Maybe it is time for a woman president

But the best woman in the race is not Hillary Clinton, with her wooden delivery, old fashioned ideas and feeling of entitlement. Cary Fiorina did a great job in her debate today. She demonstrated her intellectual superiority to the men on stage with her and to Hillary Clinton who was hiding back at the scooby van, or wherever it is she hangs out these days.

There are lots of comments on the debate. You can look at one here.

So maybe Hillary is right that it is time for a woman to have a chance. It is just that Hillary's time has come and gone while Fiorina's is just dawning.

Posted by Christine & John at August 6, 2015 10:27 PM
Comments
Comment #397153
Cary Fiorina did a great job in her debate today. She demonstrated her intellectual superiority to the men on stage……

Wow did you consider that to be a challenge when the men on the stage were Perry, Jindal and Santorum! She could have drooled through it and demonstrated her intellectual superiority C&J.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 6, 2015 10:48 PM
Comment #397154

Beats Hillary too. I would love to see that debate. Old Hillary would have no chance.

Posted by: C&J at August 6, 2015 11:00 PM
Comment #397155

Beats Hillary but they haven’t debated! Come on C&J lets face it she looked good, according to you, playing to an empty house on the loser team. All her intellect seems to be a waste in the repub party primaries, what does that say about your team?

Posted by: j2t2 at August 6, 2015 11:17 PM
Comment #397156

Carly Fiorina was so-so. I saw it. For some reason FOX is pushing her performance. But Carly Fiorina will never, ever go anywhere in politics.

C&J, do your homework. Fiorina’s chief claim to fame was being the CEO of HP. She made a bad decision to merge with Compaq. As a result, her company’s stock lost 50% of its value, and she laid off 30,000 employees. When she announced her resignation, the stock jumped UP 7% in just one day. As a leader of a large organization she was an unmitigated disaster.

Her political career consists of one run the Senate. She lost.

There’s a good reason she’s at one or two percent in the polls.

Posted by: phx8 at August 6, 2015 11:18 PM
Comment #397157

It’s funny to watch the talking heads spin a debate. For some reason, MSNBC is swooning over Rubio. I thought he was middle of the pack.

Kasich did best, but then, he had the home court advantage. There’s a good reason FOX fixed the five polls to exclude Perry and include Kasich. Kasich is a lock for VP, and he would be a very formidable opponent to Clinton. He has his weaknesses, of course, and they have not been publicly discussed, but still, I hope he stays in the single digits.

Rand Paul was poor. I was sorry to see that. He stands up for the 4th amendment and a rational foreign policy. Oh well.

FOX and Megyn Kelly had it in for Trump. He did ok. Normally, any presidential candidate who said the things he said about women would be excoriated. With Trump, who knows?

Cruz and Huckabee did well. They’re nut jobs. But they did well. Christie did pretty well.

Jeb was ok. He needed to do better than that.

Walker was lost. Carson was lost until the very end.

Posted by: phx8 at August 6, 2015 11:33 PM
Comment #397158

j2t2

Honestly, have you ever seen Hillary seem inspired? People like the idea of Hillary, but not Hillary. She is running on being THE woman. W/o that, she is nothing.

IMO - Hillary is a smart woman. Had she not met Bill, she would have ended up as a reasonably successful lawyer. But is she smarter than you or me? I don’t see any evidence.

Posted by: C&J at August 6, 2015 11:39 PM
Comment #397159

Ok, how insane is this? The online polls- some with very large samples- all show Trump overwhelmingly won the debate. Cruz, Carson, Rubio, Kasich, and Paul round out the better performers.

Trump won? By a landslide?

FOX was gunning for him. The first question asked a show of hands to see if everyone would support whoever won the nomination, and refuse to run as an independent. Of course, only Trump raised his hand. He did not promise to support whoever won the nomination for the GOP. And that was actually smart. The message? ‘I am not playing your game. You are playing my game.’

Posted by: phx8 at August 7, 2015 1:10 AM
Comment #397160

C&J, compare Hillary to anyone on the stage in Cleveland last night and she becomes much smarter. Since you seem to want a women for president then the comparison is not gonna go your way. I would suggest her style is guarded and rightfully so as she is under intense scrutiny from the conservative propaganda machine. Seems they realize the only road to victory is by trashing Hillary. Unless of course they get in bed with Kasich. But can your team move far enough to the center to get that done?

Posted by: j2t2 at August 7, 2015 7:23 AM
Comment #397161
Carly Fiorina was so-so. I saw it. For some reason FOX is pushing her performance. But Carly Fiorina will never, ever go anywhere in politics.

Actually Joe and Mika were pumping her too this morning.

Rubio was playing the political game and was darn good at it. But this maybe a cycle where being a good politician actually hurts. Didn’t hurt he had fat ones served to him.

I think Kasich locked up the VP spot last night. He’s good and will carry Ohio. You might say the same about Rubio and Florida but I think another candidate would be worried about being upstaged by him on the ticket. He’s probably got to win the nomination.

Carson is too good of a man to be President.

I thought the guys that got hurt were Paul and Walker. Paul came off as negative and petty while Walker was outclassed by the other governors, by Cruze’s story, and by Rubio’s political skills. I honestly don’t know where he wins.

Cruze is very interesting. He’s got a great story, is smart as hell, and has some political skills. Just too divisive to win.

Huckabee is good entertainment and that’s about it.

Trump showed he could handle a loaded deck, but in the end he still just talks about himself and says nothing of what he would do to “fix it.” He’s all about the Donald.

The real problem for me is I don’t think any of these guys can do anything they say they would do because our too big to fail federal government has passed the tipping point and is on auto pilot to a course of destruction. We don’t even have budget fights anymore, just theater on debt ceilings and Planned Parenthood.

Speaking of PP, it just amazed me that with all the issues in the world and in the U.S., Fox spent so much time talking about abortion. Questions on police/civilian conflict would have been more interesting.


Posted by: George in SC at August 7, 2015 8:40 AM
Comment #397164

The whole Fiorina adoration hype seems to me to be generated by Fox. They really want to see a woman break into the varsity debate team. Caught her on Hardball right after the debate and Chris Matthews asked her if she was calling Hillary a liar. She insisted that she did not call her a liar but merely said that she lies (WTF?). She doesn’t seem to me to have the wherewithal to address a serious debate but hey I could be wrong, time will tell.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 11:16 AM
Comment #397167

” I would suggest her style is guarded and rightfully so as she is under intense scrutiny…” (from the FBI)

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 1:16 PM
Comment #397168

Despite the time constraints I believe most of the candidates did a remarkable job.

