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. I know some of what I just wrote applies to Trump as well but he seems to connect very well with average Joes.
 
Fiorina is getting the love because she is very intelligent, thinks well on her feet, and I think most of her answers have made sense. I think she is much more of an insider than what is being portrayed and while I love watching her in a debate I'm afraid her positions will end up being very big business "establishment Republican." Her weak spot is clearly her business track record which is being hotly debated.

It will be interesting to see how things go in the coming weeks. Trump is showing weakness and I think Carson made a major blunder with his comments about a Muslim President. Walker appears to be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ctdub
If her business track record is her weakness she's in great shape. Outside of Trump she's the only one with a business track record.

Compare Hillary's time as SoS. How about that for a track record? I'd say a comparable corporate track record to Ken Lay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imprimis
Don't get it at all. Her performance as a company CEO has not been good. She owns yachts on both coasts. Some of her foreign policy answers border on insanity. She has the personality of a robot. She strikes me as the female version of John Boehner: an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. I know some of what I just wrote applies to Trump as well but he seems to connect very well with average Joes.


Looks like you watched msnbc this morning. The dem talking points have been released to the masses.
 
I went to her website, listened to her views on some issues important to me, and I think her answers were great.

I also like how she, as a woman, can relate to other working women and is more believable than a man when explaining certain why government rules intended to help women in the workplace can actually hurt.

I like it that she is a cancer survivor.

I think losing a step daughter to a drug addiction gives her perspective on how we should be treating drug addicts, in that we should be TREATING them not putting them in jail.

I like how even though she's against the legalization of marijuana, she does not object to states legalizing it and would not stop it as President.

She is also a bad ass on stage.
 
Indeed they have.

Time for the parrots to start doin' their thing.
Isn't just ridiculous.

Come on sheep, think for yourselves. It's really liberating.

I remember back when I realized I can have my opinion and everyone else can phuck off. It was a great feeling. You should try it.
 
Don't get it at all. Her performance as a company CEO has not been good. She owns yachts on both coasts. Some of her foreign policy answers border on insanity. She has the personality of a robot. She strikes me as the female version of John Boehner: an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. I know some of what I just wrote applies to Trump as well but he seems to connect very well with average Joes.

Honestly, you have to be intentionally obtuse to "not get it at all." I don't buy that for a second. She dominated both debate discussions, and didn't even appear in one of them. She's risen from last to 2nd and is gaining on Trump by the day. You would do well to

Personality of a robot? Out of touch? Polar opposite of the impression her growing base has of her, but that is the textbook sexist progressive spin. She started out as a secretary and worked her way up to CEO. She's not a John Kerry aristocrat that people can't relate to. She's an American success story who broke the glass ceiling and has survived cancer and lost a child to drug addiction. She's more relatable than the rest of those clowns combined.

A self-made, female American success story shatters the lie that women need more government to level the playing field and makes the phrase "war on women" even more laughable (which is hard to do). She is one of two candidates that do not fit the talking point paradigm (Carson being the other), and progressives are right to be terrified of what she represents, and so the attacks are personal from the get go. I'm astonished at how nakedly sexist these attacks are.

Her policy positions are legit targets, but the bizarre personal attacks are pretty revealing about how candidly fearful the DNC is of what she represents - an intelligent, accomplished and electable woman. She's a powerful speaker and communicator who doesn't rely on a teleprompter and doesn't stutter. She thinks incredibly well on her feet and the same things that people like about Trump are elevating her in the polls - but you know, without being an asshole. She's not a career politician, and her rank and file critic has no idea what they are talking about re: her failure as a CEO. None. Most importantly, you need to grasp this. Nobody cares about HP, but it's really the only thing anyone can say about her. It's already overused and sitting next to Hillary's list of failures and lies, it's laughable as a critique.

I believe Sanders is a principled man whose statist policies I disagree with, but the Dems don't have the sense to nominate him. It'll be Hillary or Biden and I honestly look forward to them trying to match wits with Fiorina and think on their feet. If she can take Trump down in a debate, just imagine the stuttering knots she would tie Biden in. Hillary on the same stage will not look very presidential in comparison.


Speaking of polls....

Fiorina rises, Trump slides.
 
Rare is the cheerleader, who once dawns the skirt of her team, ever re-visits to consider if the team is worth rooting for.
 
