GOProud Endorses Carly!
GOProud joins this blog in endorsing Carly Fiorina for the United States Senate. While we have not yet made it official (well, my enthusiasm should have made it obvious), I have long since convinced Bruce that we should back my gal.
Bruce agreed with me that Carly was the best candidate on the key issues facing our country at this time, notably out-of-control federal spending. Like Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Senator who has also endorsed the former Silicon Valley executive, Fiorina wants to hold the line on federal spending and reduce regulation which chokes private industry.
Echoing those views, Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud said that unlike her leading rival for the GOP nomination, ”Fiorina has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge; supports a strong, confident foreign policy; and will defend our 2nd Amendment rights.”
Earlier this spring, GOP proud ran an ad questioning that rival’s commitment to fiscal conservatism:
LaSalvia concluded, “GOProud enthusiastically endorses Carly Fiorina for US Senate and urges our members and allies to support her conservative campaign”.
21 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
I actually looked up Fiorina a bit, and was hit by two things. First the highest-rated comment on Hot Air: The Movie:
After which, I found this in her Wikipedia article:
Head, meet desk. Desk, meet head.
I went further, and also found this:
The Hot Air movie makes out that her spell as CEO at Hewlett-Packard was entirely successful, but then that’s one of those circumstances where I add “but then it would say that”. InfoWorld on the other hand called her the “anti-Steve Jobs“.
If Fiorina does win, part of me is relishing the day I can respond to “Is this the change you expected?” with “Is this how you wanted to get things done?”. Probably too small for me to actually do it, but a part of me nonetheless.
Comment by Serenity — June 2, 2010 @ 4:56 pm - June 2, 2010
I wonder if GOProud will be able to find someone who supports gay rights to endorse.
Comment by Houndentenor — June 2, 2010 @ 5:30 pm - June 2, 2010
I wonder if Houndentenor will ever try to understand what GOProud is trying to accomplish and why what some define as gay rights are at odds with conservative principles (without being anti-gay).
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — June 2, 2010 @ 5:53 pm - June 2, 2010
Serenity, trying to understand your point. Seems you’ve been cut and pasting liberal points of attack to avoid discussing the issues at stake in this race.
Carly may have been an imperfect CEO, but Barbara Boxer is a failed Senator.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — June 2, 2010 @ 5:55 pm - June 2, 2010
Carly Fiorina was the CEO of a major multibillion-dollar company with hundreds of thousands of employees.
Barack Obama was a two-bit “community organizer” who never managed people, never ran a business of any sort, and barely held a job outside of welfare agitation and government.
In short, Carly Fiorina blew past Obama on the ladder of success about twenty or so years ago. But since you base your evaluation of whether or not someone is fit on factors such as skin color rather than actual competence, you don’t really care, do you?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 2, 2010 @ 6:13 pm - June 2, 2010
@B. Daniel Blatt: Well I was sort of implying that if California’s economy were to go the same way Hewlett-Packard went under Carly Fiorina, then you may end up regretting your support for her.
[Carly Fiorina left HP in sound financial shape. California's economy already is going belly-up and Carly has never previously held political office in the state. Do you regret your support for Obama when the economy hasn't create the jobs he promised us it would? You going to join me in tying Boxer to the (once-)Golden State's current economic mess?]
Also, I know how much you hate Barbara Boxer, but outside the GayPatriot echo chamber she’s still polling pretty well against all GOP contenders. So it may be worth detailing exactly what makes Boxer a ‘failed senator’ in your opinion so I can see what we’re debating here.
[Huh, have you seen the polls? Sure, she's leading her Republican challengers, but it's a Democratic state that cast 60% of its votes for Barack Obama and where his approval ratings are still above water, but she constantly polls below 50%, usually below 45% and well behind Obama. And below 50% is considered a danger sign for an incumbent. And this one's running in a state where the demographics favor her and where all but one of her opponents is unknown, having never run a statewide campaign.
