Fiorina/Boxer Debate
I missed it. The family was watching a Star Trek re-run. Anyone know a place where there is a video clip available?
If you saw it, let me know how you thought Fiorina did. Here is the San Francisco Chronicle:
Fiorina said she and her husband have lived the American dream — she working her way to the top of the corporate ladder after starting as a secretary and he after starting out as a tow truck driver. But she said that chance at rising prosperity is being lost, in part because the U.S. is not doing enough to encourage business.
“I think the American dream is too hard for too many people,” she said.
She then took direct aim at Boxer, who is seeking a third term in the Senate, saying her long track record in Congress consistently hurt job creation and did too little to help the middle class.
“The results of her policies are devastating for this state,” Fiorina said.
Boxer, a tenacious campaigner, fired back. She criticized Fiorina for shipping 30,000 jobs overseas before being let go as CEO of Hewlett-Packard Co.
She said Fiorina fights not for average Americans, but for billionaires, millionaires and companies that outsource jobs.
“I’m in the United States Senate because I fight for the people, I fight for the dream,” Boxer said, noting Fiorina’s $21 million severance package after she was let go. “I don’t think we need those Wall Street values right now.”
What did you think?
I saw a clip on Fox of a campaign speech by Boxer stressing her degree in Economics…
AD - RtR/OS! (30a4ff) — 9/1/2010 @ 8:49 pmWhenever she does that someone needs to ask her about her nickname of “Barbara Bouncer”!
Fiorina seemed like, at the very least, she held her own, and seemed to come out ahead of many of the exchanges. Boxer’s arguments were standard leftist talking points, no deeper than the trolls that drop by.
JD (8ded14) — 9/1/2010 @ 8:49 pmI think Fiorina really missed an opportunity in a few places. The debate was never going to really be a slam dunk for her… just the list of issues covered says it all… this was a very Boxer friendly format.
but Fiorina came across as much more together and responsible and accountable to the people… it’s a shame she screwed up in a few places. She didn’t hit hard enough, generally. and the Prop 23 answer was really looking intelligent until she refused to take a stand, one way or the other, and didn’t mention oil when talking about energy. Oil is a big issue.
Fiorina’s closing remarks were excellent. They came after yet another confused dialogue with boxer, and were a breath of fresh air and I think had great impact. I think that moment helped define the debate. Boxer’s closing remarks were awful. Just a confused bunch of attacks.
Also, Fiorina wants Roe v Wade repealed and Boxer is cool with Prop 8 being overturned in court. That’s a pretty significant couple of facts for senate candidates.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/1/2010 @ 8:51 pmActually, Boxer is finishing her third teem and seeking her fourth term in the Senate. Good thing the San Francisco Chronicle has all those layers of fact checkers and stuff.
Official Democratic Talking Points (6f6c60) — 9/1/2010 @ 8:52 pmThey really were pretty shallow. Boxer came there to attack Boxer on HP and various fears of doom. But that she moaned about this so much really made her look out of touch.
It’s a shame the debate didn’t cover the issues of the day. Is the gun ban and Cali’s approach to greenhouse gas what the voters want to hear about? But that’s not super important, IMO. We get an idea of these people’s personalities, competence, and vision from this debate.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/1/2010 @ 8:57 pmMy wife and I both thought that Fiorina did well. Boxer seemed tired. In her closing argument, Boxer just repeated her debate talking points. By contrast Fiorina told the stories of three struggling Californians and promised a better future.
aunursa (78b3b4) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:03 pmThe low point for Fiorina was when she complained about Boxer’s attacks on HP. That was the only time in the entire debate where I agreed with Senator Ma’am.
aunursa (78b3b4) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:04 pmFiorina wiped the floor with Boxer. She repeatedly attacked Boxer for “empty words” and little action. She hammered her with the fact that only fur bill sin Boxer’s 18 year tenure were passed with Boxer as sole sponsor, and she cited the cap and trade bill as an example when her own leadership yanked the bill from the environmental committee she chairs.
