Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina Near Launching Presidential Bid

Oh goody by Rinikusu · 2015-03-29 05:46 · Score: 5, Funny

Maybe she can fire Congress and fill their positions with H1Bs. Not like they can do any worse.

--
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai

Re:Oh goody by DoofusOfDeath · 2015-03-29 06:19 · Score: 1, Interesting

Maybe she can fire Congress and fill their positions with H1Bs. Not like they can do any worse.
Wait until the SCOTUS tells states that immigration enforcement is a federal matter, and that states therefore cannot prevent illegal immigrants from voting or holding elected office. That's basically your joke come true.
Re:Oh goody by CrimsonAvenger · 2015-03-29 06:32 · Score: 2

Wait until the SCOTUS tells states that immigration enforcement is a federal matter, and that states therefore cannot prevent illegal immigrants from voting or holding elected office.
While some elected office require citizenship, not all do, in case you are unaware.
However, voting requires citizenship at local, state, or federal level.
Which means that even if SCOTUS says that immigration enforcement is a Federal issue (it is, frankly), that won't result in any new voters until citizenship requirements are met. Though it might result in some new candidates for public office....

--

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Re:Oh goody by tranquilidad · 2015-03-29 06:44 · Score: 2

Have to start somewhere:DC Considers Allowing Non-Citizens to Vote
Re:Oh goody by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 08:50 · Score: 1

She would find a way 'fire' the voters and replace all of them with H1Bs.
Re:Oh goody by reboot246 · 2015-03-29 09:12 · Score: 1

SCOTUS can go jump. For most of this country's history immigration was a state matter. Go read your history and you'll see that states controlled immigration, and the feds stepped in only when requested. It makes sense when you read the word "state" as "country", the way it was meant to be by the Founders.
Re:Oh goody by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-29 09:20 · Score: 3, Informative

The Constitution doesn't tell the States (or DC for that matter) who can vote in their internal elections, or what sort of form those can take, save that it guarantees them a "republican form of government," meaning essentially that your state can't decide to replace its legislature with a hereditary Monarchy for instance. Most states mimic the federal government in form (executive, bicameral legislature, etc) but not all do - Nebraska for instance has a unicameral (one house) legislature.

The States though have some reasonable discretion at how they run their elections. While I find it difficult to think of a situation where a State might have more strict requirements for voting in its non-Federal election, there is precedent for a State allowing someone who can't vote in a federal election to vote in a state election. Prior to the 26th Amendment lowering the voting age to 18, many States already allowed 18 year olds to vote in non-federal elections, and the Supreme Court upheld that Congress had the right to regulate the minimum age in federal elections, but not at the state and local level.

Now, whether that would extend to citizenship would be an interesting question, but there's certainly precedent for it in terms of both age and women being allowed to vote in state/local elections, when they could not do so in federal elections.
Re:Oh goody by AK+Marc · 2015-03-29 12:30 · Score: 2

Prior to the 26th Amendment lowering the voting age to 18, many States already allowed 18 year olds to vote in non-federal elections, and the Supreme Court upheld that Congress had the right to regulate the minimum age in federal elections, but not at the state and local level.
What's odd is that Congress would have been able to require 21+ to vote for a congressman, but not for president. The presidential elections are not federal elections. Congress could require the electors in the Electoral college be 25+ or whatever they like, but not the ages of the state voters selecting them, that's a local election, not a federal one.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re: Oh goody by AK+Marc · 2015-03-29 12:46 · Score: 1

The right to vote is Constitutionally guaranteed to citizens, but not denied to residents (legal or illegal). A state could allow residents to vote. A state "grants" most of the rights of citizenship. So ignore the feds. The most they'll do is pass a law that takes away the state's highway's funding if they don't enforce laws the feds can't enforce. Like how they set 55 as the NMSL, 21 for the drinking age, and tight laws on drunk driving.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:Oh goody by dbIII · 2015-03-29 13:17 · Score: 1

You mean just like in the early days of the USA when anyone who moved in could vote? Can't have that!
Re:Oh goody by BVis · 2015-03-30 01:10 · Score: 4, Informative

Well, fortunately we have strong voter id laws on the books that are intended to make it harder for Democrats to vote
FTFY.
Voter fraud is a rounding error. You should try finding a more compelling bogeyman.

--
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Re:Oh goody by BVis · 2015-03-31 01:12 · Score: 1

2000 wasn't about voter fraud, it was about terrible ballots and the closeness of Florida's result. SCOTUS put him in office. Actual voter fraud (where you're ineligible to vote and vote anyway) is what is the rounding error.

--
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

This is great! by ColdWetDog · 2015-03-29 05:47 · Score: 5, Funny

She can follow up on her work at HP and merge the Democrat and Republican parties together. That should make things much more efficient, increase shareholder value and offer synergies to enhance international competition.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!

Re:This is great! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 05:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

I thought they'd already merged. They both do pretty much the same thing when they're in power.
Re:This is great! by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2015-03-29 06:07 · Score: 2

. . . you forgot the part about how she is going to lay off Americans . . . revoke their citizenship, and force them to leave the country, and try their luck elsewhere in the world.
She also ditched the old concept of "The HP Way". I'm guessing that she will change the "Pledge of Allegiance, to the Flag" to "With Freedom and Justice . . . for the Rich".

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Re:This is great! by davester666 · 2015-03-29 06:08 · Score: 1

They would be "Battling Business Units"

--
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Re:This is great! by sphealey · 2015-03-29 06:23 · Score: 2, Insightful

What's a "Democrat Party"? Whig, Republican, Bull Moose, and Democratic are some major US political parties that come to mind but I don't recall a "Democrat Party" from the history textbooks.
sPh
Re:This is great! by r1348 · 2015-03-29 08:08 · Score: 3, Informative

Nitpicking, or complete lack of imagination?
Re:This is great! by sphealey · 2015-03-29 08:56 · Score: 1, Informative

"Democrat Party" is a slur, originally developed by Jesse Helms and later picked up and expanded upon by Karl Rove, intended to take away from Democrats - that is, members of the Democratic Party, the right to choose their own name.
As Theon can tell you having an entity that is attempting to obtain dominance over you impose a name not of your choosing is not a good thing. Members of the Democratic Party have been pretty vigilant about this since George W. Bush started doing it regularly. Hard right wing radicals don't like to be called out on their attempts though for some weird reason.
sPh
Re:This is great! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 09:09 · Score: 1

She can follow up on her work at HP and merge the Democrat and Republican parties together.
If her goal is for the Democratic and Republican parties to reach agreement on the value of her candidacy, I think that can be readily attained.
Re:This is great! by RabidReindeer · 2015-03-29 09:26 · Score: 1

Nitpicking, or complete lack of imagination?
"Democrat Party" is what conservatives call it because the idea of a "democratic party" offends them. You don't hear too much mention of the "Republic Party".
So, nitpicking if you will. Refusal to accept a slur, if you won't.
Re:This is great! by Livius · 2015-03-29 09:52 · Score: 4, Funny

They could never merge - they're as different as Coke and Pepsi.
Re:This is great! by catchblue22 · 2015-03-29 09:58 · Score: 4, Insightful

She can follow up on her work at HP and merge the Democrat and Republican parties together. That should make things much more efficient, increase shareholder value and offer synergies to enhance international competition.
Or she can sell off the US government's core technological assets and turn America into a hollow corporate brand name that creates almost nothing. Just like she did with HP when she sold off HP's advanced technology division as Agilent, and changed HP from a technological powerhouse into a brand-name for shitty computers and components.

--
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Re:This is great! by pnutjam · 2015-03-29 10:19 · Score: 1

and:
Privacy
1st amendment issues
4th amendment issues
single payer healthcare

just to name afew more of mine.

--
Cheap storage VM.
Re:This is great! by TheGratefulNet · 2015-03-29 10:54 · Score: 1

right now, the only thing they don't do is 'sell ink'.
I think she's the right person to help with that.
not much else, though. but if ink at a high price is your game, she's the lady to go see.

--

--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Re:This is great! by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-29 11:46 · Score: 1

Agilent is better off without the crappy consumer electronics. Laser and Ink Jet printers became commodities. The old H-P was dead no matter who took charge. Hillary could have become the H-P CEO and it wouldn't have gone differently.
Re:This is great! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 12:02 · Score: 1

She'll be buying Greece and Ukraine for $1trillion each, to incorporate them into the USA... then have no idea how to manage such a thing, realize that she massively overpaid for them and they weren't worth anywhere near what was paid, and then will try to sell them off for $10billion each... just like all the other acquisitions HP has made in recent years.
Re:This is great! by the+gnat · 2015-03-29 12:05 · Score: 1

Then why is it exclusively conservatives who use the incorrect term?
Re:This is great! by ixidor · 2015-03-29 13:09 · Score: 2

and.... Bingo. thanks folks, turn in your cards to the right as you exit.
Re:This is great! by sphealey · 2015-03-29 14:44 · Score: 3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_%28epithet%29
Use of the term has been a point of contention within the Republican Party. In 1984, when a delegate of the Republican platform committee asked unanimous consent to change a platform amendment to read the Democrat Party instead of Democratic Party, New York Representative Jack Kemp objected, saying that would be "an insult to our Democratic friends" and the committee dropped the proposal.[2] In 1996, the wording throughout the Republican party platform was changed from "Democratic Party" to "Democrat Party": Republican leaders "explained they wanted to make the subtle point that the Democratic Party had become elitist".[19] A proposal to use the term again in the August 2008 Republican Platform for similar reasons was voted down with leaders choosing to use "Democratic Party". "We probably should use what the actual name is," said Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, the panel's chairman. "At least in writing."

