1billsfan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 You'll excuse me if I focus on Rob's House. I've read a lot from him and a lot from you, and to be fair, you're too pie-in-the-sky for me waste time trying to reason with. It's bad enough you have me ending sentences with prepositions. Before long, you'll make me explain the difference between federal and state, and I'm just not up for it right now. Oh yes, you are so much smarter because you think think the left would be wildly more successful with Trump jokingly saying the thought of playboy bunny Brandi begging on her knees was a beautiful picture rather than Carly’s record of firing 30,000 people and leaving with a 40 million dollar golden parachute.
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Oh yes, you are so much smarter because you think think the left would be wildly more successful with Trump jokingly saying the thought of playboy bunny Brandi begging on her knees was a beautiful picture rather than Carly’s record of firing 30,000 people and leaving with a 40 million dollar golden parachute. No matter how many times you say it. won't make you less of an idiot.
1billsfan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 No matter how many times you say it. won't make you less of an idiot. Because you have no rebuttal is no reason to get mad.
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Because you have no rebuttal is no reason to get mad. Rebuttal to what?
1billsfan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Rebuttal to what? Your argument regarding Trump's business failings fell flat. Carly Fiorina's resume is a joke compared to Trump's.
IDBillzFan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) Your argument regarding Trump's business failings fell flat. Carly Fiorina's resume is a joke compared to Trump's. Why is Carly's business resume worse than Trump's? Because she's a woman? Do you hate women? Are you part of the war on women? Edited August 11, 2015 by LABillzFan
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Your argument regarding Trump's business failings fell flat. Carly Fiorina's resume is a joke compared to Trump's. Successful businessmen don't need to inflate their net worth by 3 times to score points with the ladies. Trump has lost control of numerous developments and has lost battles any time he has to deal with professional investors and advisers. He lost money in Atlantic City well before the Indian Casino boom killed the other casinos in the city. He's a far better self promoter than he is a real estate developer. As far as Carly's HP tenure, history has proven that her strategy was the correct one for the longer term health of an unwieldy company facing a certain demise.
keepthefaith Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Successful businessmen don't need to inflate their net worth by 3 times to score points with the ladies. Trump has lost control of numerous developments and has lost battles any time he has to deal with professional investors and advisers. He lost money in Atlantic City well before the Indian Casino boom killed the other casinos in the city. He's a far better self promoter than he is a real estate developer. As far as Carly's HP tenure, history has proven that her strategy was the correct one for the longer term health of an unwieldy company facing a certain demise. You can criticize Trump for various things but to say that he's not a very very successful real estate developer is just not credible. He's been wildly successful, but like anyone in business, he's had a few setbacks. For the most part though, he's been a winner. Your argument regarding Trump's business failings fell flat. Carly Fiorina's resume is a joke compared to Trump's. I agree that Carly can be attacked for the layoffs and her golden parachute because that what the left does with people like her. She also managed HP at a very tough time. You can make a strong argument though that she ran a far more complex enterprise than Trump ever has and that her experience in doing so makes her better prepared to be a President.
IDBillzFan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 You can criticize Trump for various things but to say that he's not a very very successful real estate developer is just not credible. That's actually not what he said. He said he was better at self promotion than at real estate development, which is true since most of what he is able to do in the RE development world -- good or bad -- is based on the promotion of his name.
1billsfan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 I agree that Carly can be attacked for the layoffs and her golden parachute because that what the left does with people like her. She also managed HP at a very tough time. You can make a strong argument though that she ran a far more complex enterprise than Trump ever has and that her experience in doing so makes her better prepared to be a President. That's when the left "drops the mic"... "As the CEO of HP, Carly Fiorina laid off 30,000 workers. Fiorina shipped jobs to China," one Boxer ad claimed. "And while Californians lost their jobs, Fiorina tripled her salary, bought a $1 million yacht and five corporate jets." http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/22/politics/carly-fiorina-hp/ IMO she simply can't win with that hanging over her.
