keenobserver
Worshipped Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2015
- Posts
- 8,550
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 13,945
- Points
- 433
- Location
- east coast usa
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
THIS is what will sink her.
THIS is what will sink her.
Because she is a woman, I believe the RNC has designated Carly as the attack dog to go after Hillary (no claims of sexism when a woman harshly criticizes another woman). By declaring her candidacy, Carly gains media attention for her role as RNC attack dog (even if she is not a viable candidate).
As a presidential candidate, I agree with you. Nobody wants to elect an angry, disagreeable person (of either gender). They always say you vote for the person you would want to have a beer with.I don't think she can win: the U.S. is still too sexist to elect a woman who seems so angry.
I'm not too sure. In 2008 I feel that a number of people who voted for McCain did so because of Palin. They seem to be the ones who still think what she says is smart and important. A great deal of people didn't vote for him because of his VP pick. I feel that because of that, who is picked to be VP now is more important.As a presidential candidate, I agree with you. Nobody wants to elect an angry, disagreeable person (of either gender). They always say you vote for the person you would want to have a beer with.
But Carly is really campaigning for Vice President. The role of VP during a campaign is to be the attack dog so that the presidential candidate can remain above it all and look presidential. I have already resigned myself to the fact that Carly will be the the VP candidate for the GOP. They would be foolish not to use her in that way. People vote for the top of the ticket - not based on the VP candidate. In the position of VP, Carly's anger will be an asset, not a liability.
In my opinion the Palin effect is still influencing McCain. He went from being a figure that even most Democrats could see themselves voting for to being the opposite. As the GOP base became more enamored of the Palin type McCain saw that in order to have a future in politics one either needed to follow suit or risk being eliminated.I don't disagree with any of those comments about Sarah Palin. She was (and is) a polarizing figure. In 2008, her persona eclipsed John McCain (a big no-no for the VP candidate), so that contributed to folks voting for/against her instead of the person at the top of the ticket. I contend that Palin was a rare exception in that regard.
I guess it remains to be seen if Fiorina becomes that polarizing/significant in this election cycle. It's hard for me to imagine anyone making a movie about Carly (i.e. Game Change).
http://www.hbo.com/movies/game-change
Fiorina was a failure as a CEO; Trump's ventures barely had more hits than misses; Carson's high-profile surgeries all resulted in deaths. From the way they tout themselves, you wouldn't know how unsuccessful they all are. Jeb Bush is turning out to be a disappointment (he's very passive against Trump), but at least he's not claiming to be something he's not.
Fiorina was a failure as a CEO; Trump's ventures barely had more hits than misses; Carson's high-profile surgeries all resulted in deaths. From the way they tout themselves, you wouldn't know how unsuccessful they all are. Jeb Bush is turning out to be a disappointment (he's very passive against Trump), but at least he's not claiming to be something he's not.