Yeah, Jack Kemp and Haley Barbour, flaming libruls both. Got it. Nice try though.
Re:This is great! by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 14:55 · Score: 1

You don't hear "Republic Party" because it is a compliment of the highest order.
Also, the word "republics" refers to countries with a certain type of government; whereas "democrats" refers equally well to people espousing democracy and many members of the Democratic Party.
The Democratic Party contains many people who claim and believe that democracy is a good thing, and consider themselves both democrats and Democrats. It is therefor accurate to describe the Democratic Party as the democrat party, i.e. the party of democrats. Calling it the Democrat Party, though inaccurate, is a subtle way of insulting those Democrats who understand the deficiencies of democracy by those who also understand the deficiencies of democracy.
It's a slur only if it's inaccurate.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:This is great! by Greg_D · 2015-03-29 20:10 · Score: 3, Insightful

Some of us got past the mentality of a 10 year old who still thinks their mother picks on them. You'll get there one day, champ.
Re:This is great! by dave420 · 2015-03-30 00:53 · Score: 1

Read up on the history of the name, and you'll see you're not only wrong, but fantastically so.
Re:This is great! by thunderbird32 · 2015-03-30 04:05 · Score: 5, Funny

Don't blame me! I voted RC Cola.
Re:This is great! by ebvwfbw · 2015-03-30 14:41 · Score: 1

And both are like crab juice.

Simplr math ... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 05:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

Since she has a greater than 90% chance of running, she has a greater than 90% chance of losing. This truly is a case of "the only way not to lose is not to play the game."

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.

Re:Simplr math ... by slashdime · 2015-03-29 06:38 · Score: 1

Your two sentences are in disagreement.

"The only way not to lose is to not play the game" -> not running = !losing

Probability of losing (at the decision to run or the election itself): p=.9
Re:Simplr math ... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 06:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

No it's not. The best way to not lose at a lottery is to not buy a ticket.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Simplr math ... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 07:46 · Score: 1

depends on your definition of losing. I see you've chosen - if you don't try, you can't fail. Typical nerd tactic to not try anything out of their comfort zone.
I've had to do plenty of things outside my comfort zone. That's how we learn. A lot of those things I'm now comfortable with.
As for Carly Fiorina, as I said before, the only hope she has of not losing is to not run.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Simplr math ... by sumdumass · 2015-03-29 08:00 · Score: 1

I doubt that. She seems like less of a bitch than Hillary, is more media and business friendly in ways Hillary simply tries to put on a show about, and not too many people outside the tech world actually hate her.
Outside of her name sounding foreign, I would think she has just as much chance as any other woman running. I bet she would be picked as a vice president candidate too- if the primaries don't get too ugly.
Re:Simplr math ... by Moof123 · 2015-03-29 10:15 · Score: 4, Insightful

Plenty of HP/Agilent/Keysight folks will happily get in front of the camera to tell war stories about how effective she was at steering a very good and well loved company into the rocks. It broke into pieces that still limp on with the scars and damage that her bad management caused. The country is littered with old HP campuses that have been abandoned after off shoring and consolidation, in large part due to activities on her watch.
Her appeal to the right is how effective she was at dehumanizing a culture that used to place great value on its people into 3 pieces that now tout "shareholder value" above valuing its people. Sadly the pieces are pretty un-special at even shareholder value these days. Bill and Dave have to be doing about 3600 rpm in their graves.
Re:Simplr math ... by Dragon+Bait · 2015-03-29 11:16 · Score: 1

Her appeal to the right
Okay, I missed it. Other than her own ego, who wants her to run? I haven't heard anyone say that she was going to be their first choice, or second, or third. Maybe I'm too close to the tech industry, but I have no clue who her target market is. Other than her ego, she has no core constituency.
Re:Simplr math ... by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 11:21 · Score: 1

So you think that "King Tutankhamun lost the 2008 presidential election" is a true statement.
No, because he never ran. Duh! Just like I didn't lose it, because I didn't run. How many people did not lose at the most recent lottery because they never bought a ticket? You can't say they lost anything - unlike the losers who bought tickets.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Simplr math ... by the+gnat · 2015-03-29 12:11 · Score: 1

I think her target market is Republicans who want a viable female challenger to Hilary. Realistically, she's setting herself up for Sec. of Commerce, or maybe, if she's extremely lucky and does moderately well in the primaries, VP. I am no fan of hers for all of the obvious reasons, but she is a rocket scientist compared to Bachmann and Palin.
Re:Simplr math ... by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-29 13:21 · Score: 1

Have you ever thought that maybe Bill and Dave having gone away was the cause of HP crumbling, and not whomever happened to be at the helm during the dissolution.
I love my HP calculators and even the Omnibook 300 which was probably the last really nice piece of hardware the Corvalis Division came out with. But times had changed. My Tektronix 465M scope is a beautiful piece of gear and the 547 mainframe before it a stunning technical achivement. But those days are over. Tech equipment cannot be the works of art that it was back in the cold war era when gear was designed to last a century. General Radio is over. H-P is over.
Don't blame it on people like Carly. She was just the corporate type who happened to take the seat at that point in history. You come off like misogynist assholes to regular people if you try.
Bill and Dave were smarter than that. You'd really disappoint them if they knew you were invoking their name the way you are.
Re:Simplr math ... by dbIII · 2015-03-29 14:11 · Score: 1

Those empty buildings HP are a selling point to a certain ideology. A wrecking ball is the ideal for those "small government" folks who want a government too small to be able to catch those buying off government granted boons with bribes.
Re:Simplr math ... by pixelpusher220 · 2015-03-29 14:22 · Score: 1

She's not running for President anymore than Ted Cruz is. the real reason is anonymously pocketing all the anonymous SuperPAC money.

--
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
Re:Simplr math ... by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 15:07 · Score: 1

Fiorina did not have to break the HP Way. Her personality flaws were incompatible with a position of power in the HP culture, and those same flaws will be bad for the country if she's elected. Not as bad as Hillary or the current occupant of the White House, but bad nonetheless.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Simplr math ... by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 15:08 · Score: 2

One point of a small government is to not have enough power to grant boons.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Simplr math ... by _merlin · 2015-03-29 15:27 · Score: 1

US is 115V 60Hz. Europe/Aus/China is 230V 50Hz. Japan is 100V 50Hz or 60Hz depending on the area.
Re:Simplr math ... by dbIII · 2015-03-29 16:40 · Score: 1

It has to be a joke because obviously even when government gets down to the level of minor warlords they can still grant boons. So please explain the joke because I'm missing it.
Re:Simplr math ... by serviscope_minor · 2015-03-29 21:00 · Score: 3, Informative

You come off like misogynist assholes to regular people if you try.
Her gender has nothing to do with it: the mental obsession with outsourcing, offshoring, mergers and splits is what caused the problem. This is a non gender specific disease which has infected a large number of professional CEOs.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:Simplr math ... by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 21:05 · Score: 4, Insightful

Palin, Bachman, Fiorina... she certainly fits the mould of the average republican female candidate: "I have a vagina and I'm not afraid to insert my head into the cavity right next to it !"

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Simplr math ... by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 21:37 · Score: 3, Insightful

And of course the irony is that their ideology never actually works, but it does turn them into valuable useful idiots.
The sincere ones among them want to cut things like crony-capitalism, regulatory capture and corporate welfare as well.
But that NEVER happens, instead by using their support for "small government" big business simply gets to have government plunder all the actual services it provides, and social safety netts and hand over the results to MORE crony capitalism.
I think the perfect example was Denver where the local government basically just took everybody's pensions because they "couldn't afford to pay them anymore" - but never cut a penny of their corporate welfare bill - which could have paid the pension liabilities ten times over !
Even their lord and saviour Ronald Reagan pulled of the scam perfectly. In theory the Laffer-curve based tax-cut concept is that you cut taxes for EVERYBODY, so EVERYBODY has more money, people spend it to buy things - and this means more business open (since there are customers to supply) so that means more jobs - and so even though you cut taxes very soon your revenues are higher than before. It ONLY works if you are AT the Laffer curve peak -any other time the tax cuts will simply mean less revenue, and the theory also demands that when you do it you cut ALL spending to the bone so you stay liquid until the increased revenue realizes, at which point you are supposed to end the austerity and use this higher revenue to fund bigger projects and MORE expansive social safety netts.
But you won't hear THAT from the politicians, they take a sound economic theory out of it's very narrow context and then apply it across the board - and what's worse, they only apply half of it. What DID Reagan do ?
He cut taxes only on the rich, then he increased spending - a LOT - especially on the military, and cut the social safety nett.
That's been the republican playbook ever since despite that fact that it never worked once in all that time. Well worked at what they said it would do - as a means of handing over poor and middle class folk's taxes to rich people it works brilliantly.
And the small government libertarians are the idiots who keep electing them because they promise to make government smaller and still haven't figured out the scam.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Simplr math ... by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-30 11:44 · Score: 1

There's actually one spot along the income spectrum where the Laffer curve is actually correct. The problem is, it's right around the poverty line, at the point where your benefits drop off faster than your income increases. At that point, you're actually doing yourself a disservice by working harder/earning more, because you wind up with more money.

But good luck getting Republicans interested in fixing that, short of just having them gut the original benefits in the first place.
Re:Simplr math ... by silentcoder · 2015-03-30 17:57 · Score: 1

Well they are the source of quotes like
"If you cut taxes on the poor they just spend it on food and shelter" and "When last did a poor person give you a job ?"
Basically - they think they are smarter than the real economists who came up with the theory. Economists who are generally horrified by the way republicans "apply" it.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Simplr math ... by silentcoder · 2015-03-30 18:03 · Score: 1

I forgot about Maggie, she is indeed a perfect example of the species.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Simplr math ... by Hognoxious · 2015-04-04 19:16 · Score: 1

I thought the idea was that gubbermint should be too weak to prevent the 1% just grabbing whatever they want.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Now I understand her record at HP by MouseTheLuckyDog · 2015-03-29 05:50 · Score: 2

when I see how she thinks she has any possibility to win, especially given her tenure at HP.

Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 06:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

She won big time,and yet HP lost
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 07:01 · Score: 4, Interesting

Would you rather have her, or President Cruz?

Now, I remember rumors that when she was fired, engineers at HP spontaneously started singing, "Ding Dong, the Witch is Dead."

She was the most powerful business woman in the world for a while. And that's how people remember her. If she can build on that reputation, she has a chance.