The three moderators did an excellent job in question preparation and control of the debate.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 1:26 PM
Comment #397169

My top three picks of the evening…

Cruz, Rubio and Huckabee.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 1:29 PM
Comment #397170

George in SC,
As I mentioned earlier, I thought Rubio was middle of the pack. He might be running for VP except that Bush will make it extremely difficult for him to ever get any traction. He was tossed softballs last night. He (and Walker) both stated they would against abortion even in the case where the life of the woman is endangered. According to polls, 83% of Americans favor that exception. It’s pretty hard to argue there is no such thing as a ‘War on Women’ and then demand the woman die in order to finish a pregnancy.

You might be right about Kasich as a VP eclipsing whoever is at the top of the ticket. He has a 55% approval rating in the swing state of OH. As a Democrat and liberal, he is the only one that gives me any real concern.

Agreed, Walker is out of his depth. Neither Walker nor Christie can offer a story about the economic performance of their state that competes with Kasich.

As I said, I was sorry to see Paul do so poorly. He already has a reputation for being a bit prickly. Combine that with an inability to raise money or successfully staff and run a campaign, and his goose is pretty much cooked.

Cruz and Huckabee turned in strong performances. I think they are both crazy as March hares. But they did well on stage. Huckabee is hinting he would throw out Marbury v Madison and the concept of judicial review, and refused to rule out sending troops to shut down abortion clinics. Cruz will say just about anything. But it’s hard to call him too extreme, given some of the other candidates surrounding him.

FOX ignored some issues, including racial issues and Climate Change. They’ve come in for a lot of (deserved) criticism for the way they conducted that debate.

Trump amazes me. It was just astounding to see him talking about buying politicians (present company excepted!). I thought he knocked it out of the park with his answer about bankruptcies, but then, I probably take a more business-oriented approach than most.

What I would like to see is Fiorina on the same stage as Trump. He would skewer her over her failure as CEO of HP. Unfortunately, I doubt The Donald would ever deign to notice her.

Posted by: phx8 at August 7, 2015 1:50 PM
Comment #397171

”!). I thought he knocked it out of the park with his answer about bankruptcies…”

Agree. He could have added that unlike GM and others, government didn’t bail him out.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 2:04 PM
Comment #397172

“FOX ignored some issues, including racial issues and Climate Change”

Hmmm…both manufactured issues by the Left.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 2:43 PM
Comment #397173

“Hmmm…both manufactured issues by the Left.”

Exactly, Royal.

Funny how the left is using their manufactured issues and positions to critique the right.

Posted by: kctim at August 7, 2015 2:55 PM
Comment #397174

Trump’s decision not to take the “pledge” at the beginning of the debate was astute and businesslike.

I don’t believe Trump would organize a challenge outside the party but has left the door open for leverage. Smart.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 2:55 PM
Comment #397175

“FOX ignored some issues, including racial issues and Climate Change”

Hmmm…both manufactured issues by the Left.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 2:56 PM
Comment #397176

Sorry for the double post.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 2:58 PM
Comment #397177

Off topic but did anyone else get the sleight of hand that was accomplished by Senator Schumer. He comes out during the heat (or chill if you will) of the debate to announce he will not support the Iran deal. Gives him cover for his base but political wonks are saying this is a signal that the Iran deal is done, votes counted, tallied and ready to go. He would never have released that statement unless it was a done deal and then he releases it during the debate to make sure everyone is looking at the new shiny object over there. But there will be theater yet regarding the deal, after all we demand bread, circus and a little bloodshed mixed in for fun at the coliseum.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 3:18 PM
Comment #397178

Noticed and dismissed Speak.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 3:33 PM
Comment #397179

Wouldn’t expect anything more or less from you RF. But others may find it curious that the deal will seemingly be approved of by Congress by virtue of Schumer’s statement. Of course it’s politics and anything can happen, sorta.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 3:37 PM
Comment #397180

Speak, you nailed it with “sleight of hand”. Why would that impress? It could also be called “sleazy”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 3:42 PM
Comment #397181

I would think that you understand that I am pleased by Schumer’s capitulation. I’d like to think of some baseball analogy but the only one I can think of right now is that President Obama has thrown a strike at every batter that comprises the opposition lineup of his second term, so far. That’s probably as close as I could get, lets see that would be 81 strikes. Yep that seems about right.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 3:43 PM
Comment #397182

I guess the definition is held in the perception. For myself I can only hope that this is what is meant by Schumer’s statement last night.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 3:45 PM
Comment #397183

Congrats Speak on understanding “sleazy”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #397184

RF,
“Leverage” is the key word with Trump. That is exactly what he did when asked about supporting the eventual winner v running as an independent. I don’t think it escaped anyone’s notice that Trump was targeted by the mediators; of course, he is the front runner, so that is not so surprising. Still, the other candidates were not subjected to that kind of aggressive questioning. And no one ever asked Romney about the way he used bankruptcy laws.

To me, the place where Trump absolutely kills his competitors comes when he talks about them begging him for money. He gives money to politicians because he expects access in return. He is quite open about it, and this is a pretty brutal, in-your-face statement the others can not counter. He hasn’t gone nearly as far as he could go.

FOX and others seem intent on pushing Rubio and Fiorina. Whatever. There’s no reason to consider Fiorina a VP slot. She has no constituency, she cannot deliver any states, she has no experience in politics at a national level (other than running for and losing a Senate seat). She’s nothing but an attack dog, and she can attack HRC just as well from the sidelines without being offered a plum position. FOX has and will give her all the time she wants.

Another issue ignored- student loan debt.

Posted by: phx8 at August 7, 2015 3:47 PM
Comment #397185

”. He gives money to politicians because he expects access in return.”

Absolutely.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 3:54 PM
Comment #397186

Some months ago I wrote of my “self-imposed” ban on using the full name phx8. No one remembers or cares so I won’t bother giving my reason.

I find that he and I have some common political and business interests which I would like to discuss with him on occasion. I am certain that it makes not one bit of difference to him and that’s OK.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 4:06 PM
Comment #397187

Speak, does Schumer now belong in the group obama claims are in “common cause” with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard?