As mentioned above, Fiorina totally blew it on the Prop 23 question. Boxer scored a heavy blow by rhetorically asking how Fiorina can be expected to cast a tough vote when she can;t even state a position on a California initiative. But this was Boxer’s only real score.
Boxer did her damnedest to stain Fiorina’s tenure at HP. She spoke againandagainandagain about jobs being shipped overseas. Fiorina effectively came back with specific instances where a Boxer vote cost California jobs and encouraged the outsourcing of jobs. Fiorina also cited a lot of financial info that made her time at HP seem pretty effective.
The liberal interrogators tried to nail Fiorina on her pro-life and anti-illegal immigration stands. Fiorina parried effectively and maintained her avowed principles.
If the trend of disaffected Independents holds true in California, Fiorina is the clear winner tonight. If it is going to be about being more comfortable with the known, Boxer may have held her own.
Ed from SFV (54e760) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:05 pmI thought Fiorina’s low point was the stance on Prop 23, but this HP line of attacks has proven to be effective. For the most part, neither of them really hammered how they would help employment. Fiorina made the basic case very well… but she didn’t make this a constant element of her debate or her closing remarks. Oops.
I wonder how accurate the polling is in Cali these days. Alaska’s polls were so far off.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:09 pmfur bil s = s/b “four bills”
Ed from SFV (54e760) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:15 pmthat’s sounds like a fascinating evening of deep thinkings about how terrible it is to drill the oils, especially with California being so terribly brokedick.
Californians can feel proud that no matter how beggarly and destitute their little state becomes, the oils will be safe with either of these hoochies in Washington.
that’s a good feeling.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:28 pmBabs Boxer… where does one start… Something that will forever remain seared, I say, seared in my brain is this: in the run up to Gulf War I, Boxer addressed the House and listed all the reasons she didn’t think Saddam’s actions deserved a military response. She believed he was just misunderstood. She went on the quote one of Bette Midler’s songs of that era… “From a Distance”… “from a distance, you look like a friend of mine… from a distance…”
One of the young pages was heard to ask of no one in particular: “don’t ya just want to slap her?”
ColonelHaiku (5d380f) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:39 pmDid not watch it, but Carly should stick it Babs on the HP jobs and Dem talking point on shipping jobs overseas saying that if she learned anything while getting her degree in economics, she would understand why U.S. companies send jobs overseas and what people like Babs have done to encourage it.
daleyrocks (940075) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:42 pmThe “questioners” were unbelievable – three hardcore leftists spouting straight up democrat party talking points and value judgments, as if they were questions. Not even the slightest pretense of balance. And Barbara Boxer is a disgusting excuse for a human being. Fiorina doesn’t strike me as a person who has a consistent internalized philosophy (certainly not a real conservative one – conservatism is a vehicle to get herself elected), but she does seem intelligent and realistic, in stark contrast to Ma’am. My gut tells me that Fiorina will just turn out to be another diversocrat/environmentalist McCain Jr. Still, anything is better than that load on two legs, Boxer.
william wilson (f6deac) — 9/1/2010 @ 9:49 pmDid not watch the debate. Fiorina is a RINO. Babs is the real deal, leftist whack-job with severe elephantitis of the head. Means Fiorina is better than Babs.
John Hitchcock (9e8ad9) — 9/1/2010 @ 10:00 pmConsidering the total bias of the panel (they make the LAT reporters look like rightwingers) and the moderator, Fiorina did great. She gave facts and figures and arguments while Babs blabbed: Green jobs, teachers, teachers, Made in America. What we heard was boondoggle, wasted stimulus, union bailouts. Let them eat arugula!
CA does have a choice between a blithering tin foil hat wearer and a RINO with some experience in reality. We shall see.
Patricia (358f54) — 9/1/2010 @ 10:20 pmDid Fiorina at least explain that moving jobs overseas has unfortunately become one of the few reasonable alternatives to cutting domestic jobs even more drastically in this anti-corporate wasteland, or stubbornly refusing to take action until H-P is uncompetitive and on the ropes? Or that despite Boxer’s ham-handed class warfare tactics, that thousands of stockholders are middle-class retirees who don’t care about making millions off of their H-P stock, they just pray that their portfolio doesn’t shrink to the point that they must take jobs as Wal-mart greeters or MacDonald’s fry cooks?