I don't think she can build on that reputation, and I don't think she has a chance......but she does.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Darinbob · 2015-03-29 07:54 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is a CEO syndrome. You're surrounded all day by sycophants who claim you're the smartest, brightest, and wisest person they know. No matter what obscure VP you go to visit they all seem to recognize you on sight, so clearly you've got name and face recognition. All of your decisions are praised. Most of the time even the board of directors treat you like their best friend.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 08:13 · Score: 1

the anti-ILLEGALimmigrant candidate born in Canada
FTFY

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 08:45 · Score: 3, Informative

As I see it, the serious candidates in the Republican party are (in no particular order):

1 Marco Rubio (experience: over ten years in congress, can win elections).
2 Scott Walker (experience: Governor, smashing unions and winning hard political fights)
3 Chris Christy (experience: Governor, reaches across the aisle, achieves Republican goals in a Democratic state).

The Jokers are:
1 Ted Cruz (no experience, he's a waffle, special gift of annoying people and destroying things).
2 Rand Paul (no experience, a big name to run on, but that name didn't win many presidential elections).
3 Carly Fiorina (doesn't know how to run a campaign)
4 Jeb Bush (Even his mom discouraged him from running)
5 Mike Huckabee (nice guy, evangelical.....that's the sum total of his platform).
6 Rick Perry (he's like Bush but with none of the brains).
7 Mark Everson (who would vote for a retired IRS commissioner?)

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Necron69 · 2015-03-29 09:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

That isn't a rumor. I was there, and yes, people did burst into song. I've never worked for a more hated CEO. She sure as Hell isn't getting my vote for anything.
- Necron69
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by McGruber · 2015-03-29 09:16 · Score: 4, Interesting

As I see it, the serious candidates in the Republican party are (in no particular order): 1 Marco Rubio (experience: over ten years in congress, can win elections).
You're wrong about Rubio's having "over ten years in congress". Rubio did serve several terms in the Florida State House of Representatives, but he has never been a US Representative and is still a first term senator, having been elected in 2010. He's about as qualified as Obama was when Obama won the Presidency. He's probably unelectable thanks to some stupid moves he's made -- he voted against the Violence Against Women Act.

2 Scott Walker (experience: Governor, smashing unions and winning hard political fights)
George W. Bush used to say "I'm a uniter, not a divider." Scott Walker is his opposite, which leads me to think that he is not electable. Walker is still in his first term and he dropped out of college, which is a big negative (in my view). He was only one semester short of a degree, but he's never bothered to finish? Something's not quite right there.

3 Chris Christy (experience: Governor, reaches across the aisle, achieves Republican goals in a Democratic state).
Christy is a corrupt New Jersey politician. The question is whether or not that corruption will catch up to him before the election. I think it will.
IMHO, Republican primary voters appear incapable of recognizing competency. There are several good Republican Governors out there, but they're not on anybody's radar screen. The Governor of New Mexico is one -- she's in her second term, has apparently done a good job because she has very high public opinion poll ratings, and she happens to be a hispanic woman.... but few people outside of NM (and its neighboring states) have ever heard of her.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-29 09:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

Depends on what she's really running for. Recent history indicates that a lot of the second tier candidates for the Republican nomination have managed to sufficiently raise their profile in so doing, and gone on to reasonably lucrative work as commentators on various news networks, especially Fox.

Or, as someone snarked to me about one candidate or another recently, "He/she's running for a Commentator spot on Fox, not for President."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Grishnakh · 2015-03-29 09:43 · Score: 2

He's probably unelectable thanks to some stupid moves he's made -- he voted against the Violence Against Women Act.
Walker is still in his first term and he dropped out of college, which is a big negative (in my view). He was only one semester short of a degree, but he's never bothered to finish? Something's not quite right there.
Christy is a corrupt New Jersey politician.
What makes you think these people are unelectable based on these factors? I think you're vastly overestimating the competence of Republican voters.
My prediction is that we're going to have a Republican president elected in 2016, and it'll be Jeb Bush. He's going to run against Hillary Clinton. After Obama disillusioning the progressives and blacks, turnout on the Democrat side is going to be weak because no one except middle-aged and up white women are excited about Clinton. Bush is going to win the Republican nomination somehow. Bush speaks fluent Spanish and is married to a Mexican-American woman. Republican voters are going to vote for him just because he's Republican, and the Latinos are all going to vote for him too because of the above factors, and because he'll appeal to their religious sensibilities with his anti-abortion rhetoric, plus his positive views on immigration reform.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by meglon · 2015-03-29 09:47 · Score: 2

Well, that's not entirely accurate.... she can rightfully claim that she's the reason HP's stock went up: http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/0...

Personally i like this part....

"The stock is up a bit on the fact that nobody liked Carly's leadership all that much," said Robert Cihra, an analyst with Fulcrum Global Partners. "The Street had lost all faith in her and the market's hope is that anyone will be better."

--
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by meglon · 2015-03-29 10:01 · Score: 3, Informative

Are you sure that's what she's remembered for?

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

Fiorina frequently has been ranked as one of the worst CEOs of all time.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/am...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/3050209...

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

http://ca.complex.com/pop-cult...

Oh... and this....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

--
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 10:06 · Score: 4, Funny

My prediction is that we're going to have a Republican president elected in 2016, and it'll be Jeb Bush. He's going to run against Hillary Clinton.
Ironically, if that happens, we'll have democrat who voted to invade Iraq running against a Bush who didn't.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 10:10 · Score: 2

He's probably unelectable thanks to some stupid moves he's made -- he voted against the Violence Against Women Act.
That won't matter.

Walker is still in his first term and he dropped out of college, which is a big negative
That won't matter.

There are several good Republican Governors out there, but they're not on anybody's radar screen. The Governor of New Mexico is one

She doesn't oppose medicinal marijuana, she doesn't oppose same-sex marriage, she does not want to repeal ACA.......essentially you like politicians who agree with your political opinions.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 10:12 · Score: 1

Are you sure that's what she's remembered for?

Among tech guys, like you, no.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Grishnakh · 2015-03-29 10:23 · Score: 1

Um, Jeb AFAIK has never held a Congressional seat at the Federal level, so it's not like he had a chance to vote on it. That doesn't mean he wouldn't have voted for it.
But yeah, Hillary is basically a Republican with a "(D)" next to her name, except maybe for the HillaryCare thing she tried.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 10:29 · Score: 1

Probably.

The fact that you feel you need to explain, instead of just enjoying the irony, shows you are taking the whole thing way too seriously.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by catchblue22 · 2015-03-29 10:37 · Score: 1, Interesting

Chris Christy scares the bejesus out of me. His personality is scary. He is the kind of guy who in my opinion you don't want to give too much power. The way he shouts down people who are weaker than him particularly concerns me. This article is a good summary of him.

--
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 10:48 · Score: 1

Well, I agree with you on that point.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re: Now I understand her record at HP by DigiShaman · 2015-03-29 11:19 · Score: 3, Funny

I'd vote for Cruz because he destroys things; specifically the political establishment and aims to realign with the constitution. I want him to be the embodiment of the Fear of God to them!
Nuke and pave the system. And he's the nuke!

--
Life is not for the lazy.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 11:23 · Score: 1

what, are people supposed to support traditional anti-american republican scum instead?
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by the+gnat · 2015-03-29 12:16 · Score: 1

reasonably lucrative work
I could understand Fiorina just wanting the attention - but dear God, I hope she doesn't need the money. That $20 million severance package would last most ordinary people a lifetime.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Will.Woodhull · 2015-03-29 13:18 · Score: 1

I would like some kind of Phoenix Party to rise from the ashes of the Republican Party. But I don't think that is going to happen. I think America is going to become a one-party system with jumble of political clowns on the other side of the aisle for perhaps a decade. It will probably take that long for the clowns to destroy the remaining infrastructure that the GOP had put together between its re-emergence in the early 1900s and 1980.

--
Will
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Bing+Tsher+E · 2015-03-29 13:25 · Score: 1

The staff at HP a generation earlier, you know... the people who actually made HP what it was, not the people who climbed on in the 70s... would not have carried on like that.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by Will.Woodhull · 2015-03-29 13:33 · Score: 1

IMHO, Republican primary voters appear incapable of recognizing competency. There are several good Republican Governors out there, but they're not on anybody's radar screen.
IMO, the problem is that the Republicans who are politically savvy are seeking to become governors or powerful legislators at the State level because they have sense enough to stay away from the national scene. At the national level, Republican politics is a chaotic whirlpool of tea partiers, evangelicals, super-capitalists, anti-thises and anti-thats that will suck under anyone who can actually DO politics, and will toss some random joker up to the top to be the next candidate.

--
Will
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by dbIII · 2015-03-29 14:15 · Score: 1

The bridge closing guy is still in the race? They really must be short on contenders since he's got the stink of a scandal to overcome before he can convince anyone that he's be a viable President.
Re: Now I understand her record at HP by dbIII · 2015-03-29 14:18 · Score: 1

Ah yes, another career politician who plays the "not a politician" card. Well if he hasn't been working as one for all this time kick the lazy leech out.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by dbIII · 2015-03-29 14:20 · Score: 1

No matter what obscure VP
That's part of the problem right there. There should never be enough VPs that you can't put them in a small room.
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by digsbo · 2015-03-29 14:34 · Score: 1

Are you saying the people who joined in the 1970s are still working there and singing the song? I can't imagine more than 3% of the workforce at HP started during the 70s. That doesn't disprove your contention that "the people who actually made HP what it was" wouldn't act this way, but it does kind of suggest that you aren't remotely in touch with the current makeup of the workforce there. Care to elaborate?
Re: Now I understand her record at HP by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 15:23 · Score: 1

Immigration laws are a matter of LAW. Enforcement is a matter of bureaucracy. Whether immigration laws are just is an open debate, as is the question of whether they're being enforced justly.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 15:43 · Score: 1

Scott Walker left college because he was offered a job that paid very well, that wouldn't still be available when he finished college. It paid more than he was likely to get if he had finished college. Judging from his success, there was no reason to return to college. What did you learn in your last term of college?
Walker is active and dynamic. People who complain that he is divisive fall into 2 camps: those who plan to run against him and their sycophants, and those who like a sneaky or convictionless candidate. A candidate who has successfully opposed unions is a candidate who has successfully opposed entrenched power, and that should be a tremendous plus.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 21:55 · Score: 1

