• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

‘Higher than 90 percent’ chance Fiorina will run for president

Interviews with close to a dozen current and former HP employees reveal that nearly 10 years after being forced out of the firm, Fiorina remains a deeply polarizing figure. Her tenure, which coincided with the bursting of the dot-com bubble, was fraught with layoffs, leadership transitions and a controversial merger with Compaq that pitted Fiorina against members of the Hewlett and Packard families in an ugly public feud.

Well, it's not just Jason.

And I was pointing out how using Jason Burnett as a source of any opinion about her is a joke.

By the way, I don't know if you've ever worked in a large corporation. You can probably find 1000 former and current employees of any large business to criticize a former CEO. Without trying.
 
Fiorina isn't going to get anywhere near where she wants to with this and it's a waste of money. She hasn't been able to punch through the political system. Since her political experience is non-existent, she has to run on her business experience. However, her tenure at HP is lacking in inspiration at best, and at worst, was absolutely dreadful.

If any group of voters can be bought off, it is the GOP.
 
Define "high level political experience".

Typical examples include a cabinet post, being a medium (on up) ranking member of Congress with multiple terms under their belt, a former multiple-term governor, or Vice President.
 
Typical examples include a cabinet post, being a medium (on up) ranking member of Congress with multiple terms under their belt, a former multiple-term governor, or Vice President.

That could explain why Obama is a crappy President.

Okay, do you think that political experience is all they need? I think that's part of the problem with the past few Presidents. They have no practical experience in the outside world. They were in a political bubble.

I actually think the only political experience that's worth anything is one that came with managing a budget. Governors have had to manage budgets. The others, not so much or for some, not at all.
 
That could explain why Obama is a crappy President.

I wouldn't term him crappy so much as much more ineffective than he could have been. He was a high riser and did not spend much time developing needed skills or relationships with his colleagues.

Okay, do you think that political experience is all they need? I think that's part of the problem with the past few Presidents. They have no practical experience in the outside world. They were in a political bubble.

It's the biggest component to what they need. I'm not much for populism in selecting persons for office in high politics. The "political bubble" as you put it, is precisely where they need to be embedded, because that is where they will spend most of their time trying to influence outcomes. Most of the time, outsiders simply don't know what they are talking about and they don't know how to wield power successfully in structures that respond best to someone that knows how they operate and can engage with those persons on a personal basis-tapping into long and familiar relationships. This doesn't preclude the idea that someone with vast political experience should engage with interesting and undervalued ideas, but being almost a total outsider when you are trying to wield influence in the political sphere is perhaps the worst place to be. Even if one is relatively experienced with politics, you can vastly undermine your own administration by stuffing it with D.C. outsiders. The first two to three years of Bill Clinton's Presidency significantly waned because he had not had nearly enough staffers who were familiar with D.C. national politics. After he changed that, he became much more successful.
 
Last edited:
I don't know where people get the idea that running a business somehow makes you a better presidential candidate.

Probably the same place people got the idea that a community organizer is qualified for the office.
 
I wouldn't term him crappy so much as much more ineffective than he could have been. He was a high riser and did not spend much time developing needed skills or relationships with his colleagues.



It's the biggest component to what they need. I'm not much for populism in selecting persons for office in high politics. The "political bubble" as you put it, is precisely where they need to be embedded, because that is where they will spend most of their time trying to influence outcomes. Most of the time, outsiders simply don't know what they are talking about and they don't know how to wield power successfully in structures that respond best to someone that knows how they operate and can engage with those persons on a personal basis-tapping into long and familiar relationships. This doesn't preclude the idea that someone with vast political experience should engage with interesting and undervalued ideas, but being almost a total outsider when you are trying to wield influence in the political sphere is perhaps the worst place to be. Even if one is relatively experienced with politics, you can vastly undermine your own administration by stuffing it with D.C. outsiders. The first two to three years of Bill Clinton's Presidency significantly waned because he had not had nearly enough staffers who were familiar with D.C. national politics. After he changed that, he became much more successful.