Did she not point out that she has at least excelled in running one of the country’s leading companies during her stint at H-P, whereas the only thing at which Boxer has succeeded during her tenure in D.C. – with the help of a brainwashed electorate – is being re-elected to carry on the same incredibly incompetent performance she’s been doing since day one?
Dagwood (0e6829) — 9/1/2010 @ 10:37 pmCarly should have asked Babs if she was going to complain about 30,000 jobs being shipped overseas, how she could explain letting 25,000 central valey jobs go to waste due to a lack of water. She had a lot of say in that matter.
David (ce2b8f) — 9/1/2010 @ 10:46 pmSomehow, I thought we would get back to “hoochies.” It doesn’t matter how often female posters explain how offensive that is. But clearly our resident misogynist wanted to sound equal opportunity, and added such a classy term as “brokedick” to the mix.
So helpful. And did I mention classy?
Jeez.
I know I am in the minority, but this is precisely what I have been writing about: conservatives who want to help the nutzoid Left win. But no worries. They make help crazy Lefties win, but you know, their hearts are pure, so it makes it okay.
Eric Blair (46847d) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:03 pmArgh.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:10 pmCarly has no principles Mr. Blair.
Electing unprincipled tools is what got us where we are. It’s not a good place, no?
Electing a new crop of unprincipled tools isn’t going to help I don’t think.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:19 pmI say bring on the new unprincipled tools because they will be my unprincipled tools and at least marginally better than the old unprincipled tools. Baby steps is better than no steps.
daleyrocks (940075) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:30 pmOr vegan cupcakes.
daleyrocks (940075) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:31 pmI used to think that too. I wish I still could.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/1/2010 @ 11:34 pmIt was despicable how the lefty journalist insinuated that Prop 8 caused gay couples in California to lose federal benefits, when in fact the federal government treats “domestic partners” and “married gay couples” the same.
It’s amazing that Barbara Boxer suggested that Carly Fiorina wants people on the no-fly list to be able to carry guns onto airplanes. That was a ridiculous distortion and it shows Boxer is either confused or dishonest.
Barbara Boxer wants to allow the government to seize guns from anyone on the no-fly list. Anyone can be put on that list, and we have no way of reviewing the government’s decision-making. What it means is that the government would be able to seize anyone’s guns by putting them on that list, and then sending a SWAT team to their house to take all the guns. No due process. No civil rights. Barbara Boxer is an extremist gun-grabber totally out of step with mainstream Californians on this issue. In fact Ms. Fiorina’s position–that the government should not take away a Constitutional Right recognized as such by all nine Supreme Court Justices without due process–is the moderate and reasonable position.
Barbara Boxer is a terrible senator, and I hope the people of California recognize what a nasty piece of work she is. Of course, we can’t count on the liberal media to highlight the deception at the debate–including deception by the liberal media.
Boxer’s question from a real person: tell us why we should elect you. Fiorina’s question from a real person: tell us why you outsourced jobs.
I’m not saying Fiorina should not have to address that issue, it’s an important issue and it deserves to be addressed head-on, but there is no reason why Boxer should get easy questions.
Finally, an early question to Fiorina attacked her for tax breaks to the wealthy AND for opposing stimulus bills, as if there was any connection between the two. The idea was to throw as much crap at Fiorina so she couldn’t handle all of it in 90 seconds, and then accuse her of dodging the question.
I’m voting for Carly Fiorina, and I hope you will, too. I know none of the three “judges” will.
Daryl Herbert (817927) — 9/2/2010 @ 12:34 amIt was despicable how the lefty journalist insinuated that Prop 8 caused gay couples in California to lose federal benefits, when in fact the federal government treats “domestic partners” and “married gay couples” the same.