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 4:15 PM
Comment #397188

RF, you will need to check with him or Obama about that. I do think it is strange that he agrees with your position on the Iran deal and yet you think it “sleazy” of him? Are you sure you are against the Iran deal? You might be one of those “liberal operatives” we hear about. Let’s see your papers please.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 4:26 PM
Comment #397191

Speak, you nailed it with “sleight of hand”. Why would that impress? It could also be called “sleazy”.
Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 3:42 PM

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 7, 2015 5:14 PM
Comment #397196

Schumer is playing the game; he can vote against the Obama deal and keep the support of his Jewish constituents, and yet know the rest of the Democrats will support Obama. Typical political game; on both sides. This is why the congress has a 17% approval rating.

Regarding “is Schumer compared to the Iranian leaders calling for death to America”? Answer: who cares, it was Obama’s sound bite aimed at Republicans…it was said and now it’s history. Speaks nor any other liberal will ever talk about it again.

Regarding the comments that Speaks has continued say:

Caught her on Hardball right after the debate and Chris Matthews asked her if she was calling Hillary a liar. She insisted that she did not call her a liar but merely said that she lies (WTF?).

I will repost the actual comments from the Matthews interview with Fiorina:

Matthews: “Do you really think that’s a way to engage in a debate? To call your opponent a liar? I’m astounded by that judgment.

Florina: First of all I was very specific about the subjects about which I think she has lied. I didn’t say she lied about everything. I was very specific. Very fact based, actually. You are the one who has made a generalized comment now about her. Not me. Secondly, I will debate her. Excuse me. Secondly, secondly, I will debate her —

Matthews: Go through your list. Go through your list of where she’s lied.

Fiorina: Benghazi, email and server. I will debate her on the issues facing this nation. I will debate her on her positions. I will ask her, for example, how she can possibly continue to defend Planned Parenthood. I will ask her why she continues to say she is a champion of the middle class, while every single proposal she has put forward makes crony capitalism worse and worse and worse which makes income inequality worse. I would ask her why she declared victory in Iraq in 2011. Why she called Bashar al-Assad a positive reformer. Why she thought she could stop Vladimir Putin, a man I have met, with a gimmicky button. I will ask why she got every policy wrong as secretary of state. that’s how I’ll debate her. On the issues.

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 5:52 PM
Comment #397197

Blaine, there is not enough lipstick at the Mary Kay factory to get this to look like you want it to. Fiorina was adamant in saying she did not call Hillary a liar but only said she lies. Conservative doublespeak lunacy at it’s finest.

Posted by: Speak4all at August 7, 2015 5:56 PM
Comment #397199

Instead of doing double duty between the red and green column, let’s keep it on one post. I said:

Comment #397198

You used Scarborough’s name 4 times; is that supposed to mean something. Maybe to you, but not to me. “Liar”, “lied”…word semantics.

If Carly is the token female; then Hillary has presented herself as the token female from the left.

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 6:02 PM

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 6:07 PM
Comment #397201

Fiorina did the impossible; she shut the mouth of a loudmouth. Matthews last words: “thank you Carly Fiorina, I see why you stood out tonight”.

Then you go on to say what Matthews and Scarborough had to say after the interview. Monday morning quarterbacking; if Matthews had anymore to say to Fiorina, why didn’t he say it to her face?

You say she did not call Hillary a liar (using word semantics), but then you went on to explain what Hillary really meant about the Benghazi lie. You answer to this:

The other great part live was when Matthews asked her for the specific lies that were told about Benghazi. Carly just said because she said the attack was due to a video. That the attack was due to a video was the official statement that was supposed to be used and was put out by NSA. They did this for a variety of reasons, not the least of which was the security of their intelligence sources.

So, if I am understanding you correctly; Hillary lied about the video in order to protect the “security of their intelligence sources”. I haven’t heard this one; is this the latest talking points from Hillary?

Since when is Hillary worried about security; isn’t she being investigated by the FBI for breach of classified material?

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 6:30 PM
Comment #397203

I would say the most striking thing is that over 24 million people tuned into a cable presidential primary debate, almost 1 1/2 years before the election. This shows the interest Americans have in the election. People are eager to replace a man who is fundamentally destroying America.

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 6:42 PM
Comment #397206

j2t2

I have met Hillary. She just is not that smart. I am smarter and I suspect you are too. She is that “smart” girl in HS who works really hard at being smart but doesn’t really succeed.

All

Consider the Republican field. We have two Hispanics, a successful black doctor, i.e. a man who made his reputation by something other than racial politics, a successful female CEO, some governors and businessmen.

Now let’s look at the Democrats. They have one old white woman, who has been in a political bubble for more than a quarter century. They have two old white men, again career politicians and one young white man, also a career politician.

Posted by: C&J at August 7, 2015 8:08 PM
Comment #397207

Blaine I was one of the 24 million. I tuned in to see the repub front runner Donald Trump, not because of Fox but in spite of the debate being a Fox propaganda event. Yet I don’t for one second believe the spittle you drool about Obama. The facts just aren’t there to support the myth you attempt to create. IN fact the opposite is true, he has fundamentally saved America during his two terms as President. If only the conservative led Congress was as corrupt as the Obama administration…. oh wait …..the Obama administration isn’t corrupt…..in fact they are angels compared to the GWB or the Reagan administration. If only our Congress could emulate the White House !

Posted by: j2t2 at August 7, 2015 8:16 PM
Comment #397211

The real problem these “debates” brought out is as a nation we are devoid of leadership in this country. Perhaps it is time to repeal the 22nd amendment. Let Obama have a third term.

Trump speaks to issues that are of concern to many people as he pointed out during questioning by the Faux newscasters. Trump stood up to these propagandist but not one other candidate for office had the cajones to do so, well at least not the top tier of repub candidates with the possible exception of Kasich when he didn’t march in lockstep to the gay marriage tune like the other propaganda swilling candidates did.

I have met Hillary. She just is not that smart. I am smarter and I suspect you are too. She is that “smart” girl in HS who works really hard at being smart but doesn’t really succeed.

C&J have you stopped to consider that perhaps she is smarter than you think, that she played you? After all you left her presence feeling as if you were the smarter one, seems she has a gift for politics. Seems to me your team would be all over her if she were as dumbed down as you claim, considering you guys are the party of the anti intellectuals. Instead your team has been trying since 2008 to make her out as something she isn’t. I assume it is the fear that your team can’t field someone capable of beating her with policies and ideas. Those guys at the “debate” didn’t show us anything but their ability to Clintonbash and tell us God wants them to run for office oh and…its Obama’s fault.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 7, 2015 9:31 PM
Comment #397212

Here is a link to a good summary of the “debate” this past Thursday.