I think he's crappy but we can disagree.

Career politicians repulse me. The more entrenched they are in politics, the worse it is. As unpopular as this is, my "dream" President was either a CEO of a large organization, or the governor of a state. While it's true that Clinton didn't know how to play the DC political game, he also didn't come in with expertise in the DC political game, meaning he really had to apply his executive experience (which he had as Gov of Arkansas) to the larger and more complex national stage.

The only way that the nastiness of our current government infrastructure will stop is by bringing in outsiders to stop it. We keep re-electing politicians and then sit back and wonder why the results are the same all the time.
 
And I was pointing out how using Jason Burnett as a source of any opinion about her is a joke.

By the way, I don't know if you've ever worked in a large corporation. You can probably find 1000 former and current employees of any large business to criticize a former CEO. Without trying.

Yes Jason, which is why I gave you ten or twelve others that you dismissed as disgruntled employees that might be found in any large corporation. So maybe you can assert bias towards Fortune.

The public dysfunction started with the vicious infighting over HP’s merger with Compaq in 2002, which reached its nadir when the company’s high-profile CEO, Carly Fiorina, pilloried Walter Hewlett, a board member and son of a company founder, for daring to voice his opposition. There was a board riven by feuds — so out of control that some directors were leaking secrets to the press while the chairman of the board was hiring private investigators to obtain their phone records (and those of reporters) to uncover the perpetrators. That bit of skullduggery ended with the company’s chairman and its CEO both dragged before Congress to explain themselves under oath.

http://fortune.com/2012/05/08/how-hewlett-packard-lost-its-way/
 
The only way that the nastiness of our current government infrastructure will stop is by bringing in outsiders to stop it. We keep re-electing politicians and then sit back and wonder why the results are the same all the time.

On the contrary, your thoughts are fairly popular.

I have two thoughts on this. First, outsiders are far more ineffective at maintaining course or introducing changes than insiders.

Second, for the most part we are doing just fine with the way things operate. The establishment works. It's the common man, the populists who somehow believe that they can turn things around and make it all better. It's a fantasy. Career politicians are a desirable necessity. The only substantive changes outsiders will bring about are the wrong ones.
 
Last edited:
Yes Jason, which is why I gave you ten or twelve others that you dismissed as disgruntled employees that might be found in any large corporation. So maybe you can assert bias towards Fortune.

The public dysfunction started with the vicious infighting over HP’s merger with Compaq in 2002, which reached its nadir when the company’s high-profile CEO, Carly Fiorina, pilloried Walter Hewlett, a board member and son of a company founder, for daring to voice his opposition. There was a board riven by feuds — so out of control that some directors were leaking secrets to the press while the chairman of the board was hiring private investigators to obtain their phone records (and those of reporters) to uncover the perpetrators. That bit of skullduggery ended with the company’s chairman and its CEO both dragged before Congress to explain themselves under oath.

How Hewlett-Packard lost its way - Fortune

You didn't "give me tend or twelve others". CNN said it interviewed a dozen current and former employees. No names. No titles. No details on why the former employees are former employees. I'm sure if Fox News ran a piece where they interviewed 12 anonymous current and former HP employees who said she was great, you'd say she was great.

Anyone who works in a big company or even a small company is smart enough to know that you can always find people, current and former employees, who will criticize the former CEO. Nothing to see.
 
You didn't "give me tend or twelve others". CNN said it interviewed a dozen current and former employees. No names. No titles. No details on why the former employees are former employees. I'm sure if Fox News ran a piece where they interviewed 12 anonymous current and former HP employees who said she was great, you'd say she was great.

Anyone who works in a big company or even a small company is smart enough to know that you can always find people, current and former employees, who will criticize the former CEO. Nothing to see.

I'm sure faux will be looking to do that too, if she's the one they need to help into the presidency. So what about Fortune?
 