Daryl Herbert (817927) — 9/2/2010 @ 12:37 amIt’s amazing that Barbara Boxer suggested that Carly Fiorina wants people on the no-fly list to be able to carry guns onto airplanes. That was a ridiculous distortion and it shows Boxer is either confused or dishonest.Barbara Boxer wants to allow the government to seize guns from anyone on the no-fly list. Anyone can be put on that list, and we have no way of reviewing the government’s decision-making. What it means is that the government would be able to seize anyone’s guns by putting them on that list, and then sending a SWAT team to their house to take all the guns. No due process. No civil rights. Barbara Boxer is an extremist gun-grabber totally out of step with mainstream Californians on this issue.In fact Ms. Fiorina’s position–that the government should not take away a Constitutional Right recognized as such by all nine Supreme Court Justices without due process–is the moderate and reasonable position.Barbara Boxer is a terrible senator, and I hope the people of California recognize what a nasty piece of work she is. Of course, we can’t count on the liberal media to highlight the deception at the debate–including deception by the liberal media.Boxer’s question from a real person: tell us why we should elect you. Fiorina’s question from a real person: tell us why you outsourced jobs. I’m not saying Fiorina should not have to address that issue, it’s an important issue and it deserves to be addressed head-on, but there is no reason why Boxer should get easy questions.An early question to Fiorina attacked her for tax breaks to the wealthy AND for opposing stimulus bills, as if there was any connection between the two. The idea was to throw as much crap at Fiorina so she couldn’t handle all of it in 90 seconds, and then accuse her of dodging the question.I’m voting for Carly Fiorina, and I hope you will, too. I know none of the three “judges” will.
P.S.: I thought it was lame how both candidates cherry-picked items from bills that the other opposed, in order to say that “Boxer opposed body armor” or “Fiorina opposed small business relief”
(Re-posted with HTML)
I just caught the two candidates final statements. I thought Fiorina did okay. I thought Boxer delivered her usual load of crap.
I hadn’t heard the “From a Distance” hoo hah before. Gave me a smile to realize that Baghdad Barbara Boxer has consistently been an idiot throughout her tour in the Senate. Time for Barbara to go home to Mill Valley where she can torment the peasants.
Mike Myers (3c9845) — 9/2/2010 @ 6:49 amI saw a clip on Fox of a campaign speech by Boxer stressing her degree in Economics
She should do another ad stressing her awesome powers of scientific tenets. I wish Fiorina’s camp would do an entire series of ads showcasing all of Boxer’s hideous speeches – including the infamous episode where she dressed down the General, of course.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:09 amI thought Fiorina did really well. When Boxer kept making the comment about HP cutting 30k jobs. I wish Fiorina would have said something to the effect of “unlike our government, HP can’t just print more money”. I know it goes without saying, but there is a lot of not real bright liberals that need the simple stuff explained to them.
ML (f060a0) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:19 amBoxer is playing that same old, tired old, tune of trying to garner votes by appealing to class envy. It doesn’t fly Babs – both you and the argument are old, uninspired, without merit and useless! At least Fiorina has had to work for a living in her time!
Gayle Miller (e5a6d9) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:40 amwake up Cali peeps
ColonelHaiku (5d380f) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:50 amno disputing Babs Boxer
unfit for office
there’s a lot to suggest really that Boxer really a lot represents California Values… Boxer comes from a bankrupt yet snotty incompetent capitalism-strangling state and she does her dead-level best to advance those values on a national level and she does it very very well I think
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:58 amIs Fiorina an unprincipled tool? A lot of people just dismiss her, or at best, say she’s better than Boxer but pretty lousy.
I’m just curious where the evidence is. I don’t think her HP work hurts her… it was a time when a lot of companies like HP were destroyed and most did worse than HP, so I give her credit.
I think she’s just about as conservative a Senator as we can get out of California, and I don’t think she’s lying about her views. What kind of panderer says she opposes Roe v Wade in a contest with Boxer in California?
I’m a little tired of people completely giving up when things don’t go exactly their way. This is the best chance California has had to move to the right in a very long time, and some of you sound demoralized because Fiorina isn’t Paul Ryan.
Chin up!
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:19 amI missed it. I was in class.
I grabbed an mp3 from kqed.com and will be listening on the drive to chico tonight after class.