A self-made, female American success story shatters the lie that women need more government to level the playing field, THAT TO "ACHIEVE" ANYTHING, THEY NEED TO "MARRY WELL," and makes the phrase "war on women" even more laughable (which is hard to do). She is one of two candidates that do not fit the talking point paradigm (Carson being the other), and progressives are right to be terrified of what she represents, and so the attacks are personal from the get go. I'm astonished at how nakedly sexist these attacks are.

Your whole post is a slam dunk, Mega.

I've added one additional differentiating phrase, bolded above.

(I'll save my opinions on why her time at HP actually is defensible and isn't nearly the "failure" the left will try hard to propagate, since it may be her only perceived large and attackable weakness. That CUP, Sys or anybody else will get on here and attempt to explain how it was a "failure," is laughable.)
 
She is my favorite, bit i am still holding judgement. That said, her "failure" at HP just does not move me. Business and government have different safety nets. The rationale of her business decisions is more important than the outcome. Nothing that she did really raises "wtf" flags to me. Time will tell, but i can see myself happily viting for her if she gets the nod.
 
Last year, the company I work for had record profits (by a lot), our stock price and EPS were easily at all time highs. Every operating segment posted record revenue, bookings, backlog, and margin...

This year, we are down almost 40% across the board in every metric. Same CEO is in place. Was he an amazing CEO last year and shitty one this year? Or, is he a CEO of an oilfield services company getting rocked by macro economic factors?

Can you name some things in the macro environment that would have effected HPs business during her tenure?

I'm not claiming my CEO or Fiorina are great business people...who the F knows really...but to claim she was bad based on a few financial metrics is just stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Headhunter
Last year, the company I work for had record profits (by a lot), our stock price and EPS were easily at all time highs. Every operating segment posted record revenue, bookings, backlog, and margin...

This year, we are down almost 40% across the board in every metric. Same CEO is in place. Was he an amazing CEO last year and shitty one this year? Or, is he a CEO of an oilfield services company getting rocked by macro economic factors?

Can you name some things in the macro environment that would have effected HPs business during her tenure?

I'm not claiming my CEO or Fiorina are great business people...who the F knows really...but to claim she was bad based on a few financial metrics is just stupid.

I think this is spot on. You can't really use her experience as a CEO against her unless she has proven that she can't direct people and she can't communicate effectively. From what I have read she was good at those things. This is part of the reason I have a hard time with CEO pay is b/c they don't have that much control over the success of the business. Not unless they do dramatic things.
 
Last year, the company I work for had record profits (by a lot), our stock price and EPS were easily at all time highs. Every operating segment posted record revenue, bookings, backlog, and margin...

This year, we are down almost 40% across the board in every metric. Same CEO is in place. Was he an amazing CEO last year and shitty one this year? Or, is he a CEO of an oilfield services company getting rocked by macro economic factors?

Can you name some things in the macro environment that would have effected HPs business during her tenure?

I'm not claiming my CEO or Fiorina are great business people...who the F knows really...but to claim she was bad based on a few financial metrics is just stupid.

It's not her political adversaries that labeled her a failure. Her own board and the financial media did so years ago.

Keep polishing that turd....
 
Your whole post is a slam dunk, Mega.

I've added one additional differentiating phrase, bolded above.

(I'll save my opinions on why her time at HP actually is defensible and isn't nearly the "failure" the left will try hard to propagate, since it may be her only perceived large and attackable weakness. That CUP, Sys or anybody else will get on here and attempt to explain how it was a "failure," is laughable.)

Your highlight of perceived is very appropriate. Romney was attacked for many things that frankly either weren't true or were severe mischaracterizations. He was not able to overcome them. I think so far her line of "challenging the status quo" is pretty damn good but time will tell whether her record becomes a true weakness in her campaign. The bad thing about it is the candidate that can do the most damage to her is Trump and he's using both barrels.
 
If you haven't had a few business decisions that didn't blow up you've never been a big time business leader. If you have never had to lay off employee's you've never been a leader at a tech company during a recession.

These Dem talking points about her business background are BS and totally based on the fear that Carly and Hillary will be side by side on a debate stage. That would/will be a disaster for Hillary.
 
It's not her political adversaries that labeled her a failure. Her own board and the financial media did so years ago.

Keep polishing that turd....

Regardless of who was at fault 15 years ago and, even if she was to blame, big phucking deal.

Soccer moms don't care about HP. Corporate women know how hard it was to get to the top and that's what resonates. I'm sure some women assume she was the fall "guy" because she's a woman.

As my 6 year-old daughter (future president) would say, "Carly rules, sexist libs drool!"
 