>essentially you like politicians who agree with your political opinions.
Erm... yeah, that's sort of the whole POINT of having elections.
Now what I can tell you is there is no way the Reps can take the whitehouse again as long as they court the batcrap crazy and the religious right so exclusively. Their extreme partisan behaviour under Obama has done them NO favours and in presidential elections the liberals actually VOTE.
The only way they can win now is if they can get a candidate who has broad appeal outside that narrow band. Somebody who can get the independents to vote for them.
Even an old-school republican has a shot.
The trouble is that to get the nomination you need to win a bunch of elections where ONLY those religious right extremists vote and the teaparty has enormous influence.
Mit learned last time round that going batshit crazy to win the nomination and then somehow getting back to the centre for the national election is REALLY hard.
If the reps want a shot at this - they need somebody who can appeal across the aisle, and that person needs to be able to convince the batcrap crazies to give her the nomination first.
Trust me, it's going to be a very interesting 18 months ahead.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 22:02 · Score: 1

>A candidate who has successfully opposed unions is a candidate who has successfully opposed entrenched power, and that should be a tremendous plus.
No it's the exact opposite of what America needs. What you desperately NEED is another Teddy Rooseveldt. You need a man who DEFENDS unions and goes to war against oligarchies and monopolies. Who actively promotes environmental protection and realizes that severe inequality WILL lead to revolution and so takes it upon himself to ensure the market is REALLY free, labour conditions are safe and paid fairly, and hold corporations to account.
The greatest irony of the 21st century is hearing people call Obama a liberal. He is centre-right at best. Now Rooseveldt, HE was a liberal worthy of the name.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Now I understand her record at HP by phantomfive · 2015-03-30 04:37 · Score: 1

Erm... yeah, that's sort of the whole POINT of having elections.
We're nor having an election here, we're discussing who is electable. Letting your own partisan views enter in makes it harder for you to see.

Their extreme partisan behaviour under Obama has done them NO favours
Except give them the senate and their largest house majority since 1930.

and in presidential elections the liberals actually VOTE.
You are reading too much Salon and DailyKos. Who won more congressional seats in 2012?

Trust me, it's going to be a very interesting 18 months ahead.
Well that's definitely true.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."

Never Forget Lucent by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 05:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

Don't forget she killed Lucent which resulted in Bell Labs being sold off to the French in a fire sale. She's evil. She's definitely prepared for a career in politics.

Re:Never Forget Lucent by umghhh · 2015-03-29 05:58 · Score: 1

There is plenty of CEOs out there that could be president of US or some other country (not that they would notice anyway).
Re:Never Forget Lucent by Austerity+Empowers · 2015-03-29 06:21 · Score: 1

China has their checkbook ready!
Re: Never Forget Lucent by Type44Q · 2015-03-29 07:24 · Score: 1

Is?! "Arrgh!" :p
Re: Never Forget Lucent by umghhh · 2015-03-29 08:31 · Score: 1

me apology. Shocked to see it too.

So she can do to the US... by SvnLyrBrto · 2015-03-29 05:54 · Score: 1

... what she did to HP?

No thank you.

I wonder what irrelevant, fourth-rate, POS country that would a complete mismatch and no one in their right mind would ever want anything to do with anyway she has in mind to merge with the USA?

--
Imagine all the people...

Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 06:11 · Score: 1

Reason.com has a story about how Somalia has done really well without a functioning government, so maybe she will let the warlords take over America and turn it into _another_ libertarian paradise
Here is her pitch to the small government crowd:
"A wide range of scholarship and commentary on Somalia, most with no ideological ax to grind, tells an interesting and even somewhat encouraging story—one about a society with an unusual and robust clan-based system of dispute resolution and goods provision that has managed to keep daily life moving along even without a "Somali government.""
http://reason.com/archives/201...

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 07:44 · Score: 1

Another reason why Reason is full of shit.
Somalia does have a functioning government and has had one for years.
Re:So she can do to the US... by epyT-R · 2015-03-29 07:51 · Score: 4, Informative

1. libertarians are not anarchists and do not believe in 'no government.'
2. expecting the government to operate within budget like everyone else is not anarchy.
2. fiorina is likely not libertarian.
Re:So she can do to the US... by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 08:15 · Score: 1

ahh yes, good ol somalia, which for some reason complete idiots like to relate them with libertarians.....

as soon as I see somalia in a comment, I know we are dealing with a wingbat of some sort

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 09:53 · Score: 1

To be honest, I was going for funny...
You should take a minute and read the article in Reason because the mental acrobats that the author goes through are stunning.
I lost a lot of respect for the publication as a result

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 10:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

While I agree with you that Libertarian =/= Anarchy, you will probably get a lot of arguments that 'getting government to operate withing budget' =/= Libertarian either.
In my mind 'getting government to operate withing budget' == Fiscal Conservative, which is why I cannot vote for the 'modern' GOP which thinks that it's roles is to play world police while cutting taxes for the wealthy and putting the country into deep debt.
I find it odd that the most fiscally conservative national figure these days is President Obama, whose tight-fisted use of stimulus and reduction of the deficit during he recover would have probably pissed off FDR.
President Obama could pull off a really good Goldwater impersonation if he was only more willing to nuke some third world countries, he already manages to pull off most of the positive traits of Nixon.

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by Moof123 · 2015-03-29 10:34 · Score: 1, Insightful

1. libertarians are not anarchists and do not believe in 'no government.'
2. expecting the government to operate within budget like everyone else is not anarchy. ...
1. Libertarians want minimal government, but not one that collects taxes, just one with enough army to enforce all the contracts they want the world to run on. And they want that army to be paid for by someone else, not them. I am pretty sure they miss company towns and want to bring back that model to the whole country, but with th emight of the US military to back it up and give it legitimacy this time around.
2. They expect the government to operate within a budget, but they want that budget to be $0. The whole notion they have is to "starve the beast", to set the budget low enough that the government is bound to be both badly run, and to badly overrun their budget by design. In so doing they can show the A) government doesn't work, and B) government doesn't stay within its budget so that they can be justified in destroying departments or installing their cronies using an invented crisis to further erode it from the inside.
Take Social Security for example. Rather than do something minimal like removing the income cap for taxation, or raising the tax by 2% to cover the long term demographic driven shortfall, they want to burn the whole thing down. We would be better off lower the retirement age than raising it, but the debate has already been pulled so far to the right you can't even talk about improving social security, you can only argue about how big the cuts *MUST* be to save the program.
I heard a lot of Libertarian ranting from my grandfather who spent much of his life in the John Birch society, and spent most of his later years running a small group trying to get income taxes repealed. So yeah, I have heard a lot of the crazy behind Libertarian ideas. It is a fantasyland for the most part. It has gotten recent attention thanks to our two major parties screwing up so bad that folks are ready to vote for the "anything else" option more so than ever before.
Re:So she can do to the US... by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 10:37 · Score: 1

i got ya, and I wasnt calling you out my apologies as I can see how it looked that way.

and i see your point. Im just really getting annoyed with everytime one brings up libertarianism, someone brings up somalia, meanwhile libertarians have nothing to do with somalia, nor do we want that.

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 12:57 · Score: 1

Obama is living with the structural deficits placed on him by the prior admin and Congress, recognized war debt and the need to pull the country out of the recession.
The prior administration received a country with a positive position to reduce the national debt and ran it into the ditch with tax breaks to the wealthy and unfunded mandates, much like Reagan did before
I am continually taken aback at how the gop talks up the need to be tight with the purse strings, but continually drives more debt up, while the last two dem administrations have shown more economical savvy
The last time around, with Clinton, the gop claimed that he received a lagged positive effect from the prior admin, I doubt that anybody will believe that bull this time around

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by epyT-R · 2015-03-29 14:49 · Score: 1

Well if libertarian != anarchy or 'within budget', then what would libertarian mean exactly? The former is no government, and the latter implies one. One that works within a budget set by the tolerances of the taxpayers seems best.
I guess I was looking at it in terms of raising national debt. In that regard, both parties have the blame. If the state really wanted to help the poor they would move to pay it off and, ideally, abolish the federal reserve. All needed funding should come from taxes, one tax for each initiative (ie road construction) with no redirection into black hole slush funds.
Obama is NOT fiscally conservative. If he was, he would not have pushed for nationalizing healthcare.
Re:So she can do to the US... by epyT-R · 2015-03-29 15:05 · Score: 1

1. Obviously not reasonable since any government needs funding, esp one with a military that could do that. ..and no, company towns would just be more authoritarian garbage under a new management...
2. Didn't you just say this? An unfunded government is no government at all, which is anarchy.
what? you're not even making sense. How about instead we have the government work within a budget like everyone else instead of like a 16 year old with the parental credit card? You talk about cronyism? The term 'crony capitalism' comes to mind, you know, the 'capitalists' who use the state to corner the market and impose their social views on us? Why would you want to grow the size of the hammer (and sickle?) they wield? Nothing hurts the poor more than creeping taxation coupled with creeping inflation.
The fantasy is printing more money whenever you run out and hoping the whole thing doesn't drop on your watch, then leaving the debt to the next generation. Your grandfather doesn't sound like a libertarian, he sounds like he's an anarcho capitalist, unless of course you're misrepresenting his views. Personally, I'd like to try for a 10% flat income tax state. That would give them roughly 1998 levels of funding, something like 1.8trillion.. really, that ought to be enough, and should be once the inflation is under control.
Re:So she can do to the US... by AK+Marc · 2015-03-29 15:18 · Score: 2

In my mind 'getting government to operate withing budget' == Fiscal Conservative,

I'm a rabid left-wing radical, and apparently a fiscal conservative as well.

That's the problem with the current definitions. Everyone labels with the intent of shaming, not describing. I want a small government that does nothing but protect the rights of people from anyone who would impinge on them, from private or governmental sources.

A Libertarian wants a government that doesn't defend rights, but defends contracts. If property has rights, and people only have rights assigned to them by their property, then you are libertarian. If you believe people have rights, and property is one of the lowest rights in the hierarchy, then you are liberal. If you believe money has rights, and people don't, then you are a conservative.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:So she can do to the US... by AK+Marc · 2015-03-29 15:23 · Score: 2

Take Social Security for example. Rather than do something minimal like removing the income cap for taxation, or raising the tax by 2% to cover the long term demographic driven shortfall, they want to burn the whole thing down. We would be better off lower the retirement age than raising it, but the debate has already been pulled so far to the right you can't even talk about improving social security, you can only argue about how big the cuts *MUST* be to save the program.
Of course, you can shut them up with a "what do you do about the old person targeted by scammers who steal all her savings, so she's left penniless at 80, with no means of income or self support? She'll lose her home, and die starving on the streets if nothing is done. What would you have done? Yes, but what if the donations don't cover that? Is there any safety net at all?