GayPatriot echo chamber, huh? Most political prognosticators have been rating this a competitive race and noting how poorly Mrs. Boxer is faring.
If you don't know why I consider Ma'am a failed Senator, you haven't been reading this blog. It's all in the archives. I hate to keep repeating myself. But please familiarize yourself with our ideas before weighing in on this blog--Dan]
@North Dallas Thirty: When did I mention Barack Obama? I’d rather stay on topic if it’s all the same with you.
Comment by Serenity — June 2, 2010 @ 7:41 pm - June 2, 2010
this might make you feel good,
ahh McDonald’s….
http://www.chicagopride.com/news/article.cfm/articleid/11065969
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — June 2, 2010 @ 9:09 pm - June 2, 2010
That was pretty gay alright.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 2, 2010 @ 9:50 pm - June 2, 2010
So Carly will let you have guns but you cannot marry? Why would you support this woman? I was an HP sales rep during her reign. She ran the company into the ground…we did not ship a product out for almost two whole months because of a decision made with a software upgrade.
If a candidate does not support gay rights why endorse her. How can gay rights be at odds with a conservative? I call that settling for less and being ashamed. A party that has absolutely no regard or respect for you and bashes us at every turn! Can you please explain the logic to me? Sarah Palin endorsed this woman…a Teabagger. They think we have too many rights? Why shouldn’t we as people have the same rights as everyone else? This is America not the caste system in India.
Comment by Stephen Bertoncini — June 2, 2010 @ 10:43 pm - June 2, 2010
Stephen–sounds like someone’s been reading the Democratic talking points.
Do you even know what you’re saying? Being a conservative means trusting the private sector and not government to address social concerns. Understand conservative ideas before mouthing off. Gay rights as defined by the gay activist groups means bigger government and less freedom, with the state regulating who private companies can hire.
The rights I want are the right to be left alone.
Why am I even replying to your comment? Anyone who uses the slur Teabagger has no interest in understanding the Tea Party.
Please tell me what you mean by the same rights as anyone else. And please tell me what a right is.
And please apologize for your insults and why you assume we’re settling for less and being ashamed.
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — June 3, 2010 @ 12:56 am - June 3, 2010
No, we can’t.
Mainly because it is impossible to explain logic and rationality to the irrational and illogical.
It is illogical and irrational to make all your decisions based solely on your sexual orientation, and clearly you do.
And really, that is what your Obama Party is all about. Gays and lesbians like yourself, Stephen Bertoncini, are completely infantilized. You are unable to function in the normal world without government welfare. You have been convinced that everything revolves around your minority status, and thus, have no understanding of the basic issues of economics, freedom, taxes, and constitutional rights that concern the vast majority of the population.
When you decide to demonstrate that you can think intelligently, then you may be humored with a response. Until then, keep flinging your sexual slurs about “teabagging” and demonstrate what a completely immature individual you are, both emotionally and intellectually.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 3, 2010 @ 1:42 am - June 3, 2010
I call bullshit on your sales rep claim.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 3, 2010 @ 1:51 am - June 3, 2010
Oh and I can tell you one damn thing, HP’s support has sucked sweatty balls since Carly left.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 3, 2010 @ 1:53 am - June 3, 2010
And did you read this part?
That “poor reception” is what killed HP’s share price more than anything she did. And then it jumped when they bought EDS anyway in 2008.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 3, 2010 @ 2:29 am - June 3, 2010
In Carly’s tenure, HP’s market value dropped by 30%. In February, 2005 the shareholders had enough and Fiorina was out. Why? Perhaps because bigness and dumbness are often close cousins. In a Banc of America Securities meeting, Fiorina admitted that HP’s internal Fusion project cost it $400 million in revenue. When the FBI or the IRS fail on a big project, one could argue that they are not experts at this. But HP? A company that has its own large division of management and technology consultants? How could they fail? So that was just not anythign to do with her…I was selling HP during that $400 million dollar summer dispute it all you want.