C-SPAN has the video here.
aphrael (73ebe9) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:27 amCali’s approach to greenhouse gas what the voters want to hear about?
One of them, yes: there’s a ballot measure on that very question and it’s going to be very well fought and highly controversial.
aphrael (73ebe9) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:29 amThis is new, Dustin? This way, these folks get to sit out elections (and I am starting to doubt those protestations that they don’t either; if they get to mindread politicians, I can mindread them), let the progressives do even more statism, and then still get to complain.
It’s not about good versus bad. It’s about bad versus slightly less bad.
And it always has been.
And I am always amazed how people who think this way just know how various people think: Person A is awful (Fiorina), and Person B is good (Sherrod).
They are all politicians, and last I heard, none of us are. It’s like I used to say about GWB: people think he is a nice guy, but dumb—when he was neither of those things.
Daleyrocks put it best: baby steps to slow the statism. But it isn’t as cool or edgy, though.
Oh well. Nothing new about what I am saying, and lots of folks disagree. But I am with Patterico: if you sit out the elections, you can’t complain.
This is just more Purity of Essence business, and it makes Axelrod so happy to see. Because it gives so much more power to the statists that RINOs ever could.
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:31 amCarly claims to have business sense but doesn’t think California should drill oils. Is that principled? I don’t think so. I think it’s pandering nonsense, and I’m not in the mood. I think she’s just another pitiful mewling whiny coward like Meghan’s daddy and I will go get tasty pancakes on election day instead of voting for yet another douchebag.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:32 amGood plan, happyfeet, why let some pandering douchebag actually kick Boxer out of the Senate …
Sheesh.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:34 amaphrael, California’s ballot initiatives show that the state has the intention to commit suicide.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:35 amOK, well I guess I was mistaken then. Fiorina fell on her ass near the end of her discussion of this because she wouldn’t take a stand, yes or no. She seemed to favor lots of energy exploration and a federal or global solution. While she’s right, it makes a lot more sense to have a global reaction, she sounded anti-federalist and this wasn’t in line with the rest of her debate.
Is happyfeet right that Carly said California shouldn’t drill for oil? I would agree that’s very misguided, given their economic troubles and what I think is limited and controllable risks.
If he’s relying on my earlier comment, all I said was that she didn’t mention oil.
This is a few months old, from ABC:
Happyfeet, it sounds like you have a powerful reason to support Fiorina. If she’s changed her tune, I’d like to hear about it.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:40 amSPQR I don’t believe for a second that Carly believes that broke-ass California shouldn’t be drilling oils. I think she’s a liar. So what I see is a person of low character no different than John McCain what will say anything to get elected, and what I see is a skank what will vote every bit the same as Boxer if she thinks that’s what will keep her in power.
Not helpful. We need principled leaderships and California is not offering a principled candidate for to give my vote so I vote tasty pancakes.
happyfeet (19c1da) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:40 amhappyfeet, if you think that Fiorina’s votes will be identical to Boxer’s then you have been abusing your MMJ card.
SPQR (26be8b) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:44 amForget it,Dustin, ‘he’s rolling’ facts don’t matter
ian cormac (6709ab) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:45 amto our mad mogwai
SPQR: is that a general problem with ballot initiatives, or aimed at any initiative in particular on this year’s ballot?
Note that the global warming initiative is a referednum on a law passed by the legislature.
Dustin: Advocating oil drilling off the coast would weaken her popularity among independents. Generally epeaking, California’s independents line up with the left on environmental and social issues and with the right on fiscal and tax issues.
aphrael (73ebe9) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:47 amHappyfeet, why do you think this?
If you simply said she would let us down at some point, since she is a politician, I’d agree. But you’re saying her entire slate is a fabrication, even though it’s predictable that she would hold the views she does based on her background.
It just doesn’t make any sense to me where you’re coming from.
I don’t really like Fiorina, since she behaved strangely towards the end of her tenure at HP, and I imagine was a pain in the ass. But her personal story makes much more sense to me if she is actually conservative.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:52 amThanks, Eric Blair.