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/7/9116127/donald-trump-insurance-regulation

Posted by: j2t2 at August 7, 2015 9:40 PM
Comment #397213

j2t2,
“Those guys at the “debate” didn’t show us anything but their ability to Clintonbash and tell us God wants them to run for office oh and…its Obama’s fault.”

Kasich didn’t do that. He was relentless positive and upbeat. He did not try to build himself up by tearing others down, whether fellow conservatives or Hillary. He expressed conservatives views but indicated a willingness to compromise. While governors from others states- Jindal, Walker, Christie- have seen their state’s economies tank, Kasich has led the OH economy to prosper.

He’s the only candidate that really worries me.

Posted by: phx8 at August 7, 2015 11:40 PM
Comment #397214

I’m glad Obama and Clinton have never tried to build themselves up by tearing others down, lol.

Posted by: Blaine at August 7, 2015 11:57 PM
Comment #397215

Why would Kasich worry you? You make him sound like the perfect candidate, just vote for him. He seems to have done all the things Obama has failed to do.

Posted by: Blaine at August 8, 2015 12:02 AM
Comment #397216

j2t2

Her accomplishments would not bear that out. I am not saying that she is not smart. Had she never met Bill, she would have been a reasonably successful lawyer.

Re ClintonBash - I liked Bill and if you search my comments you will find that I often praised him. As in many successful people, you have a team, Bill and Hillary. But Bill is the lead. Hillary is the junior partner, not ready, never ready to be the lead. It is like Nancy and Ronald Reagan. Or maybe like Penn and Teller.

Posted by: C&J at August 8, 2015 12:19 AM
Comment #397217

Blaine,
While I would not vote for Kasich, I would hold him in much higher regard than many of the others. He does have a couple big flaws.
1) His business experience consists of being a Managing Director for Lehman Brothers. That was the investment bank which collapsed in 2007, setting off the Credit Crunch and Great Recession. That is a huge negative. It doesn’t get much worse.
2) In OH, he did not help the situation with income inequality. He redistributed income with tax cuts, benefiting the rich while everyone else was left treading water.
3) While he is not as extreme about social issues as other candidates, I nevertheless disagree with him on many.
4) He has said nothing to address the problems being caused by Citizens United.
5) As far as I know, he has no ideas on how to address the upcoming generation’s staggering college debt.
6) He has no experience with foreign policy. That isn’t a deal killer, but it certainly isn’t an asset.

Posted by: phx8 at August 8, 2015 1:25 AM
Comment #397220

ph, illogical comments. You voted for Obama. He had no business experience, his beliefs of income equality are based upon taking from those who have and giving to those who depend on government, he is extreme on all social issues, his answer to college debt is to let taxpayers pay for it, he had no foreign experience and it shows. I’m not a Kasich supporter, but he or any other person in the Republican debate would certainly do better than the shrill and abusive Hillary Clinton. But I don’t think we will have to worry about Hillary, the Democratic Party will take care of her. Biden will knock her out.

Posted by: Blaine at August 8, 2015 9:08 AM
Comment #397222

Blaine,
Obama’s experience was in the field of education and public service. He stepped into office during one of the worst financial crashes in American history and turned the economy around. Kasich did well in public service too. But his experience in the private sector was a disaster. So far, everyone is glossing over it because he is so far down in the polls, but if he ever moves up, the issue will have to be faced.

Biden is a good man with a long history of distinguished public service. However, everyone else in both parties who was expected to announce a run for the presidency has already announced. Only Biden has not. Perhaps he could get away with starting later than everyone else, given his name recognition as VP. But I think it is unlikely. There is too much to do prior to running- forming committees, PAC’s, ginning up his own organization and staffing it, entering in each state, setting up a ground game, and so on. A lot of the good people who might have joined him earlier have gone elsewhere by now. It is still possible for Biden to go for it, but it becomes less and less likely with each passing day.

Posted by: phx8 at August 8, 2015 11:04 AM
Comment #397223

“… he is extreme on all social issues…”

Uh huh. And he was elected twice with more than 50% of the vote, and currently has an approval rating of 49%. Apparently the majority of the country is “extreme.”

Posted by: phx8 at August 8, 2015 11:27 AM
Comment #397224
He has no experience with foreign policy. That isn’t a deal killer, but it certainly isn’t an asset.

Kasich served on the House Armed Services Committee for 18 years.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 8, 2015 1:19 PM
Comment #397225
Obama’s experience was in the field of education and public service. He stepped into office during one of the worst financial crashes in American history and turned the economy around.

Education??? You aren’t talking about a “constitutional scholar”, I hope.

Public service??? A Jessie Jackson wana be. A hustler and shyster community organizer.

The BLS reports that 93,770,000 people (16 and older) were neither employed last month nor had made specific efforts to find work in the prior four weeks.

The number of people outside the workforce in July increased 144,000 over June’s record when 93,626,000 were not in the workforce.

(CNSNews.com) - A record 93,770,000 Americans were not in the American labor force last month, and the labor force participation rate remained at 62.6 percent, exactly where it was in June — a 38-year low, the Labor Department reported on Friday.
According to the BLS, 56,209,000 women aged 16 and older were not participating in the workforce in July, besting April’s record of 56,167,000 women who were neither employed nor had made a specific effort to find work in the four weeks prior.

July’s figures represented an uptick of 124,000 over June’s level of 56,085,000 women who were out of the workforce.

All of the employment gains among women since the recession hit in December 2007 have been taken by foreigners, even at a time when the numbers of U.S.-born women surged more than 600,000, according to new federal statistics.

The jobs data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed gains in the “employment level” among “foreign born women” and losses among “native born women.”

Obama is trying to put coal companies out of business. That means union workers laid off.

If Obama has been so good for the economy; why has the concern for the economy rated top or next to top for the entire time Obama has been in office? You would think, at some point in his presidency that the American people would believe the economy was good…but not so. Federal debt can be lumped in with the economy. Notice how the American people classify threats:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/139385/Federal-Debt-Terrorism-Considered-Top-Threats.aspx

Posted by: Blaine at August 8, 2015 4:43 PM
Comment #397226

A Gallup poll from June 2010 is not very relevant today Blaine.

However, you are correct, for average working Americans the economy stinks.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 8, 2015 6:23 PM
Comment #397227

Royal, you’re correct, but the numbers have not changed much.

Posted by: Blaine at August 8, 2015 6:42 PM
Comment #397228

So let me get this straight, Conservatives tell us it is the businessman that creates jobs yet they blame Obama when jobs aren’t created. Conservatives tell us if only taxes are lower the “job creators” would create jobs. So Congress along with Obama lowers taxes as a third of the recovery bill yet jobs aren’t created to their satisfaction and the debt they tell us is the biggest threat to the country is increased!