That usually gets them on a 6 hour rant about personal responsibility, and some blaming the victim and such. But never an answer.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:So she can do to the US... by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 15:59 · Score: 1

The recession continues, but the media is hiding the fact by cherry-picking statistics and ignoring inflation (inflation used in the technical sense here.) Government dispersing money is not the way to end a recession, and the systematic damage being done will hurt the country for decades.
Obama's biggest monetary cockup came during the first 2 years, when Congress obeyed him slavishly. Blaming Congress for Obama's failings is like pointing at a mirror and saying "It's your fault!"

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 17:59 · Score: 1

I will have to say that we have a fundamentally different views on how the economy works
A recession is great for people who have cash on hand to buy up assets at foreclosure rates, it is horrible for everybody else who has debt against their assets, needs jobs or has their money in the stock market
The primary way to end a recession was demonstrated by FDR as he applied Keynesian economics to put cash into the economy at the consumer level, by hiring them to create infrastructure. This ignites markets by creating demand, and prolongs the recovery by creating resources for those markets to use and grow larger.
This continued growth was demonstrated over the following three decades as the American economy, and middle class grew at phenomenal rates
Some people do not believe in Keynesian economics. They call their version supply side economics and believe that you need to 'give' money to the corporations (via tax breaks and corporate welfare), and that it will somehow trickle down to the consumers. This has not been demonstrated to work out very well for the American economy (makes it prone to boom bust cycles) or the American middle class, which has been reduced by these policies.
I only see President Obama's shortcomings to be that he paid heed to supply side demands by including tax breaks in the stimulus and failing to spend more money on infrastructure build outs
As far as your claims of inflation, I find those to be spurious, much like the cries about hyperinflation resulting from the initial stimulus

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 18:07 · Score: 1

Our current health care system is profit based, and has seen larger increases in cost than nationalized healthcare systems like Britain, Canada, Spain, Taiwan or Australia
How is promoting a healthcare system that is not cost effective fiscally conservative?

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by garyisabusyguy · 2015-03-29 18:10 · Score: 1

I find your definitions to be very insightful, and have found myself in the liberal end of the pool based on the groups that you have defined
I think that the current conservatives have co-opted the definition to line their pockets and I find that to be unfortunate because I come from a long line of decent conservatives who did not value money over people

--
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Re:So she can do to the US... by serviscope_minor · 2015-03-29 21:14 · Score: 1

I'm a rabid left-wing radical, and apparently a fiscal conservative as well.
This is why I can't stand the fake left-right divide, it's trying to project a high dimensional thing down onto a one dimensional space and it's just too coarse.
Furtunately some people are taking a stand against it. For the UK bigots/xenophobes tended to the conservatives so it was always seen as a right wing thing. Now we have the UKIP which is the bigot's leftie party.
While I jest, I'm seriously hoping we end up with a multiparty government. We've already got 4 (juuuuuust---though the Green's one MP barely counts), but more parties is a better opportunity to represent the political spectrum. It's likely we might end up with Consrevative, Labour, Lib Dem, Green, UKIP and SNP this time round, which will be historic.
A Libertarian wants a government that doesn't defend rights, but defends contracts.
Depends which libertarian. The internet is infested with internet-libertarians who think all govenment==evil, and you should enforce contracts via a private army.

--
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Re:So she can do to the US... by dpidcoe · 2015-03-30 03:39 · Score: 1

It's profit based in a system where there's no incentive to lower price, and lots of incentive for people to rack up huge bills with no immediate consequences. Someone could run crying to the doctor because they have a cold, demand every test and scan in the book be run, and it's less than $100 in co-pays with insurance. It's easy for them to rationalize it becuse "this is what I pay all this money every month for and I want to get the most out of it". The insurance buracracy doesn't really care as long as all the Is are dotted and Ts are crossed, but the accountants notice rising costs and make it harder for people with legitimate issues to get tests run next year.
Re:So she can do to the US... by rickb928 · 2015-03-30 04:17 · Score: 1

Really well? They seem to be losing the lead in the sea pirate business.

--
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Re:So she can do to the US... by AK+Marc · 2015-03-30 05:39 · Score: 1

I left out one. If you think the government has rights, you are fascist.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:So she can do to the US... by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-30 12:01 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, there's an underlying mentality in some people that if you can't support yourself, you're basically worthless, and deserve to die. Nobody phrases it like that, because it's a horrible way to think... but that's the end result of it. Point out that it's the logical conclusion, and the response is something like "Well that's just not my problem, why should I support them if they're lazy and irresponsible?" Some of it is a lack of empathy, but mostly it's just distance. It's much harder to get people to care about hypotheticals, or with someone that they would never identify with and never see, than it is to get them to care about some poor cold starving wretch that's right in front of them (at least until they manage to desensitize themselves).

It's also something that comes from a highly understandable and logical notion. There was a time in the past where, if you were an able bodied adult that didn't contribute, you -were- a direct drain on everyone else around you. Back when a single bad harvest could mean the difference between starving or not, that was a life or death matter. If I didn't work, I would be putting you and the entire rest of the village/etc at risk, potentially. That's not the case anymore, not by a long shot - but notions like that don't just go away.
Re:So she can do to the US... by AK+Marc · 2015-03-30 14:08 · Score: 1

Unfortunately, there's an underlying mentality in some people that if you can't support yourself, you're basically worthless, and deserve to die.
My belief is that it's an unconscious belief. They act as if they believe it, but when confronted, they say things like "if you cut taxes, people will give more." and "nobody will go without, you are making false assumptions."

Because they are unwilling to think about the reasoning that must exist for their position to be valid. Though, the prisons are becoming debtor's prisons. Deadbeat dads can't declare bankruptcy to get out of child support, but if they go to prison, they never have to pay a dime. Same with student loans, and other debts that can't be discharged. Also, health care is free in prison.

People aren't sent there for being in debt, but they end up making choices that land them there because of debt. Interesting that the Libertarian is against spending $0.50 of preventative care to stop $10 in enforcement costs. That's why I think Libertarians are as much big-government as the two main parties, it's just all military and police. If they were actually small government, they'd be for Head Start and other programs that increase tax revenue and reduce prison and enforcement costs. But they aren't. Don't ask them why, or they get angry. Just like the people you question who want poor people to die to decrease the surplus population.

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:So she can do to the US... by AK+Marc · 2015-03-30 14:15 · Score: 1

Libertarians want minimal government,
If that were true, they'd be for programs like Head Start, where every $1 spend saves more than that in future costs the Libertarian approves of (like prisons and police). Head Start is a reasonable program for a "small government". Instead the Libertarians are spiteful racists. They want to make sure nobody else gets an opportunity by rigging the game and eliminating all help for others.

In that sense, Bush Jr. was the ultimate Libertarian. He used affirmative action to get into Yale, but would like to end Affirmative Action (he got in under "legacy" where who your daddy is counts for admissions, but wants to eliminate AA, where who your daddy is counts for admissions). That's the real ideal of Libertarian. An actual libertarian would want open borders. Less government regulation. If there's a cost to that, then charge the entrants for coming here - service based fees. But the US-Libertarians want closed borders and large government securing them. That's no libertarian. That's a new brand of conservative that's labeled neo-liberal outside the US.

--
Learn to love Alaska

Echo chamber by RightwingNutjob · 2015-03-29 05:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

What sort of echo chamber does this woman live in to think she's got a good record as a manager to run on? Romney at least made real money and ran a real state government. Fiorina started lots of pissing contests, got booted by the shareholders for loosing money and assets, and lost a senate (not even governor's) race. Wow.

Re:Echo chamber by hey! · 2015-03-29 06:28 · Score: 5, Informative

She can't hear reality over the roar of the hundred million dollars she was paid for halving the shareholder value of HP. Clearly she isn't deluded; she just lives in an alternate reality from the rest of us.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:Echo chamber by quax · 2015-03-29 06:35 · Score: 1

Your point is well taken, but then look at the other contenders in the Republican camp. If there's any group of people who can make Fiorina look good in comparison in must be Ted Cruz et al.
Re:Echo chamber by ColdWetDog · 2015-03-29 06:37 · Score: 2

She could be positioning herself as a VP candidate if she manages to have a decent showing in the Iowa caucus and wins a few primaries along the way.
Channeling Sarah Palin? That's a scary thought.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:Echo chamber by Ryanrule · 2015-03-29 07:09 · Score: 1

a very rich echo chamber who will be pilfering her pockets some more.
Re:Echo chamber by Darinbob · 2015-03-29 07:58 · Score: 1

Sarah Palin actually held a political office. I'm not sure if Fiorina was even on a student council.
Re:Echo chamber by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 08:19 · Score: 1

good point. but I think we have learned why its a bad idea because of him

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Echo chamber by jd2112 · 2015-03-29 08:30 · Score: 3, Funny

I have a slogan for them:

Fiorina/Palin 2016: Making Hillary the sensible choice.

--
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
Re:Echo chamber by TWX · 2015-03-29 08:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

No, think that hey! summed it up fairly well. Fiorina has been extremely successful, even to the point of literally being phenomenal, for her own interests. The problem is, her interests are most every other person's interests are not necessarily compatible and may be outright hostile. One can argue that her success, while bad for just about everyone else that she has done business with, is still good for her.

Take another look at Mitt Romney for a moment, in the sense that his corporate interests have been successful, by and large, for shareholders in the firms that his loyalties have been to. He could at least claim that his policies were beneficial for shareholders and for the company, but even with such claims he still lost an election. I expect that many of the stories of companies purchased and stripped by Romney's companies, promptly laying-off thousands of workers in the process.

If Romney couldn't win despite having arguably a successful track-record, then I don't see how Fiorina could.

