Alexis Levinson:
Carly Fiorina arrived at the RedState Gathering here the conquering hero, following her commanding performance at yesterday’s happy-hour debate.
“I think we kind of rumbled last night, what do you think?” Fiorina told the crowd as she took the stage to a standing ovation.
Fiorina was by all accounts the winner of the early debate in Cleveland Thursday, where she appeared with the other six GOP presidential contenders who were not in the top ten in national polls. In the otherwise unremarkable two-hour undercard event, she stood out for her poise and her well-crafted answers, and emerged as the one person who looked like they should have been on the main stage. Fiorina often points out that she has the lowest name ID of any candidate in the Republican field. But 6.1 million viewers tuned in to watch the former Hewlett-Packard CEO’s performance on Fox News yesterday, which means this could be her moment — if she can capitalize on it.
Fiorina and her campaign declined to talk about the concrete effects of that performance in terms of campaign fundraising — which has been lackluster thus far — or what they planned to do to take advantage of the extra attention. “We’re gonna keep doing what we’ve been doing,” Fiorina told reporters following her speech at RedState.
But the super PAC backing Fiorina, CARLY For America, which has done much of the organizing legwork for her White House bid, said they had seen an uptick in support.
“Our field leaders in the early states, our fundraising team, and our digital teams are all reporting surges in interest and engagement,” communications director Katie Hughes tellsNational Review.
For her part, Fiorina acknowledged that voters and the media probably perceive her differently than they did two days ago.
“Let’s face it, a lot of people probably underestimated me. . . . I hope that what people are starting to say is, ‘You know what? She could win this job, and she could do this job,’” she said.
It was clear from Fiorina’s reception at RedState, a gathering of conservative activists organized by radio host Erick Erickson, that people are starting to think exactly that.
“When I heard that Carly Fiorina was running for president, I thought, ‘Is she running for president, or is she running for vice president?’” Erickson said as he introduced her to the crowd. “But holy cow!” He joined the consensus, calling her the winner of the early debate last night.
She came on stage to a standing ovation, and earned several more over the course of her speech and the question-and-answer period that followed, especially when she attacked Hillary Clinton.
Fiorina used her time at RedState to emphasize her persona as the anti-politician, someone who talks directly to voters and reporters, rather than having staff run interference. Erickson told the crowd that Fiorina had expressed a preference for answering audience questions over delivering long, prepared remarks, and her appearance bore that out. She made a number of references to her interviews with media traditionally considered hostile to Republicans, such as her segment on Chris Matthews’s MSNBC show yesterday and her earlier chat with the women of The View, drawing another marked contrast to the press-shy Clinton.
That interview by Chris Matthews was a thing of beauty:
[youtube]https://youtu.be/WbDqWZMOROE[/youtube]
I think she was the best of both debates and she kicked Chris’s ass.
@old guy:
While wearing pink.
retire05: LOL
And already the left is offering the “she could be a veep” bs. Sexism only applies to the right….the left will choose their women, carefully…and those women need to get in line.
Hillary is not qualified to be, or even run, for President.
Double standards (segregation, sexism, etc.) is wrong. News coverage and what disqualifies a candidate should be the same for each party.
Either HIllary is treated as a joke, or Trump is the obvious choice. You can’t have it both ways.
Carly Fiorina halved the value of HP shares in only 6 years, essentially wrecking one of the best technology companies in the world. She’s been judged by some sources as the worst tech sector CEO of all time. I don’t think those are sexist observations. Those are the observations of people in the business and investment sectors.
@Greg:
If driving up stock prices is the criteria for putting someone in charge, then maybe you can explain to me why Obama hired Ed Whitaker to head GM when Obama bailed out the UAW.
I believe the suggestion will be made that America needs someone at the helm who knows how to run a business. I’ve always been a bit skeptical about business experience being the best preparation for the United States presidency. I think it might narrow down a person’s vision rather than expanding it. Of course that probably depends on the nature of the business activity, and on how much the person was in touch with the real world as opposed to corporate boardroom strategies.
@Greg: Problem solving capabilities would be the best qualification for a President. That and the ability to identify and select capable people for advisory and staff positions. No one is smart enough to handle the entire job themselves and capable, competent people (as opposed to trustworthy ideologues) is the greatest asset available.
In that regard I think Trump may have the edge on most others. Fiorinas also. Also, simply because someone has not been a “success” at business does not necessarily indicate lack of intelligence or other capabilities. There could be numerous factors involved, such as the economic conditions when they were performing their duties.
One thing is for certain; a community organizer that majored in campaigning is the worst possible option. That’s been proven with definition.
@Greg:
If you had a clue you’d take it out and play with it.
Fiorina was there during the merger of Compaq and HP. Technology changes and it causes mergers and bankruptcies. It also means people lose jobs, it’s just the way it is. Maybe someone could have done better, but then again maybe she learned from it. I’ve seen little evidence HRC has learned much about how business or how economies work. However, if you want to invest in a buggy whip making company go ahead. See how far your money goes.
Whatever happened to Quantex or Gateway? They are gone. Get the idea? No? I figured not.
One thing is pretty certain electing HRC will not be a business friendly proposition and therefore not good for jobs. Her investment plan that she recently spoke about is pure left wing crap. It shows less than novice knowledge of investing. One would think she would be a little better informed since her son in law is a hedge fund manager. Oh the irony.
BTW, HP is still with us and makes great products.