Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Carly Fiorina was in New Hampshire today, participating in a Labor Day parade. It was about 95 degrees. Afterward, from an air-conditioned vehicle, she did a “Q&A” with Jay. They talked about a range of issues, including economic growth; abortion; Iranian nukes; Donald Trump; immigration; HP; and Afghanistan. If you’re looking for a compact way of knowing “How does Carly think? How does she talk?” this podcast will serve pretty well.
Help Ricochet by Supporting Our Sponsors!
For a limited time, The Great Courses has a special offer for “Q&A” listeners: Order any of four Everyday Gourmet courses for just $9.95. Don’t delay, because, again, this special price is available for only a limited time.
Visit TheGreatCourses.com/QA today!
Subscribe to Q & A, Hosted by Jay Nordlinger in Apple Podcasts (and leave a 5-star review, please!), or by RSS feed. For all our podcasts in one place, subscribe to the Ricochet Audio Network Superfeed in Apple Podcasts or by RSS feed.
Thanks for this, Jay. She is really impressive. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are both quick and smooth and articulate too, but there’s something I like better about her rhetoric. It sounds more direct, less canned and politiciany or something.
Enjoyed the podcast. Would like to see Carly do a Q&A with our membership. Could someone make this happen?
Carly continues to impress me. She never seems to dodge a question, even the obvious HP query. Always prepared, well-versed in global affairs.
Once the glare of the Donald Trump show begins to dim, hoping people will start taking a better look at Carly.
And she doesn’t hedge. She offers a lot of refreshingly direct “yes” or “no” answers. Then she follows up with her reasoning. Most politicians first hedge and qualify all over the place to avoid being definitely for or against something.
I like how she doesn’t deflect. She takes the question head on, answers it and never dodges to another sound-bite. I’ve not heard an interviewer state that she hasn’t answered their question yet.
I am getting sold, fast.
Her message of hope is rooted in the right place. Her complaints about Washington are spot on. She does have real executive experience.
Carly/Carson, with Cruz as AG, Bolton as SecState… ?
I like what she had to say; she has good insights and is plainspoken. Her political resume is weak. Much as I like the idea of outsiders coming into politics, presidential candidates need significant political experience. Consider the case of Angela Merkel or Margaret Thatcher. Both were scientists first, politicians second. But both of them had substantial political accomplishments before leading their nations.
Many voters will be put off to Mrs. Fiorina’s candidacy just because of her resume, regardless of whether they agree with her views. There’s hostility towards the political class at the same time there’s discomfort with complete outsiders. If only she’d won her Senate race!
Edit: On a more positive note, she’d make a great Cabinet member, say SecDef. She’s got the technology and executive chops for that gig.
The fact that her political resume is weak, as it is for Dr. Carson, is one of the most attractive things about them.
Maybe for you but not for everyone. It will be a handicap in the view of many voters. It will also interfere with her ability to perform on the job. These two facts are not unrelated.
The only relevant exception that comes to mind is Ike. But he’s the exception that proves the rule. He was elected at an extraordinary time and, in any case, his resume was quasi-political. After all, he was a political appointee and he had significant foreign policy experience.
Professional politicians with excessive experience (resumes) living off the public dole for 30+ years is also a handicap. It also doesn’t mean that said politician has done anything of merit on behalf of the people regardless of their “commitment” to public service. Ever notice that once they’ve held office, they can’t quite quit the life and move from one office to another? Some do it to continue to gain power and some do it because it’s the only thing they know how to do. Maybe it’s time to change politics as usual.
There’s a middle ground between 30 years in politics and zero years. Consider Ronald Reagan. He had a couple of careers before embarking on the political one. You can’t say he spent 30 years on the dole yet he gained significant experience as governor of California, to which he often referred while he was president. It stood him in good stead when dealing with the likes of Tip O’Neill. A lesser man would have been rolled by O’Neill. These guys are skilled, savvy opponents. With respect to Mrs. Fiorina, she’s a naif when it comes to Washington politics.
I like the Reagan model: a person who has had life experience both in and out of politics. Don’t you want champions who know all the tricks of their adversaries?
So do I, theoretically. Do you see one on offer? Anyone in the field who matches the description?
Point taken. We can’t always get what we want. Circling back to my previous point, many voters (e.g., independents) will view Fiorina’s thin resume as a deal-breaker. Much as you might like it otherwise, that will make it hard for her to win. She lost pretty decisively for the Senate in a year that Republicans did quite well. Granted it was California, but still.