--
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Re:Echo chamber by sjames · 2015-03-29 09:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

Only if the alternate reality doesn't exist. She actually turned HP into a ruin of it's former self, but she also actually got a massive pile of cash for it and Lucent actually started waving money and stock offers at her before her seat was even cold. Then she actually left a smoking crater where Lucent used to be but she actually made big piles of cash doing it.
That's the thing. She lives in an actual alternate reality where terminal fuck-ups are coveted.
For the rest of us, no matter how many times you discharge the halon, EPO the datacenter and delete the database server and all of the backups, you won't make CEO money, so it is truly an alternate reality.
Re:Echo chamber by sjames · 2015-03-29 09:07 · Score: 1

He at least held an elected office first.
Re:Echo chamber by McGruber · 2015-03-29 09:40 · Score: 1

She can't hear reality over the roar of the hundred million dollars she was paid for halving the shareholder value of HP.
I hope she runs.
A Fool and Her Money Are Soon Parted....
Re:Echo chamber by RightwingNutjob · 2015-03-29 09:48 · Score: 1

Yeah, but it's the add, subtract, multiply and divide that must be missing...
Re:Echo chamber by dbIII · 2015-03-29 14:28 · Score: 1

What sort of echo chamber does this woman live in to think she's got a good record as a manager to run on?
The Enron book "The Smartest Guys in the Room" has got some good examples of people that far out of touch with reality and some broad hints as to how they ended up that way.
Goldman Sachs was another very weird 1300s Venetian Merchant Prince sort of environment that was probably even more fucked up.
IMHO she's thinking she was born to rule and everything else is just a detail or someone trying to get in the way of her destiny.
Re:Echo chamber by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:05 · Score: 1

If Fiorina runs true to form, only other people's money will be lost.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Echo chamber by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:35 · Score: 1

If you've already accepted as testament that there is a worldwide systemic effort to oppress women...
There is. There are 1.6 billion members of this conspiracy, called Islam.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Echo chamber by quantaman · 2015-03-29 18:54 · Score: 1

What sort of echo chamber does this woman live in to think she's got a good record as a manager to run on? Romney at least made real money and ran a real state government. Fiorina started lots of pissing contests, got booted by the shareholders for loosing money and assets, and lost a senate (not even governor's) race. Wow.
Unless she's running for VP.
It wouldn't be that hard for her to make a little noise in the primaries given she could be the only female (certainly the only establishment female).
Then if Hillary wins the nomination the Republicans are going to want a female or minority to stick in the VP slot. Right now that means Marco Rubio or Ben Carson but there's lots of reasons a nominee might not want one or both. In that case Fiorina might be the only option who isn't a white male, it's still a long shot but a VP nomination is far from impossible.

--
I stole this Sig
Re:Echo chamber by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 22:40 · Score: 1

>lest they reinforce that the right is nothing but misogyny incarnate.
If there weren't over 400 anti-choice laws passed by republican state legislatures JUST last year, then maybe that perception wouldn't be true.

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Re:Echo chamber by cyberchondriac · 2015-03-30 02:42 · Score: 1

NOTHING makes Hillary the sensible choice.

--

Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Re:Echo chamber by AK+Marc · 2015-03-30 14:16 · Score: 1

Wait, wouldn't getting paid millions for failing itself be a success? You've never been offered such a contract.

--
Learn to love Alaska

Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by damn_registrars · 2015-03-29 06:06 · Score: 3, Insightful

She won't really stand out in the crowd of crazy that the GOP is already assembling.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.

Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 06:10 · Score: 1

I don't know -- a Carly-Hilary matchup is probably the *only* way I'd vote for Hilary...
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by dackroyd · 2015-03-29 06:44 · Score: 1

I'm not so sure. The rest of the GOP pack is a bunch of people who have been politicians for most of their life.
Fiorina does kind of stand out as someone who has led a large company. Which would be better for her if her leadership wasn't absolutely terrible.

--
"Free software as in beer, copy protection as in racket" - Telsa Gwynne
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by damn_registrars · 2015-03-29 06:53 · Score: 2

The rest of the GOP pack is a bunch of people who have been politicians for most of their life.
We could still see the godfather's pizza guy, and Trump keeps teasing us about planning to run as well. We also have Rand Paul, who is definitely running and was busy doing non-government stuff before running for senate. And don't forget that the last president from the GOP - as much as they encourage us to forget him - had more years of experience in business than in government.

Fiorina does kind of stand out as someone who has led a large company. Which would be better for her if her leadership wasn't absolutely terrible.
Don't forget, though, terrible leadership in business generally ends up ranking as "above average". HP does still exist as a company, so she did vastly better than a lot of other CEOs who drove their companies straight into the ground. Also remember that both of those strategies generally warrant multi-million dollar bonuses.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by Ihlosi · 2015-03-29 07:58 · Score: 1

P does still exist as a company,
That's because it started out large enough to have quite a bit of momentum.
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 08:21 · Score: 1

really? because paul seems to be the only one running on civil rights. prison reform, generally issues one would not use to call someone a racist on

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 09:14 · Score: 1

oh I see, so because hes doing good, but not for the reasons you think he should be doing them, its somehow bad

its STILL better than doing nothing, or doing the opposite

as for the bill in question, I wish people would be more factual with their coverage. The law protects business owners from abuse. Should a black banquet hall owner be forced to hold a KKK rally against his will in the name of equality??? no of course not. This new law would protect him.

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by Overzeetop · 2015-03-29 11:01 · Score: 1

They'd never be able to run together - they both want to hold the handbasket.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:43 · Score: 1

Karl Rove is a money-raiser who makes heaps of money for himself by running GOP campaigns, win or lose. He sees Jeb Bush as his best bet for making money from a compliant, non-distinctive candidate. Cruz won't touch that bastard, more credit to Cruz.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Maybe she'd have luck as an independent? by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-30 12:12 · Score: 1

Connections. It's all about your connections. The biggest thing you need to get into politics today, at least for either major party, is connections - mostly to donors and supporters. The best way to establish these is to start by working your way up from smaller levels, working with the local/state party, winning smaller offices, and moving on to bigger. It's how many of the successful presidential primary candidates started.

There are shortcuts though. For one, being the relative of a successful politician gives you access to their contacts. Rand Paul may have been outside of government prior to his Senate run, but his father was a nationally known politician. Al Gore is another example, as is George W. Bush, JEB Bush, Mitt Romney, Kennedy, etc etc.

The lone exception to this has been massively successful Generals - Grant and Eisenhower. In those cases, their profile was high enough and impressive enough that the contacts pretty much came to them.

Perot may be the other exception, but he ran a mostly self-financed independent campaign, and harnessed a lot of circumstances that I'm not sure are easily replicable in a given election. Had he tried to win the primary instead, I doubt he would have succeeded.

So we all can take a crack at it..... by zawarski · 2015-03-29 06:15 · Score: 1

How to Become President http://www.wikihow.com/Become-...

Money by rsilvergun · 2015-03-29 06:18 · Score: 1

she's got lots of money. Also, she has connections with other folks who have lots of money. It's not echo chamber. She doesn't need a good record, just enough to bury the past. If you're old enough to remember Regan he didn't have much to run on, but his ad campaigns were _fantastic_. It's morning in America, and everything's just a little bit brighter because you voted for Regan...

Also people like to forget she basically won the California Gubernatorial race until an epic, almost legendary gaff during a debate cost her the election. Gerrymandering + voter suppression + money can get anyone or anything elected in America...

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/

Re:Money by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 06:25 · Score: 3, Informative

She was stupid enough to say this:

Fiorina said she could appeal to voters with a “deep understanding of how the economy actually works, having started as a secretary and become the chief executive of the largest technology company in the world.”
If she's running on that "record", she's dead in the water.

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 06:28 · Score: 1

If you're old enough to remember Regan he didn't have much to run on...
wut? He was president of the Screen Actors Guild, a labor union for television and screen actors, for 5 years. Then later he was a two term Governor of California. He had plenty of political experience before running for President, unlike Carley.
Re:Money by Alomex · 2015-03-29 06:46 · Score: 3

If you're old enough to remember Regan he didn't have much to run on
I'm as ant-Reagan as they come, but I'm sorry, his two terms as governor of California look positively scholarly compared to the lack of experience from Fiorina.

almost on the California Gubernatorial race until an epic legendary gaff during a debate cost her the election.

Coulda woulda shoulda. But I seriously doubt this is true since she never ran for Governor.
Re:Money by daremonai · 2015-03-29 06:47 · Score: 1

Also people like to forget she basically won the California Gubernatorial race...
They probably forget this because it's not true. Did you confuse her with Meg Whitman? In any case, both of them lost pretty badly, despite pouring mountains of their own money into their races.
Re:Money by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-29 06:48 · Score: 1

“If we want mainstream and the middle class going and growing again, we’ve got to get small and family-owned businesses going and growing again,” she said.
She has the experience - she made a large business into a much smaller business. It's like "how do you get a million dollars?" "start with 10 million."

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 06:53 · Score: 1

Holy shit that is delusional. "Started as a secretary" when she had graduated from Stanford is about as much bullshit as Hillary saying they were "dead broke" after they left the whitehouse.
Re:Money by khasim · 2015-03-29 07:15 · Score: 1

And that's not all. From her Wikipedia page:

Following an August 4, 2010, federal court ruling that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional, Fiorina expressed disagreement with the ruling, saying that California voters spoke clearly against same-sex unions when a majority approved the proposition in 2008.
And she wants to lead the Executive Branch?
Majority != Constitutional.
And she's got a bit of money. So .... what's she been doing with it AS A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL to help with any of the "problems" that she's talking about?
So far it looks like a lot of paid speaking engagements. She is paid to be "concerned" but she doesn't fund anything herself.
Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 07:41 · Score: 1

If she made the USG into a much smaller government, I guess that'd be good.
Re:Money by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 08:18 · Score: 1

states rights vs federal. the state constitution in cali from my understanding does in fact give the rights to the people on these props. the federal courts went against the constitution claiming cali went against the constitution

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Money by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-29 09:39 · Score: 1

She ran for Senate (in 2010) in California, not Governor. Perhaps you're thinking of Meg Whitman, who ran for Governor of California?
Re:Money by Alomex · 2015-03-29 09:50 · Score: 1

Yeah because the best places in the world are those with small governments like Haiti and Somalia, while the worst places in the world are those with large governments such as Germany, Sweden and Canada.
Re:Money by RightwingNutjob · 2015-03-29 09:50 · Score: 1

With a pretty solid centrist record as governor, if I remember my history books correctly
Re:Money by RightwingNutjob · 2015-03-29 09:51 · Score: 1

Not if she outsources it to the lowest foreign bidder it wouldn't
Re:Money by meglon · 2015-03-29 10:13 · Score: 1

Any given state's constitution is subservient to the US Constitution. Period. Anyone who thinks differently is either completely ignorant, or simply a fucking idiot. The US constitution is not in place to empower the majority to be able to use tyranny of the majority to subjugate the rights of the minority; the Bill of Rights IS in place to keep that from happening. Madison always said he saw no need to enumerate a bill of rights, as he never thought citizens would sink to trying to strip others of their rights. Clearly Madison didn't foresee the complete fucking asshats that some worthless fucks would become.