Conservatives, Kansas, look at the drain on the economy from the conservative utopia of Kansas. Look at the poor jobs Walker and Christie have done trashing their states when compared to the states around them. If this wasn’t done intentionally then we must all agree that conservatives economics don’t work and are a drain on the economy of this country. So when do you guys stop complaining about Obama and admit the very conservatives you elected are the problem.

Both at the state and federal level. What have the repubs/conservatives in Congress done except spread myths and misinformation, try to repeal Obabmacare and try to blame Obamacare for jobs not being created as they squash every opportunity to create jobs though infrastructure.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 8, 2015 7:43 PM
Comment #397229

” And he was elected twice with more than 50% of the vote, and currently has an approval rating of 49%. Apparently the majority of the country is “extreme.”

Shows you are not thinking too clearly. Only about a quarter of the citizens vote. Think 15-20% instead of 50%. Your math is terrible.

Posted by: tom humes at August 8, 2015 7:55 PM
Comment #397230
Her accomplishments would not bear that out.

When compared to your teams Fiorina she is a genius C&J. While Fiornia was running a company into the ground and making herself rich in the process Clinton was on the board of a successful company, a tireless servant on the people working as a Senator and Secretary of State as well as helping people all over the globe with her husband amongst other endevors. Now you may want to try to sell the conservative myth that she isn’t accomplished but watch out C&J your best is the brother of a failed president and son of a one term president. The rest of the pack can’t even top that, with the exception of Kasich and Trump.

Kasich didn’t do that. He was relentless positive and upbeat. He did not try to build himself up by tearing others down,

phx8 I agree with you Kasich did set himself apart from the crowd at the main event.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 8, 2015 8:01 PM
Comment #397231

j2t2

Here is a list of Hillary’s achievements as Secretary of State.

1. Lots of travel.
2.

We could make a similarly long list of her term as senator.

Re Kasich - I like him. Liberals claim to like him. Were he nominated, they would hate him and call him an extremist.

Posted by: C&J at August 8, 2015 8:22 PM
Comment #397232

Even if that were true C&J it is still a longer list than than Fiornia, and Carson, and Jindal, and Perry, and Christie, and Walker and Cruz, and Bush, and Rubio and Huckabee and Paul so why do you continue with this ruse?

Not only that C&J you make travel sound like a bad thing. As the Secretary of State it was her responsibility to carry out the foreign policy of the administration, would you have her stay home to do that? She does hold the record for the most countries visited but it was Condolezza Rice that traveled the most miles so it seems when it comes to efficiency your team loses again.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 8, 2015 10:18 PM
Comment #397233
Re Kasich - I like him. Liberals claim to like him. Were he nominated, they would hate him and call him an extremist.

If he made it! By the time he was done pandering to the conservatives he probably would be an extremist as the repubs have became a far right party lately.

We could make a similarly long list of her term as senator.

Even if that were true C&J it is still a longer list than than Fiornia, and Carson, and Jindal, and Perry, and Christie, and Walker and Cruz, and Bush, and Rubio and Huckabee and Paul so why do you continue with this ruse? Oh wait Paul, Cruz and Rubio can have “shut down the government costing taxpayers billions” on the list , but so what.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 8, 2015 10:25 PM
Comment #397234

J2t2

Hillary has got almost nothing. She is an empty resume. She won the Senate by virtue of his husband’s election team. After election, she seemed to work hard and accomplished about as much as a freshman senator, i.e. she passed but w/o distinction. She then ran unsuccessfully for the presidential nomination. The guy who won appointed her Secretary of State, probably to get her off his back. She did a reasonable job as Secretary of State, but she was not in the top half.

The Republicans have a strong field. If Hillary was to be in that pack, she would fall around the middle, much like she does more generally.

Hillary is “qualified” to be president the way that I am “qualified” to play major league baseball. I can swing a bat and run the bases, but you would not want me on your time. Hillary can make speeches, go to rallies & sit in chairs. But she really is not the best choice among 300+ million Americans.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 9:19 AM
Comment #397235

Thinking a bit farther - imagine Hillary as a Republican and Fiorina as a Democrat. You certainly would have a much better arguments for Fiorina. Hillary just is not a good candidate. She would not be in the race at all if not for her husband and the Clinton network.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 9:26 AM
Comment #397236

C&J, you guys have cried wolf so many times over Hillary, you have accused her of everything but being good. Yet she has come out stronger after proving your team wrong each and every time. So it can be only two things, you are wrong or you have an agenda because she can win the election. You guys have struck out every time you were at the Hillary plate.

You have lost this game for two reasons, you have 17 candidates and only Trump and Kasich to show for it. I mean the same thing you say about Clinton is the best that could be said about any of the 15 candidates fielded by the repubs. Secondly your team has lost all credibility on the issue with all the false claims and such over the years. You are now fielding a team that isn’t any better qualified, devoid of new ideas and full of myths and misinformation. They are not running on issues they are running on empty.

The fact you are trying to compare Fiorina to Clinton is proof of this. She is the bat boy not the home run hitter, the temporary respite from the field of sluggardly candidates for your team. Hell her claim to fame is she lost 30,000 American jobs the last time she pitched.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 9, 2015 10:58 AM
Comment #397237

FOX is pushing Fiorina for one reason and one reason only: as a female, she can be particularly nasty when she attacks HRC.

Fiorina’s record as a CEO at HP was horrendous. Her ill-advised takeover of Compaq- and she was DIRECTLY responsible for pushing it through- resulted in a 50% loss of value of the stock, and 30,000 employees lost their jobs. When she announced her resignation, HP stock jumped 7% UP in just one day! That was an increase in value of $3 billion dollars in just one day, just for her going away. That was the judgment of the equity market, btw, not a political one. As a CEO, she was a disaster.

She followed that with a run for the Senate. She lost by 10 points.

Her polling has remained in the low single digits because she has a record of failure at high levels and no national constituency. She brings nothing to the table as a potential VP, literally nothing, unless one counts her being female.

Of course, the GOP does have more than one presidential candidate rejecting abortion for women even if the life of the woman is endangered, and with the War on Women in full view, the GOP is desperate for a fig leaf.

Notice I did not even mention Trump.

D’Oh! I mentioned Trump after all! Ahh! I did it again!