Ozymandius Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 The calm, cool businessman in Trump has displayed itself twice in recent days. Once, with the first question of the debate. Trump was put on the spot right away but maintained his cool and raised his hand to keep his 3rd-party leverage, despite massive peer pressure and crowd pressure to pledge allegiance to the Republican party. Then, after the debate, Trump started only giving interviews to rival networks and shut out FNC. The 24 million viewers of the debate was his leverage, and it was only a matter of time before Roger Ailes had to call him up and make nice with Trump so that Trump would return to his network. Hannity and Fox & Friends will now benefit from Trump's occasional presence.
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 You can criticize Trump for various things but to say that he's not a very very successful real estate developer is just not credible. He's been wildly successful, but like anyone in business, he's had a few setbacks. For the most part though, he's been a winner. I agree that Carly can be attacked for the layoffs and her golden parachute because that what the left does with people like her. She also managed HP at a very tough time. You can make a strong argument though that she ran a far more complex enterprise than Trump ever has and that her experience in doing so makes her better prepared to be a President. Measuring a real estate developer's success in a rising real estate market is rather easy. But where these guys earn their chops is how resilient they are during inevitable busts, and this is where Trump got his clocked cleaned many times. You always hear when he's entering a development deal, you rarely hear how it ends up. He's still talking up his West Side development deal, even though he got pushed out of that development, as well as many others. And you are correct, running HP at the turn of the century was a hell of a lot more complicated than running a reality show. It's like comparing Tim Tebow to Aaron Rodgers.
Magox Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 This is for all you Trumpocrats "I am the most fabulous whiner," Donald J. Trump told CNN's Chris Cuomo. "I do whine, because I want to win. I am a whiner, and I'm a whiner and I keep whining and whining until I win."
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 That's when the left "drops the mic"... "As the CEO of HP, Carly Fiorina laid off 30,000 workers. Fiorina shipped jobs to China," one Boxer ad claimed. "And while Californians lost their jobs, Fiorina tripled her salary, bought a $1 million yacht and five corporate jets." http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/22/politics/carly-fiorina-hp/ IMO she simply can't win with that hanging over her. Just so I understand, your solution to a company that's facing unprecedented tech challenges, disruptive, new competitors, and a massive collapse of the market is to retain full employment?
DC Tom Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 This is for all you Trumpocrats Just what this country needs: an unqualified, thin-skinned whiner who can't face a tough question and thinks the problem is everyone else.
GG Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Just what this country needs: an unqualified, thin-skinned whiner who can't face a tough question and thinks the problem is everyone else. You mean, just what this country needs to continue?
1billsfan Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Just so I understand, your solution to a company that's facing unprecedented tech challenges, disruptive, new competitors, and a massive collapse of the market is to retain full employment? Tripling her salary on the backs of those 30,000 laid off people? Buying a yacht? Five jets? You only have an argument if you're talking to the 1% voters.
DC Tom Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 You mean, just what this country needs to continue? Of course. I thought that point was obvious. Tripling her salary on the backs of those 30,000 laid off people? Buying a yacht? Five jets? You only have an argument if you're talking to the 1% voters. And how, exactly, does a CEO set their own salary?
Joe Miner Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 Of course. I thought that point was obvious. And how, exactly, does a CEO set their own salary? Duh, they're the boss, they set all the salaries. It's like you have no idea how business works.
Tiberius Posted August 11, 2015 Author Posted August 11, 2015 Carly did not do great against a Liberal women in 2010, a year Republicans did really well: Nearly three out of five women voters are supporting Boxer, while male voters give Boxer a slim three point advantage. The white vote, which is 61% of voters are backing Fiorina over Boxer (53% vs. 44%); Latinos, who make up 22% of the electorate give Boxer 68% of their vote, compared to 28% for Fiorina and 9% of the electorate is black. This group is overwhelmingly backing Boxer (82%). All age groups, except for those voters who are 65 and over support Boxer. Households with income less than $50,000 are going for Boxer almost two to one (63% vs 33%), while households earning $100,000 or more back Fiorina giving her a 10 point lead over her opponent. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-election-results-how-barbara-boxer-bucked-a-national-trend-by-beating-carly-fiorina/ Sounds like Boxer painted her as a Mitt Romney type 1%er. It's hard for a business leader to win elections if they try and do the right thing in business
Recommended Posts