--
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Re:Money by ganjadude · 2015-03-29 10:35 · Score: 1

except for that pesky 10th amendment which states anything not explict in the constitution is in fact a state right

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Re:Money by MikeKD · 2015-03-29 10:52 · Score: 2

I'll see your 10th Amendment and raise you the Supremacy Clause (Article Six, Clause 2):

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
Re:Money by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:23 · Score: 1

The 10th Amendment, being part of the Constitution and subsequent to Article 6 Clause 2, supersedes any part of Article 6 Clause 2 with which it conflicts. Further, the judges in the case decided wrongly, and it is the Constitution, not the court, which is the final authority. Fiorina was correct to identify the ruling as a bad one on several grounds. Any president who fails to follow the Constitution, regardless of the claims of any court, is violating the Constitution and should be impeached and removed from office. Any judge who fails to follow the Constitution is violating the Constitution and should be impeached and removed from office.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Money by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:28 · Score: 1

And Russia.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Money by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:31 · Score: 1

Brown has been known to be a loon for over 30 years. It shames California, not Whitman, that she lost.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
Re:Money by Greg_D · 2015-03-29 20:17 · Score: 1

The term "state's rights" is nothing more than politically charged rhetoric. States do not have rights. They have powers. Those powers are limited by the US constitution and federal statutes.
Re:Money by BarbaraHudson · 2015-03-30 08:43 · Score: 1

having started as a secretary and become the chief executive of the largest technology company in the world.”
I wonder how many cocks you have to suck to get that far?
Let's face it the woman didn't get there with her brains.
How about all the male CEOs who have failed, like Ron Wagoneer at GM? You going to make the same assumptions?

--
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Re:Money by meglon · 2015-03-31 19:12 · Score: 1

Yeh... that's not actually how it works. Why is it there's so many fucking idiots in the US who, like you, never met a civics or US history class they could pass? However, even playing along with your fucking idiocy, the 14th Amendment comes after the 10th Amendment, so even by your fucked in the head idiotic logic, you're still fucking wrong.

Civil rights are not subject to popular vote.... it's WHY we have a bill of rights in the first place, to keep a majority from using tyranny of the majority to curtail a minorities rights.

You fucking idiots need to learn a little history.

--
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Re:Money by meglon · 2015-03-31 19:22 · Score: 1

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
....except the word "explicit" does not appear in the text, and the courts have routinely held that people pushing that position are simply fucking idiots (paraphrasing, but still an accurate description). Why is it that dumbfucks like you who bring up the constitution so much don't have a fucking clue about it?

"it was impossible to confine a Government to the exercise of express powers; there must necessarily be admitted powers by implication, unless the Constitution descended to recount every minutia." - - James Madison

--
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's

Re:Not what we need by hey! · 2015-03-29 06:21 · Score: 3, Funny

Another mushy moderate is not what we need. The GOP needs a rock ribbed, conservative bomb thrower. Go Ted Cruz!!!

Not precisely correct from an anatomical standpoint. The rocks in question are superior to the c1 vertebra.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.

What republicans arent running for president? by peterpolle78 · 2015-03-29 06:33 · Score: 1

Soon it will be easier to make a list of the republicans that AREN'T running for president.

As somebody who saw her in action by mykepredko · 2015-03-29 06:38 · Score: 4, Insightful

during her tree felling heydays at HP, I'm not surprised at the chutzpah that would be required for her to think that she could be president.

And her total lack of self-awareness to understand that she doesn't have a snow-ball's chance in hell.

I don't see her being anything approaching a serious candidate.

myke

--
Mimetics Inc. Twitter

qualifications? by belmolis · 2015-03-29 06:39 · Score: 1

Since when does a series of lackluster to poor stints in upper management and no experience in public affairs make someone a serioius candidate for President?

Yes, why stop at fucking up a company... by gestalt_n_pepper · 2015-03-29 06:43 · Score: 4, Insightful

...when you can fuck up the world? Yes, let's put an MBA with a BA in philosophy and medieval history in charge of the USA. I mean, wouldn't *you* give the nuclear codes to the MBAs in your company? What could possibly go wrong?

--
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.

Re:Yes, why stop at fucking up a company... by jd2112 · 2015-03-29 08:36 · Score: 1

...when you can fuck up the world? Yes, let's put an MBA with a BA in philosophy and medieval history in charge of the USA. I mean, wouldn't *you* give the nuclear codes to the MBAs in your company? What could possibly go wrong?
What do you mean? Surely the nuclear codes are an underutilized asset that money can be made on. There are several highly motivated buyers mostly in the middle-east. You know those new HP servers that the government is going to buy aren't going to buy themselves. (Odd, for some reason HP is the only manufacturer that is able to meet new purchase requirements. And they are a mere 5000% markup over retail).

--
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
Re:Yes, why stop at fucking up a company... by hcs_$reboot · 2015-03-29 14:08 · Score: 1

Yes, why stop at fucking up a company...when you can fuck up the world?
Provided that most political figures do not have a strong background in the industry, why would her (failed) experience be a disadvantage, in comparison?

--
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Re:Yes, why stop at fucking up a company... by silentcoder · 2015-03-29 23:39 · Score: 1

A community organiser with a law degree mind you. Just like Lincoln actually...

--
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *

Ohcrap by Chas · 2015-03-29 06:43 · Score: 2

So she can finish bottoming out the economy, put the country into full repo, and then all government forms will come with 17 pages of ads and all government websites will auto-load crapware and malware?

May Fiorina burn in hell!

--

Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!

Oh gee, I'm soo bored.. by chasm22 · 2015-03-29 06:43 · Score: 1

Maybe I should spend some of my hundreds of millions playing presidential candidate. It was so cool being on Fox News. I mean, all my BFF's were so jealous.
Oh the attention I'm getting is orgasmic...

Carly Fiorina for President! by roc97007 · 2015-03-29 06:45 · Score: 1

Because HP went so well!

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.

Re:Carly Fiorina for President! by hambone142 · 2015-03-29 12:13 · Score: 1

I am surprised that no one has brought up her famous quote of "No one in this country has a God given right to a job". This said that HP employees during her massive layoffs. Why can't the Republicans offer a sane candidate? First, Palin and now this abomination. " Ding done the witch is dead" was sung in the halls of H.P. when she was fired.
Re:Carly Fiorina for President! by roc97007 · 2015-03-29 15:04 · Score: 1

> I am surprised that no one has brought up her famous quote of "No one in this country has a God given right to a job"
It doesn't do the Democrats any good to bring it out now. Wait until she gets the nomination, and *then* bring it out.
> Why can't the Republicans offer a sane candidate?
I think because all the insane ones have all the political clout.

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.

Carly's platform by Snufu · 2015-03-29 07:00 · Score: 5, Funny

"My plan for America will build on my spectacularly successful tenure atop Hewlett Packard. Therefore, if selected as president by the board members of the U.S. at A I promise to:

1. Sell California to China, because the state never produced anything of value.
2. Merge the supreme court, the FBI, and NASA, because that's the kind of outside the box thinking this country needs.
3. Focus on our core competence: T-shirt manufacturing. We can out-compete third world countries in this area.
4. After my policies have led the country to the top of Fortune 500, I'll ride my golden parachute to Mars.

Thank you!"

Re:Carly's platform by Overzeetop · 2015-03-29 11:03 · Score: 1

...golden parachute to Mars
Now there's a taxpayer funded option I would vote for. I wonder how many we could send with her?

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?

She has a shot by ITRambo · 2015-03-29 07:09 · Score: 2

If she says and does what the GOP want to hear, and follows the lead of her handlers exactly, she has a shot of running. Once campaigning, she needs to be a great debater, not get flustered or defensive when presented with her failures.. Promise to go along with all the factions of the GOP by using language that they all want to hear, while staying flexible, if possible. Be likable and convincing to the American people. Don't be a snobbish ass. Look good but not glamorous. Don't focus on how you ran a large company, but on what you will do to help America successfully move into a future of increasing worldwide economic competition without further degrading the middle class. Carly has a shot. A long shot, but a shot as long as she's not snuffed out ahead of time by bigger money than what she has.

Hooray!!! by frank_adrian314159 · 2015-03-29 07:23 · Score: 4, Funny

The R's are filling up the clown car again. Will THE Donald be next? Or will Sarah Palin try to climb in hatchback before he and Teddy Cruz can lock it? Maybe Jebediah will announce! Then the banksters can masturbate their piles of money over all of them and they will coast to victory!

--
That is all.

Re:Hooray!!! by frank_adrian314159 · 2015-03-30 03:04 · Score: 1

Why yes! Because the alternative of 4 years of Wall Street runamuck, destruction of anything that a normal person might fall back on in times of hardship, and foreign military involvements would be so much better. Get it straight - at least the D's don't have the clowns trying to run their circus.

--
That is all.
Re:Hooray!!! by ebvwfbw · 2015-03-30 14:49 · Score: 1

But don't answer yet. The D's are filling up the clown car again. Will THE Hilary be next? or will Rahm Emmanuel try to climb in hatchback before he and Martin Owe malley can lock it? Maybe crazy crazy all time presidential loser Joe Biden will announce! What a wacky pack that'd be! Then the banksters can masturbate their piles of money over all of them and they will coast to victory!
Mabye we'll get martial law as Obama decides he's not even leaving. Why not, he doesn't care about any other law. He's already a dictator.