Posted by: phx8 at August 9, 2015 11:05 AM
Comment #397238

Fiorina will be a fine campaign co-chair for Walker/Bush/Kasich/Rubio. She’ll be the attack dog that will appear on the Sunday Morning shows when the nominees are busy elsewhere campaigning door-to-door. That is it. She has nothing else to look forward to over the next year.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 9, 2015 11:25 AM
Comment #397239

I know the left likes to use a lot of liberal talking points to bash Republican candidates; but in all seriousness, the Republican’s have created an interesting list of candidates. On the other hand , what do the Democratics have, a socialist/communist who doesn’t have a prayer, and an old white woman, who has the personality of a wet sock. The left wants to accuse Republicans of going after Hillary, but it is the Obama administration/FBI who are investigating her. Hillary did this to herself. Instead of coming clean on everything, she has chosen to allow the courts to force her to release documents…so every Friday we see a document dump. All this does is prolong her agony. People who have worked for Hillary, have complained about her shrill abusive voice. I can’t imagine her as the president. I don’t think she would make a good manager at McDonald’s.

Posted by: Blaine at August 9, 2015 1:05 PM
Comment #397240

Blaine,
The NYT retracted the story about a criminal investigation of HRC. As for the fake e-mail server, there is still no evidence of anything illegal and the e-mails are being released as fast as they can be reviewed for classified information.

Can’t imagine Hillary as President? Try harder. It’s a lock.


The GOP has a long list of candidates precisely because they are so weak- Donald Trump has been leading the pack. We have another Bush, a bunch of one-term Senators and Governors, and a couple vanity candidates.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Kasich is the only one who worries me. He has his vulnerabilities, but he has some impressive strengths, too. At some point conservatives are going to need to get over the attack and engage in name-calling. It didn’t work in 2008 or 2012.

It did work in 2004, when Bush swiftboated Kerry, openly mocked his Bronze Star and Purple Heart, and campaigned against gays. The relentless need to crank out fake scandals won’t work this time. The demographics are too strongly aligned against the GOP base.

And that is why Kasich worries me. He isn’t negative. He doesn’t try to build himself up by tearing others down. He’s positive, optimistic, and he is a two-term governor with a 55% approval rating in the swing state of OH, not to mention impressive experience in the House.

With the other GOP candidates, it is only a question of how much they will lose by, and everyone knows it.

Posted by: phx8 at August 9, 2015 1:38 PM
Comment #397241

I have accused her of being mediocre. Beyond that, I believe that she violated security policy by using her own email. She was an employee of the State Department and subject to its rules.

I keep on telling you that my main objection to Hillary is her lack of distinction. Can you please list what she did as Secretary of State or Senator from New York that you consider remarkable, i.e. above what we would expect from a normal senator or a normal Secretary of State?

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 1:46 PM
Comment #397242

I finally got around to watching the debate this morning. I used to think Scott Walker was a potent threat to the Queen of Boredom running for Democratic nomination, but wow does Scott Walker have Hilary Clinton beat in that regard. He still has the resume to do well, but he needs to sharpen his public speaking skills.

Speaking of public speaking skills, I was impressed with Rubio. I don’t think I’d ever seen him like that before. Generally, I give people with executive experience (Bush, Walker & Kasich) and edge, but Rubio is definitely holding his own. But ultimately I have to agree, it’s Kasich that scares me too. He really could beat HRC, although I’d never vote for him. It is good that Bush & Trump are sucking a lot of the oxygen he needs to exist (Walker’s supporters aren’t Kasich’s base).

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 9, 2015 1:57 PM
Comment #397243

I like Rubio. But he is not ready yet. I always thought that Bill Clinton was a good president who could have been a great one had be “seasoned” for another 4-8 years. Rubio currently has the kind of experience that Barack Obama had. We do not want to go that route again, even if it is on the other side.

More people have potential than are able to realize it. Hillary has had a very long time to show what she could do. She has failed to excel.

Kasich could be a good president, appealing to both sides. But if he goes into an election with Hillary, the Clinton machine will trash him good. Hillary’s strategy is NOT to make herself look good. Her strategy is to make other candidates look bad and so unacceptable. She will win by default, but win dirty and by a small margin, like Obama did in 2012.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 2:22 PM
Comment #397244

Jack,

Hey Jack, good to have you back.

“Beyond that, I believe that she violated security policy by using her own email.”

Except wasn’t that rule changes after she left office? Didn’t Colin Powell use his own e-mail?

“I keep on telling you that my main objection to Hillary is her lack of distinction.”

If this is the criteria you choose, what the hell have any one of your guys done of any distinction?

I mean, other than Trump, who has made and lost fortunes, hosed his investors and his employees more than once, and is in general an all around a-hole, what have the current crop of also rans done to distinguish themselves.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at August 9, 2015 2:25 PM
Comment #397245

Using a private server was perfectly legal at the time HRC did so.

As Secretary of State, HRC improved foreign relations right across the board. Under her we saw US favorability ratings go up with every major country in the world except Israel and Pakistan (which never forgave us for killing Bin Laden.) She successfully executed policy for the Obama administration, which is what the Secretary of State is supposed to do.

Posted by: phx8 at August 9, 2015 2:34 PM
Comment #397246

Rocky & Phx8

If a State Department employee used personal email for a lot of business, he/she would be reprimanded and persistent use would make you lose your security clearance. It has been part of the required security briefing for at least ten years. When Colin Powell was SecState the State email system didn’t really work and most officers did not have access to it. By 2009, it had become very good.

Beyond that, sending anything that could be classified on a non-secure server (and State defines that as any private server) is a potential security violation.

As far as I know (and I know a lot about this) everybody uses some personal email for some official business as an expedient but nobody (except evidently Hillary) uses personal email instead of official email. It violates procedures and risks violating law. It also makes it difficult or impossible for an inspector to properly judge your activities. Hillary knew this and I suspect that she set up a private server with this goal in mind.

I doubt she “broke laws” because she is good at playing right to the lines. But the government ethics course, which all senior officers must take each year, tells that anything that appears to be dishonest should be avoided.

IMO we have two possibilities. Either Hillary knowingly chose to violate security procedures in doing her job or she was so inconsequential to the actual running of the Department that she could safely use her personal email.

Phx8

Re our image - Russia, China, Iran - Are we better off today than we were in 2008? Did we respond well to the Arab spring? Do our NATO allies have more or less confidence in our resolve than they did in 2008? We were in a generally bad place in 2008. We are not in a fundamentally better place today. We ended our war in Iraq in a fairly unsuccessful way. Afghanistan is still up in the air. The lack of these irritants have taken some of it out of the headlines, but if you look at international affairs as a multidimensional chessboard, our position is not better. This is a little surprising, given where we started.