PatAZ (9d1bb3) — 9/2/2010 @ 8:54 amAnyone can be put on that list, and we have no way of reviewing the government’s decision-making.
I would argue that that fact, right there, is the core of the problem.
aphrael (73ebe9) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:01 amWhat an interesting state you live in.
I can’t blame them. I’ve been to California many, many times. Your environment is a special resource, and it’s what makes the nonsense bearable to me when I’m there.
I think there’s just a huge tension in this one issue, offshore drilling. It can be done safely (will it?) and it brings in tremendous revenue to a state that is bankrupt (and would probably spend all this revenue on a $43 billion school cafeteria).
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:02 amMy bad. Last time I saw her talking about drillings she was defending Meghan’s coward daddy’s position on not drilling ion ANWR. I had no idea she thinks it’s ok to drill off the coast of California but not in the barren tundra.
Strange woman.
But anyway I will shut up about that then.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:19 am*in* ANWR sorry I am in a hurry some douchebag in a bentley didn’t have his parking card so we all had to wait like 15 minutes
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:21 amhappyfeet,
Just as an aside, I’ve been lied to by too many supposedly awesome Republican candidates to not understand where you’re coming from.
Just sayin’. I want Fiorina to win and think she should be a huge improvement that motivates voters, but it sure would be easier to convince folks if I didn’t have these knives on my back.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:25 ammy friend in Chicago notes that oil rigs never sploded when Mr. Bush was president and now we have Obama they’re like jiffy pop
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:26 amno but thank you for telling me that I still think I will go get tasty pancakes but I’m glad to know that if she wins she’s committed to offshore drillings
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:31 amJust don’t get vegan pancakes with turkey bacon and decaf coffee. Or is this a metaphor?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:34 amit’s for reals the vegan pancakes are one of my finds this year…
but also I think now that I think about it that I may have conflated Meg’s drilling views with Carly’s
That was sloppy of me.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:44 amThat’s what happens with the vegan pancakes, Mike ‘the Iceberg’ Murphy is full up ‘epic fail,’ but
ian cormac (6709ab) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:47 amWhitman might win regardless
It’s not just Whitman and Fiorina… I would not support Meghan’s daddy’s bff Charlie Crist neither. I would not support John Cornyn or Kay Bailey. I would not support Princess Lindsey. I would not support Tim Pawlenty. Lots of others, but I think you can see the general pattern.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 9:59 amI think I’ve made my feelings on “Al Orange” rather clear
ian cormac (6709ab) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:06 amAnyone read that Meghan Mccain stole Romney yard signs and then sent a lackey who looked like her to be arrested in her place?
I guess freedom of speech is not a Mccain family value, then.
John Cornyn I hope redeems himself, but he has been a disappointment. Used to send him money.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:13 amOh, yeah, my point:
Imagine replacing John Cornyn with a more reliable Texan who didn’t manipulate primaries, etc. With the great wealth of Texas and the size of the state, ousting an incumbent like Cornyn would take a huge effort. At the end of the day, the differences on votes, or negotiations would be real, but it wouldn’t be a huge change. for the most part, our laws and confirmation vote tallies wouldn’t change very much.
Compare those results to ousting Boxer, or replacing Graham, or keeping Crist out, or even sweeter, Miller over Murkowski, and I think it’s clear that, with limited resources and time, it makes more sense to fight for ‘moderates’ in blue states and conservatives in purple states.
I’m not just talking about maximizing the number of Rs. We need to get rid of as many of the weak Rs as possible in the primary process (even when we fail, we force weak Rs to the right somewhat, too).
Fiorina in the Senate would be a huge win for conservatives. A net win larger than any I’m aware of.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:19 amMiller over Murkowski was very America and I salute Sarah Palin for her efforts in that regard.
Now I need to lie down.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:21 amStop the presses, feet was complimentary to the Huntress’s efforts
ian cormac (6709ab) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:26 amEspecially to Happy Feet,like you, many people love to cite “Big Oil” as a huge problem.The problem is how to deal with the FACT that petroleum based products are an intrinsic part of everyone’s daily life.The shell for the computer on which you wrote that, for example.The problem with Oil interests is that they are controlled globally by ALL of the oil producing countries. Do, try, to rein in, say, the Arab Emirates. Like the banks and the fabulous FED created by a private and international group of bankers.Read: Creature from Jekyll Island.
