Originally Posted by onesnowyowl (Post 2525469)

Carly Fiorina actually has very little room to talk in this situation as she basically ran HP into the ground during her time as CEO. She completely changed the corporate culture there and not for the better; when she was ousted employees threw parties to celebrate.

Carly's pretty much always been full of shit.

Originally Posted by onesnowyowl (Post 2525469)

Carly Fiorina actually has very little room to talk in this situation as she basically ran HP into the ground during her time as CEO. She completely changed the corporate culture there and not for the better; when she was ousted employees threw parties to celebrate.

Carly's pretty much always been full of shit.

Originally Posted by Tully Mars (Post 2525474)

She's playing well in middle America and that's all that matters.

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2525477)

Who, Palin? That's not my read.

My read is, there were a WHOLE lot of Republicans who were downright DESPERATE for a reason to get behind McCain, but it wasn't going to be McCain himself. So the campaign found a charismatic, attractive, VERY conservative woman, and stuck her on the ticket. Now those who would have held their nose as they voted for McCain have something to rally around--no matter how in-denial they are about the woman's qualifications, positions, and intellect. The support for her is blind, unthinking, and brittle to assault. I believe that's what we're seeing.

Originally Posted by Tully Mars (Post 2525511)

I think her support is blind and unthinking, doesn't mean she's not playing well in middle America.

Originally Posted by guyy (Post 2525531)

She's already peaked. She's lost Tante, who saw her interview last week and now thinks, correctly, that she's a moron.

By the end of the day today, she may be forgotten.

Originally Posted by Tully Mars (Post 2525511)

I think her support is blind and unthinking...

IMHO, far too many voters cast their ballot for BS reasons and not on the issues...

Originally Posted by ottopilot (Post 2525549)

Tully, I agree with your assertions on Palin, but this has always been my take on the Obama phenomenon. There seems to be this blind unthinking desire to elect someone, who by any comparative measure to Palin, is just as unqualified. Each one appealing to their base regardless of substance. Perhaps that's all that will matter in this election.

Originally Posted by ottopilot (Post 2525549)

Tully, I agree with your assertions on Palin, but this has always been my take on the Obama phenomenon. There seems to be this blind unthinking desire to elect someone, who by any comparative measure to Palin, is just as unqualified. Each one appealing to their base regardless of substance. Perhaps that's all that will matter in this election.

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2525553)

Well, look, even if I were, for the sake of this post, to stipulate that their level of qualification is identical, there's unqualified and intelligent and willing to listen to differing positions and be a force for unification in the world, and then there's unqualified and uninformed and stupid and uninterested in positions other than her own and wanting to be a continuation of the imperial presidency we've lived in for eight years.

In other words: it's not the experience that she really fails at.

Originally Posted by aceventura3 (Post 2525574)

Go Palin! I like her more every day and with every elitist criticism.

Originally Posted by ottopilot (Post 2525577)

I understand your passion, but is what you've stated really accurate? Being passionate is one thing, but this tone in regard to Palin seems to perforate the current pro-Obama rhetoric. It's unseemly and reactionary, and appears more off-topic, trending toward less unifying or intellectual tones of his earlier message. The old Rove strategy to never accuse your opponent of your own weaknesses comes to mind in this case. The more his campaign slugs it out in the mud wars, Obama is looking less and less like the statesman above the frey that often he claims to be.

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2525580)

It's weird that criticisms of someone by people you don't like push you closer to that someone. I don't know, I just find that weird.

Originally Posted by ottopilot (Post 2525549)

Tully, I agree with your assertions on Palin, but this has always been my take on the Obama phenomenon. There seems to be this blind unthinking desire to elect someone, who by any comparative measure to Palin, is just as unqualified. Each one appealing to their base regardless of substance. Perhaps that's all that will matter in this election.

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2525636)

very strange.
the campaign must have felt that they had no options.
this seems like scorched earth...