Sauce for the goose? by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 07:40 · Score: 1

States can't, actually, as all questions of citizenship are decided by Congress under the Constitution, who has the right to set Naturalization laws.

All states can determine is residence.

Uh huh. Aside from the fact that the point was about whether state's are allowed to enforce the immigration decisions made by Congress and had nothing to do with who is or is not allowed to be naturalized ...

I'd love to see the Federal reactions if:
1) Texas told the ATF that no Texas state or local LEO will enforce any ATF regulations and it is now 100% up to the ATF to staff any alcohol or firearms regulations.
2) Colorado told the DEA that no Colorado state or local LEO will enforce any DEA regulations and it is now 100% up to the DEA to staff and pharmaceutical regulations.

That's pretty much what the Feds have asked for when it comes to enforcement of CBP regulations, but somehow I think they'd have a cow if the same behavior were applied consistently...

Re: Sauce for the goose? by pnutjam · 2015-03-29 10:17 · Score: 2

Not so fast...
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Four-Th...

--
Cheap storage VM.

Re:Dream ticket - Carly & Mitt by epyT-R · 2015-03-29 07:53 · Score: 1

Nah, that was mostly caused by democrats and republicans 'reaching across the aisle' to burn the dollar from both ends and corner the market. This has been SOP for quite awhile.

No Thanks by sexconker · 2015-03-29 08:10 · Score: 1

This woman has destroyed everything she touched.

Re:No Thanks by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 08:25 · Score: 1

This woman has destroyed everything she touched.
Then she's in good company, because most of the Republican clowns have done the same thing. Some even worse. The problem is that some of them are not so easy to destroy in an election as she would be, especially if she ran against Hillary because then nobody could claim everyone is being mean to her because she's a woman. Gender is of course irrelevant: her record to date indicates massive ego plus either massive incompetence or massive indifference, none of which do we need any more of running this country.

Re:And they said it couldn't be done... by leptons · 2015-03-29 09:18 · Score: 1, Informative

Obama has not run the country into the ground, GW Bush did that, if you remember... oh wait, republicans have selective memory.

America needs a woman preident by Anonymous Coward · 2015-03-29 09:21 · Score: 1

Come on, you know it's coming.
Female is the new black.

Re:America needs a woman preident by The+New+Guy+2.0 · 2015-03-29 13:53 · Score: 1

Yep, the world leadership jobs are turning towards beautiful females who understand how to work a crowd... think Obama's stage shows mixed with somebody who looks like they belong in positions of beauty.
Re:America needs a woman preident by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 17:08 · Score: 1

Ooh! Wendy O. Williams.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate

What the what?! by TigerPlish · 2015-03-29 09:54 · Score: 1

Let's see, what could possibly go wrong with entrusting the keeping of the nation's confidence to a CEO that pretty much steered HP right into the iceberg.

No. Just.. no. NO fucking way.

The only way I'd accept this is if she outsources Congress to a call center in India. They can't do any worse than the locals!

--
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.

Goalposts by Livius · 2015-03-29 10:02 · Score: 4, Interesting

I would speculate she is not competent enough for certain voters and not irrational enough for certain others, but by participating as a candidate, she will have an effect on which other candidates will be viable, by making others look good or bad by comparison.

Strategic Merger With Mexico by l0ungeb0y · 2015-03-29 10:25 · Score: 1

Right after jettisoning the unprofitable divisions of NASA, USPS and the EPA, Carly's next big agenda will be merging Mexico with the US to strengthen it's cheap labor market to compete with China and solve the immigration problem for once and for all.

Re:The Republcans would never let her win by Fire_Wraith · 2015-03-29 12:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

For all I dislike the Republicans and all of their recent actions and policy proposals, I have to disagree on this. The base of their party is deep enough in wingnut land that they absolutely would back even a black woman, IF she gave full throated backing to all of their beliefs, dogmas, and notions. In fact, they'd absolutely relish throwing that in the face of the Left.

That said, this isn't something where they'll simply take anyone. Such a candidate would need to be in a position to take advantage of this, get access to donors, have the "experience" to push ahead. They'd need to be good at putting together and running a campaign. They'd need to be able to go toe to toe with all the other competitors and not stumble/look like an idiot/etc.

Part of the reason the Republican party fields minority candidates at lower rates isn't because they wouldn't back one - even Herman Cain had a moment where he was at the top of the polls, but he was a very flawed candidate once you got past the initial pitch. Go look at the following that Ben Carson has, and how many in the conservative base would love for him to run (and he might, though that doesn't mean he'll succeed, for the same reasons). No, it's because it's not easy to be a candidate for President without having worked your way up through lower offices, building a reputation, establishing contacts, etc. Every single successful candidate for either party in the last hundred years or so has. The only shortcut is through family connections, but even then they're running for Senator or Governor first. It's at the lower ranks that the potential candidates are weeded out, or just never given the opportunities to begin with.

Re:It is already determined by Hartree · 2015-03-29 12:54 · Score: 1

"The next president will be either Jeb Bush, or Hillary Clinton"

Making such an utterly conventional wisdom prediction anonymously so no-one can say you were wrong after 2016?

I dub thee the Anonymous-Uber-Coward.

Re:Not what we need by shutdown+-p+now · 2015-03-29 12:58 · Score: 1

To drown it once and for all? Yes, that it does.

If Cruz wins the Republican primaries, it will be hilarious, even if it won't really last long. Unfortunately, that's exactly why he won't win them. We'll get someone boring again, like Bush.

She has no sense of value by The+New+Guy+2.0 · 2015-03-29 13:52 · Score: 1

She led HP into the disaster of overpaying for Digital (DEC) so I wonder how she'd ever be able to handle the US Budget.

Re:She has no sense of value by Deflatamouse · 2015-03-30 08:02 · Score: 1

It was Compaq that bought DEC.
But HP did bought Compaq a few years later.
Re:She has no sense of value by The+New+Guy+2.0 · 2015-03-31 08:05 · Score: 1

Thanks, I got that out of sequence. Point is... Compaq paid for DEC and then went bankrupt, HP saw value in that company like no one else did, then had to take a writeoff.

Re:The bitch who killed Compaq? by The+New+Guy+2.0 · 2015-03-29 13:55 · Score: 1

Compaq was already dead, HP just picked up the rubble just like they did with DEC. HP now owns legacy contracts from both companies, and turned that into a typical Windows PC vendor.

Re:Not what we need by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:47 · Score: 1

We already did that in 1992 and again in 1996.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate

Re:It is already determined by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:51 · Score: 1

Hillary's foreign policy will be to refuse to act, and then be unavailable when something goes badly wrong, and then try to destroy the records. Again.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate

Re:And they said it couldn't be done... by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 16:59 · Score: 1

The country's current financial problems lie in the erect laps of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Due to them, Bush was unable to remove the legislation that caused the 2008 collapse. Granted, Bush is responsible for doing the exact wrong thing in response to the crash, and Obama has followed his lead, compounded with corruption and deliberate destruction.

But don't let me get in the way of your Bush Derangement Syndrome.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate

Re:The lesser evil. by ChrisMaple · 2015-03-29 17:21 · Score: 2

The two leading potential Democrat candidates are Hillary and 'Granny' Warren. Compared to them, Fiorina is a shining star. Fiorina falls about in the middle of the Republican pack, sounding good but with a field of destruction in her wake.

A Democrat president elected in 2016 means the end of the US as a world power, and the beginning of a new dark age. I feel very sorry for the youth of today.

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate

I'd rather have Cruz, TBH by melted · 2015-03-29 18:08 · Score: 1

If these are the two choices, I'd rather have Cruz. At least he only caused minor clusterfucks so far. Fiorina has ruined one of the most significant US technology companies. I don't want her to do the same to the rest of the country.

Re:I'd rather have Cruz, TBH by phantomfive · 2015-03-29 18:40 · Score: 1

To be fair, the board had a rather significant hand in destroying HP as well.

Let's hope those are not the only two choices.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."

Only 10%? by sabbede · 2015-03-29 23:51 · Score: 1

That's quite the showing considering the strength of Democrats in California and Boxer's accrued power.

Name Recognition by Steve+B · 2015-03-30 03:17 · Score: 1

it is unclear what level of name recognition she enjoys

"Bad news, Ms Fiorina. According to the latest polls, some of the voters still remember who you are...."

--
/. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.

Proven Record of Success by biggaijin · 2015-03-30 03:27 · Score: 1

The one thing Carly has been really good at is hiring an effective personal press agent. Every few months, I see notices that "Carly is coming". I can't imagine why anyone cares; she has done nothing of note since leaving HP. She fouled up Lucent and failed to merge it with Philips, and then moved on to destroying HP with another ill-considered merger and her profligate personal spending of HP's money (like the G5 she needed). Since leaving HP many years ago with her golden parachute, she has held the full time position of "Former HP CEO" and worked the talk show circuit whenever she could. Who could imagine that this bimbo would be capable of running the U.S.?

I did hear one clever observation from her recently, though: She pointed out that Hillary's millions of miles of travel as the Secretary of State was "an activity, not an accomplishment".

HP Crashes and Burns by pebear · 2015-03-30 04:40 · Score: 1

I think the Republicans would be better off getting Meg Whitman to run. She cleaned up Ebay, my favorite place to shop, and she is fixing all that Carly broke at HP. Or maybe if Carly gets elected then we will need to elect Meg after her to fix what Carly broke. Of course after 8 years Bush Jr. and 8 years with Obama I can't see much left to break.

--
Paul E. Bahre

Carly Fiorina Near Launching Presidential Bid by rogerrc47 · 2015-03-30 10:01 · Score: 1

Breaking news - Carly Fiorina announces that her Vice Presidential running mate on the "Yesterday's People Party" ticket will be Mitt - "Back From The Dead" Romney.

Re:She tried tokill VMS and foisted ITANIUM on us! by ebvwfbw · 2015-03-30 14:51 · Score: 1

Really? VMS was already dead. Good to have know ye VMS. As for Itanium, that was one really nice chip.

Slashdot Mirror

Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina Near Launching Presidential Bid

227 of 353 comments (clear)