Re Carly and 23, as she has not made up her mind, I think she should have just said that it is not a yes or no answer as the issue is too complicated.
I almost felt sorry for Boxer as either she was ill prepared or frightened or both. Sad, really.
By the way, what could the General possibly have said other than what she says he did?
I wish re Prop 8 and ROe vs Wade Carly would speak more to State’s rights.Why should something as personal as that be decided by a bunch of people in robes and palatial headquarters in Washington DC? Let the people of each state decide.
Thank you for letting me comment and yes, vote for Carly! VOte for STAR PARKER if you are in her district. Vote for Damon Dunn! Steve Cooley!
JazzCat (9d1bb3) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:51 amSen. Boxer stressed her dream of seeing more “Made in America” signs.
Carly should kill that line off with, “The only thing Barbara Boxer has made in America is deficits, $10 trillion of deficits during her time in Washington. The deficits Barbara Boxer has made in America have killed millions of American jobs. She should apologize to those millions of workers who once had jobs that allowed them to say, “Made in America.”
Bob Leibowitz (e88839) — 9/2/2010 @ 10:59 amI think that Fiorina ran Lucent Technologies into the ground, landed at HP, proposed a merger with Compaq that would have (in the view of HP board member Walter Hewlett—and I agreed at the time—would have diluted HP’s platinum product image and thrust it into the low profit margin commodity PC market).
Fiorina then engineered an ouster of Walter Hewlett from the board of HP based on the allegation that some board members had leaked board information to the press, then it was revealed that Fiorina was up to her neck in the resulting “pretexting” scandal.
Ultimately, Walter Hewlett was proven correct. HP diluted its platinum brand image and entered into the low profit commodity PC market.
HP profit performance tanked.
Fiorina was fired.
Now she wants to manage the United States?
No thank you.
Stepjen Gianelli (be043d) — 9/2/2010 @ 1:31 pmSince WHEN does Fiorina want to run the United States?
Icy Texan (db9ed0) — 9/2/2010 @ 1:39 pmGianelli, HP’s profits did go down.
It was the dot com bust. HP also drastically outperformed the competition. The merger went through, even after she was gone, and her leadership has been vindicated, at least on performance compared with companies like HP at that time.
She made big changes, huge cuts, and the company survived.
You describe HP as tanking… yet HP didn’t tank… it emerged from the dot com bust as one of the strongest companies in the world.
Was she perfect? No. Her behavior was strange, for one (you cite a lot of this, fairly), and some of her cuts seem pretty severe. A lot of the Compaq merger’s rollouts were lousy. It’s easy to identify many examples of problems. And yet, overall, HP did so much better than the competition, and has emerged extremely strong. It’s hard to run an extremely complex company when its complex economic sector collapses, and her results were successful. It’s easy to point to many flaws, and easier still to point to the bottom line. A solid bottom line. I’ll take someone who can manage such a thing over Barbara Boxer, who has run the USA into the ground with consistently economically destructive votes.
No, she’s pretty freaking smart on how to make hard choices. She also has elbows that are very sharp… too sharp. But I am happy to send those elbows to DC to replace Boxer.
Frankly, even her more reasonable detractors note she is an efficient manager in tough times.
If you’re insisting on only voting for people who are perfect, Fiorina is not for you. If you’re looking to vote for the most competent candidate in this general election, you have to choose between Boxer and Fiorina.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 1:46 pmI watched the first 5 minutes and checked out after the 2nd question. But I already had the ‘story’: the questioners. The ‘rightie’ was from the SF Chronicle! Question 1 was for Fiorina – roughly, why do you want to give tax cuts for rich people that don’t need it but don’t want to give anything to the middle and lower classes? Question 2, where I dropped out in mid-question being asked, was to Boxer and asked Boxer what she thought about the Iraq War. Fiorina needs to lay down the law on fairness – upfront, not at the debate. No more debates with three leftie nutcases asking the questions!