Comment by Stephen Bertoncini — June 3, 2010 @ 3:40 am - June 3, 2010
Isn’t it amazing, “Stephen Bertoncini”, that you’re simply repeating WORD FOR WORD something that was posted somewhere else?
Without citing it, of course.
Typical leftist trolling. You don’t know anything about HP; you’re just here to bash Fiorina because that’s what the Organizing for America handlers told you leashed lapdogs of the Obama Party to do. Cut and paste, no intelligent thought or insight.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 3, 2010 @ 4:09 am - June 3, 2010
I know editing someone’s post to demonstrate your ability makes you feel powerful, but it’s a trick I generally grew out of by the age of 20.
Well my intention was to cast some doubt in the minds of others over Fiorina’s business ability. I’m not too knowledgeable in this area (California is, after all, a long way from where I live) but I thought maybe something to give you pause during your fawning over her would be a good thing.
Call it sowing the seeds of dissent if you will, but the picture I’ve seen painted of Carly Fiorina seemed too good to be true.
Yes I have.
This was a very long way of saying nothing, since you’d said everything important in your first six words.
She’s leading her Republican challengers.
In a two horse race, what else matters? If Boxer gets more votes than her Republican challenger, then that’s the end. There are no other factors to consider.
I’ve seen (I think from other bloggers on this site, though maybe it was you) references to “the outgoing senator Barbara Boxer” or words to that effect on a race that is still rated ‘Lean Democrat’ by RealClearPolitics. Declaring victory for the Republican in such a scenario is just delusional.
Ah, now hits a bit of irony. This is a competitive race, with one proviso.
At the moment, Boxer is polling an average of 2.8 points ahead of Tom Campbell. That’s still far from a sure victory and the margin of error on this average of polls is probably small enough that 2.8 points counts as a statistically significant lead for Boxer, but it’s competitive. No doubt about that.
But if we change things and assume Boxer is running against your gal Carly, Boxer suddely has a 6.8 point lead. More than twice the lead she has over Campbell, and a lot for Fiorina to make up.
The same RCP polling also has Fiorina well ahead in the Republican primary, so prognosticators calling this race competitive seem to be ignoring the evidence. It’s not over until the votes have been counted, but it’s not looking good for Fiorina.
There’s a lot to look though, though I will say that to my mind, ‘failed’ brings up images of someone going down in flames who has no serious chance of re-election and is giving the impression of someone trying to deny the inevitable.
In other words, exactly what you dream is happening to Boxer. But when you wake up, the poll numbers don’t lie. It’s not happened yet, and time is running out.
Comment by Serenity — June 3, 2010 @ 4:57 am - June 3, 2010
No, you think Dan’s an idiot who hasn’t thought about the issue at all. The rest of the meaningless blather in your post reinforces that notion.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 3, 2010 @ 6:33 am - June 3, 2010
Serenity, I have no misgivings about the challenges that lie ahead for Carly. I know she has a tough race ahead of her and faces an uphill challenge to unseat an incumbent Democratic Senator in a Democratic state where the Democratic president remains popular.
As to my choice of the adjective “outgoing,” well, I guess you just don’t appreciate my style.
All that said. Just look at the first paragraph of your comment #6. California’s economy is in the tank. Boxer has represented the state in the Senate for 18 years. So, shouldn’t you then be reconsidering your defense of this career politician given your forecast about my potential future regret of my current support for Carly?
Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — June 3, 2010 @ 8:27 am - June 3, 2010
I wonder if Serenity can offer a damn good reason why anybody should vote for Boxer.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 3, 2010 @ 10:36 am - June 3, 2010
I´m glad to see the endorsement. I mailed my absentee ballot on May 17th with my vote for Carly.
Comment by Roberto — June 3, 2010 @ 12:00 pm - June 3, 2010