Originally Posted by Tully Mars (Post 2525558)

I think you're right about it coming down to appealing to the base (on both sides) with a small play for those in the undecided column.

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2525636)

i have to say that i'm surprised that mc-cain's campaign headed in this personality-driven direction because it requires not only that they control the direction of debate, but also that they control the terms.

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2525580)

It's weird that criticisms of someone by people you don't like push you closer to that someone. I don't know, I just find that weird.

Do you know what her positions are? Do you agree with them? I'd think that would matter more than the question of who's talking against her.
-----Added 16/9/2008 at 04 : 37 : 28-----

Originally Posted by CNN Political Ticker

Fiorina: McCain can't run a company either
Posted: 06:20 PM ET

(CNN) — Hours after top McCain aide Carly Fiorina said Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin isn't qualified to run a major corporation, the former Hewlett-Packard CEO said she doesn't think John McCain is either.

In comments that are strikingly off message as the Arizona senator attempts to position himself as the candidate best positioned to fix the country's economic woes, Fiorina said in an interview on MSNBC Tuesday running a Fortune 500 corporation is not the same as running the country.

“Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation, I don't think Barack Obama could run a major corporation, I don't think Joe Biden could run a major corporation," Fiorina, a top McCain advisor, said.

"But, on the other hand, a major corporation is not the same as being the president or the vice president of the United States," she continued. "It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So, of course, to run a business, you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that's not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden, or Barack Obama are doing."

Fiorina was president of Hewlett-Packard until her high-profile ousting in 2006 after the company's uneven performance. Her comments Tuesday were immediately circulated by the Obama campaign as part of its continued effort to paint McCain as a candidate who lacks understanding of economic issues.

“If John McCain’s top economic advisor doesn’t think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis?" said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor. "Apparently even the people who run his campaign agree that the economy is an issue John McCain doesn’t understand as well as he should."

Fiorina made similar comments earlier Thursday to a St. Louis radio station when she was asked if Palin was qualified to run a company like Hewlett-Packard.

“No, I don’t,” Fiorina answered. “But that’s not what she’s running for. Running a corporation is a different set of things."

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2525674)

Evidently her own presidential candidate doesn't rise to her personal level of business acumen either:



CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Fiorina: McCain can’t run a company either - Blogs from CNN.com

I see the point she's trying to make here, but this attempt at damage control just sounds even worse.

Originally Posted by asaris (Post 2525624)

What are your common values with Palin, ace? Or what values do you share with her that you do not share with Obama and Biden?

Originally Posted by aceventura3 (Post 2525731)

The most basic value we have in common is an optimistic outlook on life in general and the country in particular. Obama/Biden's basic premise is that everything is wrong with this country. I believe most of the things are right with this country, not perfect, needing some changes and improvements, but I basically think our country is on the right track. I find it very difficult to buy into the doom and gloom message of the Democrats.



I personally think the competence argument is over-rated. I never made issue of Obama's competence/experience and I won't make an issue of it with Palen. I don't think representing "the people" and/or doing what is right is difficult and requires special skills. I was watching one of the political talk shows today, and the host put it well when he talked about the difference between Dems and Repubs - I do vote for the "who" (meaning the person and their character) and not the "what" (issue positions). I actually would have voted for Hilary Clinton over McCain in the general because I think Clinton has been more consistent and honest about her positions than McCain is. Clinton is predictable, McCain is not. In my view McCain was the worst choice for Republicans, Palin is the only reason I would vote for him. He is "political" to his core. I think the same of Obama and I think Bidden is the worst of the bunch.

Originally Posted by aceventura3 (Post 2525731)

The most basic value we have in common is an optimistic outlook on life in general and the country in particular. Obama/Biden's basic premise is that everything is wrong with this country. I believe most of the things are right with this country, not perfect, needing some changes and improvements, but I basically think our country is on the right track. I find it very difficult to buy into the doom and gloom message of the Democrats.