Not to get persnickety, but Ted Cruz nominally fills the bill since he was in private practice before getting into politics. John Kasich is another example; he was in business for almost a decade before returning to politics. Mike Huckabee was in the religion biz before politics. Not endorsing these guys, just sayin’ they match the description and they’re on offer.
Fiorina makes the case for the free market very well. Other Republican politicians could learn a lesson from her. The longer she stays in the race the better.
There are quite a few interviews in the Podcast section of itunes, in addition to this interview.
Wow! This was great. Compare Trump with Hewitt and Carly with Nordlinger. In both cases serious interviewers who challenged on many topics but not seeking cheap gotchas (great journalists not deserving the disdain that is regularly heaped on them).
About the interviewees: Carly spoke convincingly like regular people while at the same time exposing knowledge of everything. She was unafraid to take well thought through positions. Didn’t dodge questions. Exuded passion and energy. Never haughty or arrogant. Pretty much 180 degrees from Trump (correction on the energy – he has that too; and plainspoken to a fault).
I was hesitant for a long time to a non-elected person entering as President. Because of that I favored Carly as VP on a Walker or Rubio ticket. Now I feel she should be the President.
Go Carly Go!
I’m not endorsing Fiorina yet either. We have a long way to go. I’m just very impressed with her so far—more than I’d expected to be. At the same time, I’ve been suffering disappointment in my earlier favorite, Scott Walker, and diminishing enthusiasm over Rubio and Cruz. Cruz had some time as a lawyer, but zero as an executive. Nothing to compare with Reagan.
And he sounds slick, even shyster-y. I wish he didn’t, but he does.
I personally think he’s a true believer (I think the same of Santorum), but I worry that he will rub a giant percentage of the electorate the wrong way. Maybe I’m wrong. I hope so.
for anyone looking for more info:
Carly answers questions on her website.
you can enter a word or a question, and linked videos for certain tag words, etc show up.
https://carlyforpresident.com/answers/
I doubt it. I think sometimes we project what we would like onto independent voters. I think most independent voters are swayed by personality (if they had strong convictions they probably wouldn’t be independent). If that is the case, I think they would find Carly much more persuasive than Hillary.
I loved this interview. Early in the interview, when you were talking about foreign affairs issues generally, I felt like I heard echoes of Condi Rice’s speech to the 2012 GOP convention (which I still go to when I need some inspiration to keep up the fight). The more I hear from Carly the more I am a fan. I don’t know that I’m quite ready to commit to her (though I have sent her a small donation – I think she needs to be in the mix going forward) but I am ready to commit to the idea that if she does not get the nomination herself she should be the VP choice – absolutely no doubt she would be an asset to any of the other Republicans running.
Pretty darn good.
This is very true. In fact, nobody knows why people vote the way they do, so all talk of electability is strictly bunk.
Is it just me, or has it been a minute (to quote a younger generation than me), since I’ve seen you around, katievs?
Welcome back, always happy to hear your thoughts…and words like “politiciany” : )
Katievs – indeed!!!! Welcome back – you were much missed, and we are delighted to see you here again!
She’s surely very impressive. She’s make a fine President.
Addressing the point about her lack of political experience: I think that is a huge advantage in that she would genuinely be able to speak to the insanity of the Federal system. Most Republicans who have significant business experience (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Daniels, Romney) have enough political time so that they don’t spend a lot of time addressing the gap between how the Feds do things and how the rest of us have to do things.
This is why, I think, both Trump and Carson are doing so well. A large chunk of Republicans have given up on members of the Establishment. They’re the problem, not the fix.
Objectively Carly is head-and-shoulders above either of those last two…
We may not know why they vote but we do know how they vote. For example, consider some lessons of history. Santayana comes to mind right about now.
Many things are possible, though some things are most unlikely. One August I was caught in a minor snowstorm in Tuolumne Meadows. There can be snow in Yosemite in August but that’s not the way to bet – at least not if you like to win. On the other hand, if you want to make a statement or stick it to the Man then support the unlikely, by all means.
As for projecting one’s own thoughts onto independent voters, that cuts both ways.
For those who think Carly has no political experience – Being the CEO of a multinational company is an inherently political job. Anyone who can make it to the top and stay there for a period of years has all the political skills you need.
I agree. I think she has political experience, and in a podcast from her post-HP days (pre-Presidential announcement) she says that all human interactions are inherently political.
She has sound ideas on how to collaborate effectively, how to build consensus, and to garner information for herself, from those she works with.
Every day, Every time, I hear her speak, I gain confidence in her ability to have one of the top two positions in the Executive Branch.
fyi: if you go to her site, you can register to win a free trip to the Reagan Library debate coming up.
Could Jay conduct one of the debates, just him and the candidates?