This is not all Hillary’s fault. Most of it is not her fault. But there is also no cause to praise.

The big change has been the development of fracking, which has changed the energy equation and made the Middle East and Russia less potent. That is a great opportunity, so far not much used.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 3:59 PM
Comment #397247

The Clintons have always worked from the premise that if you delay or push things off until another day; eventually people will forget. Hillary knew exactly what she was doing by using her own server. She wanted to hide her dealings. I have always believed that when push comes to shove and someone is looking at prison time for destroying public records, copies will mysteriously be found. These people are not stupid; someone has copies of the missing or “deleted” emails. And they will eventually come out. To this, Hillary and her minions will say, “old news” or “who cares”. IMHO, Hillary is an evil person. What woman would put up with the philandering of a pervert like Bill Clinton. There is no love loss between them; it’s simply a marriage of convenience. It’s a shame that she would have to spend her who life with a pig, just for her own political ambitions. It wouldn’t surprise me if Bill nixed his own wife’s ambitions. Why would he want to put himself back under the microscope of living in the White House?

Regarding Hillary, she has nothing on her resume. Only a name. And she would never have been SOC, had a deal with Obama not been reached. She’s a dinosaur. Talk about a crazy old white woman with her finger on the trigger. Scary thought…

It’s hilarious to even hear the left talk about how Hillary has improved relations with foreign countries. I keep thing of the crazy old white woman with the Russian “reset button”, talk about a complete disaster. Can you imagine what was said about her after she left the room? Arab nations have absolutely no respect for women; can you imagine the hooting and laughing at the Obama administration for even sending that shrill old woman to negotiate with these Muslims? If the terrorists and countries that are potentially our enemies have no respect or fear for Obama and his red lines in the sand; what would they think of Hillary in the hot seat?

Posted by: Blaine at August 9, 2015 4:53 PM
Comment #397248

ph said:

Blaine, The NYT retracted the story about a criminal investigation of HRC. As for the fake e-mail server, there is still no evidence of anything illegal and the e-mails are being released as fast as they can be reviewed for classified information.

The retraction occurred only after the Clinton machine threatened the Old Grey Lady. But it doesn’t change the fact that:”Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.”

You might want to read the latest story from the Times; written just yesterday and dealing with what happened and the consequences of Hillary Clinton’s actions:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/us/hillary-clinton-emails-take-long-path-to-controversy.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

You might want to take the time to read the article. Democrat Elijah Cummings, certainly no supporter of Republicans, concludes the article:

The committee’s top Democrat, Representative Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, said his concern has always been that the Benghazi inquiry — which he said comes on top of “seven or eight” investigations already conducted — would become a tool for Republicans who want to bash Mrs. Clinton. He said he believed that to a considerable degree, that is what has happened. “We have basically an unlimited budget to go after Hillary Clinton,” he said.

But Mr. Cummings noted that the former secretary of state has herself said it was a mistake to use only the private email, and said he agreed that it was “inappropriate.”

“I think it’s very important that the public knows what’s going on with regard to government,” he said. “I think the public should have access to that information, period.”


Posted by: Blaine at August 9, 2015 5:33 PM
Comment #397253

Blaine,
Has it occurred to you that the tactics you use to smear Obama and Clinton don’t work? If, at, some point, there is proof of breaking the law and committing an illegal act, then let me know. Let’s see an indictment, trial, and conviction. In the meantime, it’s just the same old snooze rest- wash, rinse, repeat.

Conservatives have been playing this game for a long time, and now, it amounts to nothing more than crying ‘wolf.’ Conservatives accused Obama of all kinds of things. We are near the end of the second term, and he has been one of the most successful presidents in history. And you can thrown the same kind of accusations against Hillary as you did against Obama, and guess what? Near the end of her second term, you will still be doing it.

Here’s a suggestion. Instead of trying to tear her down, why not try to build someone else up? See if it can be done with words not involving cutting, bombing, reducing, a birth certificate, hoax, conspiracy, building a bigger wall, or deporting. Suggestion: don’t use the phrase ‘unborn babies’ (I always laugh when I hear that one-go to the supermarket and ask for one carton of a dozen ‘unborn chickens’ and see what happens!).

Ultimately, this constant tearing down and negativism will kill the GOP. It’s not a coincidence that Donald Trump soared to the top of the polls. Now, here you are. A $10 billion dollar chicken has come home to roost, and he’s sitting on top of the polls.

One funny thing about Trump. He’s being attacked for supposedly putting down Megyn Kelly for a hormonal issue. It’s the oddest thing. I never thought for a second Trump was accusing her of what some conservatives are suggesting. Trump has said so many things that were worse, even during that same interview, and yet, he is being pilloried for something I don’t think he ever implied.

Notice how Fiorina was sent in there to attack? That’s her new role for the GOP. Let’s see if anyone buys it.

Posted by: phx8 at August 9, 2015 7:57 PM
Comment #397256

C&J, what you have attempted to do is tell us Fiorina is much superior to Clinton, yet have failed to do so. Fiorina seems to have accomplished, according to you, the feat of debating with Rick Perry and the rest of the bottom feeders in the repub race and magically showing us something that exists only in the minds of the wishful thinking repubs hoping like hell someone, anyone, emerges from this mess of a primary with a chance at winning the game. Hell you had her winning a debate with Clinton that didn’t happen!

This failure to spin the story has resulted in your Clinton bashing and downplaying of her abilities. You have attempted to bring her down to the level of your team and IMHO failed to do so. You are going negative because you cannot go positive with the team you have.

Lets face it guys the problem here is much bigger than you realize, the conservatives simply don’t have a plan or, it appears, a clue. The failure of conservative led states to keep up with their neighbors (such as Walker and Brownback) have proved that your plans don’t work. Admit it and lets move on. You had you way you struck out.

Some of the other contestants at the “debate” shut down the government and proved they were unworthy of a leadership position as they continued to attempt to thwart Obamacare and ultimately had to concede they were wro…. oh wait they don’t have the character for that do they. Your favorite player was directly responsible for the loss of 30,000 American jobs and you treat her as worthy of a leadership position all because she won the “debate” with the likes of Jindal and Perry!

At the later “debate” the contestants were fed Clinton bashing questions for crying out loud! All but Kasich ate it up. The “debate” seemed to focus on Clinton bashing instead of the contestants themselves. What is wrong with your team C&J? Where are the ideas you claim these guys have? How can you critique Hillary when with 17 contestants only 1 seems to be real enough to even bother with?