Originally Posted by CNN Political Ticker

Fiorina's comment called 'Biden-like'

From CNN Chief National Correspondent John King

(CNN) — Top McCain-Palin official Carly Fiorina is facing criticism from some within the campaign for a day of what they call "very Biden-like" comments, after the former Hewlett-Packard CEO told two separate interviewers that neither member of the Republican ticket would be capable of running a company.

Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden is noted for his off-the-cuff gaffes.

Asked by a St. Louis radio station whether she thought Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin could run a company like Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina responded: "No, I don't.

“But that's not what she's running for. Running a corporation is a different set of things."

Asked about that remark on MSNBC, she made the same unprompted assessment of the GOP presidential nominee. "I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation."

She also said she did not believe Democrats Barack Obama or Joe Biden had the right business background either.

But with the economy center stage in the campaign, the words that gave Democrats easy fodder to attack the Republican ticket.

A top McCain official contacted by CNN said, on condition on anonymity, "No big deal, but not how you get on the surrogate all-star team. Very Biden-like."

“This campaign source said Fiorina would be discouraged from additional media interviews.

Another top campaign adviser was far less diplomatic.

"Carly will now disappear," this source said. "Senator McCain was furious." Asked to define "disappear," this source said, adding that she would be off TV for a while – but remain at the Republican National Committee and keep her role as head of the party’s joint fundraising committee with the McCain campaign.

Fiorina was booked for several TV interviews over the next few days, including one on CNN. Those interviews have been canceled.

A third source said "it was another bad day for her, and important people are mad because the timing is horrible… But I would not necessarily buy the Siberia storyline."

Fiorina has forced the campaign off message before. In July, she told reporters women often express frustration over the fact many health insurance plans cover Viagra but not birth control medication.

"Let me give you a real, live example, which I've been hearing a lot about from women. There are many health insurance plans that will cover Viagra but won't cover birth control medication. Those women would like a choice," she said.

It was a topic McCain wasn’t as keen to talk about. "I certainly do not want to discuss that issue," he said, when reporters asked if he shared that view.” That comment, and the pause that preceded it, captured headlines for days.

Originally Posted by hiredgun (Post 2525630)

With respect, Obama was editor of the Harvard Law Review. He is at least extremely intelligent. Palin, by contrast, seems frightening uninformed on a host of important issues. Their governing experience may be comparable, but at least concede that much.

Originally Posted by Poppinjay (Post 2526002)

Thanks for your lazy grasshopper - worker ant analogy. It shows how "lightweight" the thought process is behind supporting Palin.




What? He's lazy? He's only good at running for president? Do you know his record as a community organizer? Tell me Otto, how does a lazy person graduate Harvard Law Magna Cum Laude and become president of the Harvard Law Review?

Because it's an elitist school, right? And those schools are so easy to get degrees from, if you're the "right kind" of person.

How about his 11 years as a professor at the Uni of Chicago? Oh, right, another elitist school where laziness is reward and hard work is mistrusted.

If anybody invades the country, Otto, I want the elite troops to protect my castle. You are welcome to all the hard working D-students for yours.

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2526007)

wait---so what you're saying, otto, is that having an ivy league education is a PROBLEM?

how exactly does this work?

be careful what you say.

Originally Posted by ratbastid (Post 2526006)

otto, I think you're confusing ambition with intelligence. She's ambitious. She's feisty. She's scrappy. I wouldn't accuse her of having a lot of this ephemeral quality we're calling "substance", though. And she certainly doesn't currently have a sufficient handle on the world situation to lead the country. She reads a teleprompter well, though. She could probably be trained, and could potentially be a very satisfactory puppet for her version of Karl Rove who would be pulling the strings.

You really think she has what it takes to be the President under her own steam? President of the United States? Of America?

Originally Posted by roachboy (Post 2526015)

can you translate this bit of gibberish then?