East Bay Jay (2fd7f7) — 9/2/2010 @ 3:39 pmEast Bay Jay, it got worse than that, IMO. the questions were all obviously tailored and the “moderator” seemed to be tilted too. I thought it played into Fiorina being the outsider fighting the system, taking it back for the people.
Asking one party “why are you wrong?” and the other “what do you think about this?” is a little too obvious for most folks. I hope I’m not giving too much credit to the audience.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 3:47 pmI see your point, Dustin, about setting up Fiorina as an outsider. That makes sense. But that first question? Wow.
East Bay Jay (2fd7f7) — 9/2/2010 @ 3:50 pmWhat’s funny is that they were probably trying to restrain themselves as much as they could.
Ben Smith is complaining that certain conservatives wouldn’t have such a hard time with the press if they were more open to the “neutral media”. That animal is mythical.
They could have accepted it, and had neutralish questions from the left, and the same from the right. Instead, they pretend the left is objective.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 3:57 pmIs it too late to vote for Chuck DeVore?
/kidding
A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job. A recovery is when Barbara Boxer loses her job. (hat tip “Dutch” Reagan)
papertiger (daf467) — 9/2/2010 @ 4:10 pmStepjen Gianelli #65 – I wonder if “Stepjen Gianelli” is perhaps the same as “Stephen Gianelli, registered Democrat” ?
Given the other facts wrong in his comment, getting his own name wrong would fit the “registered Democrat” part …
Alasdair (e7cb73) — 9/2/2010 @ 4:11 pmthe j and the h are near eachother on the keyboard. Pretty mild typo compared to my adventures in communication.
but he did give the typical spiel from the Boxer campaign. Fiorina as some horrible trainwreck maker, doom and gloom for all should she ‘run the USA’.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 9/2/2010 @ 4:18 pmKCRA has a poll;
Who is the winner of tonight’s U.S. Senate debate?
Vote here.
Currently Fiorina leads with a comfortable 66% to Boxer’s 34.
But this is a Dem state and we need more then a victory. We need a Roman Triumph – otherwise an SF district Judge will declare the election null and void.
Vote now – Vote later – Vote often!
papertiger (daf467) — 9/2/2010 @ 4:18 pmFresh Sacramento Bee poll – only about 600 votes so far.
Farm fresh.
A little bit on the way things go with the Sacbee. Tonight the poll will trend the way it does – breaking down party lines roughly keeping with the trend of the population of the greater Sacto area.
But then tomorrow – when the state workers hit their desks in the morning there will be an inter office memo (much like what I’m doing now) reminding the drones that they get to vote twice (once at home and now at work) for Barbara Boxer.
Passing the collection plate for Boxer’s campaign fund might happen also (conjecture).
Right now Fiorina is leading 51% to 45%.
papertiger (daf467) — 9/2/2010 @ 7:33 pmI LOVE Carly Fiorina. As a libertarian, I disagree with her stance on gay marriage and drilling, but I applaud her stances on just about everything else (including her pro-life stances). Whoever says that Fiorina is not a BIG step toward freedom for California either doesn’t understand Fiorina or doesn’t understand Boxer. Come on, folks, even a Clinton is better than Boxer – VOTE HER OUT!
Also, I’d like to suggest that for every minute we spend discussing politics or watching political news or listening to Rush, that we spend equal time volunteering at phone banks, putting signs around town, going door-to-door and waving signs at rallies. Do SOMETHING. We NEED Carly! DO Something!
ThatGuy (d8ae55) — 9/5/2010 @ 12:00 amChumchonmuaythai store is a major online seller of the Muay Thai quality brand, Twin, Fairtex, Top King, Yakthai. We have wide range of Muay Thai gear such as Boxing Gloves, Bag Gloves, Grappling MMA Gloves, Fancy boxing gloves, Body protection, Belly protection, Shin protection, Headgear, Shorts, Trunks, Pads and more product. http://www.chumchonmuaythai.com/
Chumchonmuaythai (f4bbcd) — 9/8/2010 @ 9:29 pm