Just watched Chris Wallace's short segment with Carly Fiorina on FNS.
I make no secret, she and Rubio are my current two choices for the GOP nomination (with the fading Walker as my 3rd choice), but today I wasn't thrilled with 2 of her answers to Wallace.
On the question about the "fact checking" of the CMP planned parenthood videos, I think her answer is fine for a low information voter, but I don't think she's harmed by saying:
"I stand it. The video is clear in what is described and what is shown, and I challenge anyone, especially Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to watch the actual video to defend these practices. Period."
When confronted with the "PP does all these other wonderful things, do you NOT want women to get these essential services?" or some-such gibberish, I'd just like this simple answer:
"There are thousands of women health services across this country who can, and do, perform these services. What I would like to see is the $500 million of taxpayer money that goes to Planned Parenthood, and, make no mistake, allows them to remain the nation's largest abortion mill, instead go to those other women's health services who provide only services that serve the woman's health and doesn't murder an unborn son or daughter."
Much more difficult for her is going to be the defense of her record at HP. Everyone wants to point to Romney and say that even acknowledged outstanding business leaders (and there can be no doubt that Romney was this) can't be elected because the Dems will use their tenure as a cudgel against them. This line of thinking would eliminate every businessperson who has ever made any tough decisions from pursuing public office, and is wrong headed and should be resisted. I actually think this is the entire political class (not just Dems) likes this lien of reasoning, for obvious reasons.
I think Romney was so dumbfounded by it that he let the attacks against him stand. The Romney campaign did many things to lose the election, but his business experience had less to do with it than the 47% remark and trying to coast after he cleaned Obama's clock in debate #1.
That aside, Carly has to make a more spirited defense of her record as CEO of HP. The core charge seems to be that HP's stock lost value, and she responds, correctly, that most tech companies stock lost value in the tech bust that wasn't recovered for 15 years. Then they point to the firing, and she needs to turn this into a positive.
One thing the business world does that the public world does not, is hold people accountable when they don't live up to expectations. I'd like to see Carly just flat out say tat she fought the board at HP and the board won and showed her the door. That's the way it works in the business world. Even if you do great things, where she can weave in her standard awesome growth things she did for HP, if you don't satisfy your management, you get fired.
That's incredibly different from the government, where incompetence seems to get you promoted, or at least protected, in the case of say...Hillary Clinton.
Say that having experienced this, she would bring that worldview to a Fiorina Administration. Unlike President Obama, if you fail to deliver services to Veterans, if 4 Americans, including an Ambassador, are murdered on your watch, if you're using the tax power of the United States to harass opposition in a Fiorina administration, you are going to be called to answer for that by President Fiorina and you are going to be fired, just like she was.
Now, get me my bumper sticker before I switch to Rubio.
Ben Carson says:
