• 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

Excon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2012
Messages
40,615
Reaction score
9,087
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
‘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
 
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.
 
just what America needs, a multiple golden parachutee?


does she (and the GOP base) know that you can't run America into the ground and profit from it?
 
does she have a pattern of behavior when in charge of something to indicate she knows how to do anything else?
Not saying you have to, but you didn't answer the question asked.

And the other one was a statement.
 
Not saying you have to, but you didn't answer the question asked.

And the other one was a statement.


No, I don't think that would be her stated platform. However, I don't think she understands anything other than how to game the system for personal gain, based on her past history of actions.


Also, I would never vote for someone who made a massive profit at the expense of a business and its workers.

Now,

"Not saying you have to, but you didn't answer the question asked. "
your turn.
 
Trump in a skirt. Good grief GOP, how about running someone with actual governing experience. We've see what those without it can/can't do (Obama).
 
No, I don't think that would be her stated platform. However, I don't think she understands anything other than how to game the system for personal gain, based on her past history of actions.


Also, I would never vote for someone who made a massive profit at the expense of a business and its workers.

Now,

"Not saying you have to, but you didn't answer the question asked. "
your turn.
Your whole take is skewed by your biases and she is far more intelligent than you give her credit and no she doesn't have such a pattern, she actually has the opposite pattern of success.

That said, I still wouldn't vote for her.
 
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.

I do not think her goal would be to win, but to set up later runs at office.
 
I don't know where people get the idea that running a business somehow makes you a better presidential candidate.
 
Your whole take is skewed by your biases and she is far more intelligent than you give her credit and no she doesn't have such a pattern, she actually has the opposite pattern of success.

That said, I still wouldn't vote for her.


Your attempted rebuttal might carry weight with actual citations.
 
I do not think her goal would be to win, but to set up later runs at office.

Is that something that works particularly often? "Failed presidential candidate" as a resume builder?
 
Is that something that works particularly often? "Failed presidential candidate" as a resume builder?

Yes. How many people won their party nomination the first time? I suspect, with the massive amounts of money in these campaigns any more, that it will become even more common to run the first time not to win, but to establish the campaign infrastructure that will be needed for later runs, to learn the process, to start building name recognition and establish a brand.
 
While I would never vote for her, or any Republican, I do like the idea of giving someone a chance who doesn't come from a career in politics.
 
Attempted? :doh iLOL

Citations?
Really don't need to as you haven't shown any such pattern to begin with.

But try reading up on her. You might find that she has had more success, accomplishment, awards and accolades of a higher stature than most folks on this site.

Carly Fiorina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyone on this site could run a business into the ground. She has done it several times.
 
I don't know where people get the idea that running a business somehow makes you a better presidential candidate.

Should be easy to see. But in this case she doesn't have governing experience.

I'd like for my president to have experience running a business in America. That informs the governing process. But number one for me is governing experience.
 
Anyone on this site could run a business into the ground. She has done it several times.

Several huh? :doh

No, she definitely has had more success, accomplishment, awards and accolades of a higher stature than most folks on this site.
 
Several huh? :doh

No, she definitely has had more success, accomplishment, awards and accolades of a higher stature than most folks on this site.

yup, she mismanaged Lucent in the dotcom bubble (scrapping the R/D focus to R/D.... and in turn, de facto ending Bell Labs legacy, home of two of the most important discoveries of the 20th century, thanks to the work of Brittain, Schockley, Bardeen, etc),

and then she crushed HP with the compaq acquisition (you do remember that HP stock rebounded 10% within 24 hours of her firing?? LMAO!, well sadly all those she outsourced probably aren't laughing about it. oh, sorry, she "right shored" them)
 
yup, she mismanaged Lucent
:doh
1. No she didn't.
I gave you the wiki link. You should have availed yourself of it.

Far more success.

AT&T and Lucent

She joined AT&T in 1980 as a management trainee and rose to become a senior vice president overseeing the company's hardware and systems division. In 1995, Fiorina led corporate operations for the spinoff from AT&T of Lucent, reporting to Lucent chief executive Henry B. Schacht;[11] she played a key role in planning and implementing the 1996 initial public offering of stock and company launch strategy.[12][13] Later in 1996, Fiorina was appointed president of Lucent's consumer products business, reporting to Rich McGinn, president and chief operating officer.[13] In 1997, she was appointed chair of Lucent's consumer communications joint venture with Philips consumer communications.[14] Later that year, she was named group president for the global service provider business at Lucent, overseeing marketing and sales for the company's largest customer segment.[15][16]

In 1998, Fortune magazine named her the "most powerful woman in business" in its inaugural listing, and she was included in the Time 100 in 2004 and remained in the Fortune listing throughout her tenure at HP. Fiorina was #10 on the Forbes list of The World's 100 Most Powerful Women for 2004.[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] She became regarded by many as being the first woman to head up a Fortune 20 company, and to have overcome the metaphorical "glass ceiling".[24][25][26]



2. That is not several. That is one (HP) that everybody is well aware of.

And the money she made at HP was by contractual obligation. Matters not if you like that or not.
 
Several huh? :doh

No, she definitely has had more success, accomplishment, awards and accolades of a higher stature than most folks on this site.

So does Obama.
 
:doh
1. No she didn't.
2. That is not several. That is one (HP) that everybody is well aware of.

And the money she made at HP was by contractual obligation. Matters not if you like that or not.


1) Yes, she did. The fact that you don't understand the history of Bell Labs and its value to this country, is shocking.
The irony that you are communicating that ignorance via a computer(or smartphone/tablet) , is beyond description.
 
Back
Top Bottom