I do not think her goal would be to win, but to set up later runs at office.

I agree with you that she is NOT running to win. However I suspect that GOP operatives want her to do this to have a woman savaging Clinton like no man might be able to do. Her reward for that service would come if a GOP win gets the White House in 2017.
 
Fortune what?

The public dysfunction started with the vicious infighting over HP’s merger with Compaq in 2002, which reached its nadir when the company’s high-profile CEO, Carly Fiorina, pilloried Walter Hewlett, a board member and son of a company founder, for daring to voice his opposition. There was a board riven by feuds — so out of control that some directors were leaking secrets to the press while the chairman of the board was hiring private investigators to obtain their phone records (and those of reporters) to uncover the perpetrators. That bit of skullduggery ended with the company’s chairman and its CEO both dragged before Congress to explain themselves under oath.

How Hewlett-Packard lost its way - Fortune
 
I agree with you that she is NOT running to win. However I suspect that GOP operatives want her to do this to have a woman savaging Clinton like no man might be able to do. Her reward for that service would come if a GOP win gets the White House in 2017.
She could, as Chris Wallace suggested, get the VP nomination.
 
I doubt you know much about the high tech industry, business, the stock market or what qualifications are necessary for the Presidency.

Why not watch the interview and then give your critique. Fiorina likely GOP presidential candidate, attacks Clinton

The board of HP asked for her resignation/forced her out. How does that come across as success?
She is promoting her expertise in business as the reason she would be a good president.

From the OP:
“Because I have 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,” she said.


Based on the results of her tenure though, (see quote below) she wasn't so expert at the tech business or the economy.

HP stock has been a laggard compared to the shares of rivals such as Dell (Research) and IBM (Research). Shares were trading at only about 13 times 2005 earnings estimates before the announcement, while shares of IBM and Dell traded at 17 times and 26 times forecasts for the current year.

And even after factoring HP's big move Wednesday, the stock was still trading at around the same price it was at when the company announced its merger with Compaq in September 2001.
Carly Fiorina forced out at HP - Feb. 10, 2005
 
She could, as Chris Wallace suggested, get the VP nomination.

I am hoping that the GOP goes to a woman with governing experience especially on a state level. Perhaps a governor or former governor from a western state who has a reputation as a maverick of sorts. Maybe a woman who is younger and more attractive than Clinton as well to contrast how old she is.

Anybody know of anyone like that in the GOP?
 
The public dysfunction started with the vicious infighting over HP’s merger with Compaq in 2002, which reached its nadir when the company’s high-profile CEO, Carly Fiorina, pilloried Walter Hewlett, a board member and son of a company founder, for daring to voice his opposition. There was a board riven by feuds — so out of control that some directors were leaking secrets to the press while the chairman of the board was hiring private investigators to obtain their phone records (and those of reporters) to uncover the perpetrators. That bit of skullduggery ended with the company’s chairman and its CEO both dragged before Congress to explain themselves under oath.

How Hewlett-Packard lost its*way - Fortune

What about it?
 
I am hoping that the GOP goes to a woman with governing experience especially on a state level. Perhaps a governor or former governor from a western state who has a reputation as a maverick of sorts. Maybe a woman who is younger and more attractive than Clinton as well to contrast how old she is.

Anybody know of anyone like that in the GOP?
Anyone competent would be a welcome change.
 
‘Higher than 90 percent’ chance Fiorina will run for president

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina said Sunday that she is almost certain she will run for the GOP nomination for president.

Fiorina told “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace that there is a “very high” chance she will run, and followed it up by specifying that the probability is “higher than 90 percent.”

If she decides to run, Fiorina wants to wait until late April or early May to announce, she said.[COLOR="#0000oo"]

[...]
[/COLOR]
‘Higher than 90 percent’ chance Fiorina will run for president


Really?
:doh


I like her but don't think she can get the nomination.
 
Back
Top Bottom