It isn’t Fiorina BTW, as she has nothing to offer either C&J, stop being so negative on Clinton when through the discovery process we here at WB have just went through on this thread have found your team to be lacking, I think we can all see that.

My God man for the sake of the country your team needs to get serious about this. Stop with all the Clintonbashing and start with weeding out the idiots. Start bringing something to the table other than negativity. Offer the country the conservative plan to “restore greatness”, don’t just yap about it as if you had a plan. Or stand back and let someone else do it as you finger point and nay say.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 9, 2015 8:15 PM
Comment #397257

j2t2

Fiorina earned her way up. She has potential. Hillary HAD potential, but now we see what she could do … or not.

I would like to see her debate Clinton. I watched her this morning. Really smart and articulate. Not like that angry, wooden Hillary show.

I am not bashing Hillary anymore than you all bash Republican candidates. In fact, I am very gentle with her. I am not attacking her; just pointing out that she is not particularly well-qualified. If we put all the candidates Republican and Democrat in one group, instead of putting them in by party, Hillary would fall about in the middle. In fact, if you didn’t know any of the history, you would put Bernie about Hillary.

Posted by: C&J at August 9, 2015 8:41 PM
Comment #397258

Oh please C&J setting the bar this low screams “we have nothing to offer”. So instead you continue to offer the negativity that comes with nothing to offer. The problem is your team won’t let Fiorina play in the big leagues will they? So instead you have to resort to the negative Clinton bashing instead. That makes it easier to make these unfounded claims though I guess.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 9, 2015 11:54 PM
Comment #397261

j2t2

I am just not impressed by Hillary. I do not think she is the kind of person Democrats would nominate absent the Clinton machine.

Let me admit that I just never liked Hillary. I met her three times and worked on visits for her. Most politicians are charming and you can see why people like them, even if you do not. Hillary has none of this. She always seems like she is lecturing people she thinks are less intelligent than she is. Yet she is not brilliant. She doesn’t have Bill’s charisma or ability to understand political relationships. I am sure he is coaching her on this, but it is like trying to substitute a less talented quarterback for the big star. The team can still play, but there is something wrong.

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2015 7:45 AM
Comment #397262

Let me clarify. She is not unqualified. She is just not very qualified. This is why it is such an odd thing to have her running. Think of how effectively Obama dispatched her. All those “loyal” supporters just jumped off. This time, the Clinton machine was more careful to choke off any credible opposition, but even you must admit that few people love Hillary. In fact, I have seen DEMOCRATS saying that Hillary is not really their choice but they like her better than Republicans. That is not much of an endorsement. “I don’t much like you, but I figure I might not be able to do better.”

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2015 7:50 AM
Comment #397263

Well we certainly have come a long ways haven’t we C&J. After blustering about Fiorina and bemoaning Clinton as being in hiding fearful of Fiorina we have come to she isn’t as good as Bill! Which of course is exactly what can be said of all 17 candidates running for the GOP spot. Your personal reasons for feeling ‘talked down to” by a women may be more to do with other issues that you have conveyed upon Hillary, who was the leader, after all, that your efforts were supporting.

Could there have been a bit of ego involved in this? What with you not liking her politics and all it may be tough to judge her fairly as she seems to be just as good at debates and other public appearances as Fiorina yet you don’t have an axe to grind with Fiorina. Perhaps if you have to work for her and she “talks down” to you your eyes will open and you may see that the difference if there is one is in your head.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 10, 2015 9:24 AM
Comment #397268

j2t2

IMO Fiorina is much better than Hillary. She is very articulate and has a command of the facts that Hillary seems to lack. You can try to bring in the bogus sexism if you want, but it obviously does not apply, since we are talking about two women.

I do not like Hillary’s politics. It has nothing to do with her talking down. I indeed do not find her charming. We are willing to forgive Bill some of his politics, since he is charming.

Hillary has never “talked down” to me personally. I do not know her that well. I have observed her closely, however, and how she and her staff treats others. I did not like that.

I also object to the high-handed way she treats security procedures. I am amazed that she can treat it so cavalierly. Most of us care more about integrity than she evidently does. I do not like the idea that she would put herself above her country. She was an employee of the State Department and subject to its rules. In America we believe in the rule of law and not the rule of ego. I dislike it that Hillary disagrees in her behavior if not her rhetoric.

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2015 6:29 PM
Comment #397269

So you are willing to be charmed C&J! That is all it takes, a smooth talker like Fiorina gets the start over a more experienced, qualified pitcher because she is a smooth talker? Look Carly has no more command of any “facts” than someone who has been there and done that. That is just you being talked into believing this to be true. Clinton is more familiar to all of us due to the decades long witch hunt the repubs/conservatives have subjected her to.

Many of you guys have bought into the smooth talkers and their schemes to make Clinton into something she isn’t. It is the fear and hatred built up in your team that causes Clinton to be mentioned so many times in the repub “debate”despite the real issue being what is the difference between the repub candidates. Because they are so bankrupt when it comes to ideas they have no choice but to invoke the Clinton bell so the movement followers start salivating.

That is why I say you guys set the bar so low for Fiorina C&J. All she has to do is mention Clinton a few times to be deemed articulate and in command ….seriously! in command of the …list of non scandals your team has tried to create over the years!!! In the mean time those that have listened to the smooth talkers start salivating and lose perspective.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 10, 2015 7:59 PM
Comment #397273

Fiorina showed real intelligence and grasp of the issues. I saw her a few times now. She is really sharp. She actually is not very charming. She makes it on her intelligence. Hillary has neither charm nor that quick intelligence.

I would repeat, it is not a hatred of Hillary or a fear. It is simply that she is not brilliant and would not be in the race at all except for his husband’s presidency and their continued political machine, which is a type of crony capitalism.

You guys have made her into something she isn’t. She just is not that good. What we have is an intelligent, but not brilliant woman, w/o the usual political abilities of a successful leader.

My own opinion is that Fiorina might make a good VP. It would give her a chance at the political apprenticeship. Political leadership is not the same as private sector leadership. I would like to see if she is up to that task. Hillary, on the other hand, has already has her “training” and it is clear that they is not up the task.

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2015 9:02 PM
Comment #397274

And we don’t want to become more like Argentina. They tend to let the wives take the place of their husbands as president. We had Isabel Peron and now there is Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. It doesn’t work out well.

Of course, we had George Wallace get is wife Lurleen elected when he was no longer eligible, but she died soon after.

Posted by: C&J at August 10, 2015 9:09 PM
Post a comment