It's not her political adversaries that labeled her a failure. Her own board and the financial media did so years ago.

Keep polishing that turd....

Steve jobs got fired from Apple by his board.
 
Whatever she did or didn't do at HP, promise she never spent 5-10 million per soldier to fight ISIS, opps sorry I meant to write programming.
 
Don't get it at all. Her performance as a company CEO has not been good. She owns yachts on both coasts. Some of her foreign policy answers border on insanity. She has the personality of a robot. She strikes me as the female version of John Boehner: an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. I know some of what I just wrote applies to Trump as well but he seems to connect very well with average Joes.


Hillary hype: Don't get it at all. Her performance as sos was not good. She owns multiple multi million dollar homes. Her foreign policy decisions border on insanity (people actually died). She has the personality of a shrill bitch. She strikes me as the female version......well she actually doesn't strike me as anything female, but I digress. But she is an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. That was easy.
 
Hillary hype: Don't get it at all. Her performance as sos was not good. She owns multiple multi million dollar homes. Her foreign policy decisions border on insanity (people actually died). She has the personality of a shrill bitch. She strikes me as the female version......well she actually doesn't strike me as anything female, but I digress. But she is an elitist who is out-of-touch with regular people. That was easy.

Also you have to add political outsider. Yes she is now claiming this. So you want to be remember for losing your lawyer card or license what ever lawyers have for credentials or for the great affair? She can't be this dumb right?
 
For the record HP is now not claiming that she was the reason for their failures. But if I was a chicken shit scared Hillary supporter I would beat that dead horse well until Hillary won or lose.
 
Sys, do you have any business thoughts on which of her decisions were poor and what were the driving factors? Or are you a parrot?

Also, here is a small clip of the horrible person. She sounds pretty grounded and "in touch" to me, especially when speaking about her loved one lost. I had forgotten she prevailed against breast cancer. No mention of yachts though.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/09/...rts-goes-behind-scenes-carly-fiorina-campaign
 
Brad, I posted several articles where the financial media blistered her ass way before this race. One was a "20 worst CEO's of all time" type article. I don't think other tech CEO's during her reign made it. I don't know what she did other than lay off 30k employees, outsource what she could, apparently sold off assets and bought Compaq. All I know is what the financial media reported. She was widely ridiculed.

She seems like a train wreck to me. What is her signature accomplishment?
 
Brad, I posted several articles where the financial media blistered her ass way before this race. One was a "20 worst CEO's of all time" type article. I don't think other tech CEO's during her reign made it. I don't know what she did other than lay off 30k employees, outsource what she could, apparently sold off assets and bought Compaq. All I know is what the financial media reported. She was widely ridiculed.

She seems like a train wreck to me. What is her signature accomplishment?
Well for one she was CEO of a ****ing fortune 20 Company...as a woman...rose from secretary. Pretty much crushes you and 99% of all Americans.
 
Well, by that standard HRC was Secretary of State. That pretty much crushes everyone except maybe like.... 10 people?
 
So, you're a parrot.

You can say that.

That you are ignorant from being able to form a cogent opinion is forgivable. Being a parrot, however, has no virtue.
 
So, you're a parrot.

You can say that.

That you are ignorant from being able to form a cogent opinion is forgivable. Being a parrot, however, has no virtue.

Brad, that isn't fair. He posted some articles by liberal "journalists"...oh wait, that does make him a parrot.
 
She went from a peon to the leader of a company. Even if her stint at HP as CEO wasn't perfect she was a smart and hard enough worker to get from the bottom to the top. Something silver spoon Hillary wouldn't know about.
 
Brad outside of conservative media is there anybody that thinks she did a good job? I guess CNBC, CBS and USAToday are parrots too? Here's a cut and paste of stories from another thread.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/americas-worst-ceos-where-are-they-now/

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/technology/maney/2005-02-15-maney_x.htm

http://www.cnbc.com/2009/04/30/Portfolios-Worst-American-CEOs-of-All-Time.html?page=3

Those articles are old, well predating her candidacy. I take it your business judgment is superior to these authors? Also to the HP board? What about the market, which bumped her stock price up 10% when she left?
 
Brad, that isn't fair. He posted some articles by liberal "journalists"...oh wait, that does make him a parrot.

tattletail
Well, at least you didn't tattle.
 
Nice fail at critical thought.

WTF are you talking about? Your critical thought is by posting articles from 3 liberal sources and zero thought of your own...you then follow it up with a total failure of a post where you couldn't figure out how to link an image.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT