|
|
Post by beth on Sept 17, 2015 10:30:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dex on Sept 17, 2015 12:43:25 GMT -5
The audience were the winners because we got to see them better. They came across as their real selves at least part of the time. I am a little better impressed with Cruz but would never vote for him. I am a little less impressed with Carson who I might vote for but would have to have good reasons to jump the ticket.
|
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Sept 17, 2015 13:27:45 GMT -5
There are so many undercurrents here that it is difficult to narrow comments down to a singular response. For example, Donald Trump has brought up many subjects that have been concerns of the voting public and has done so in his brash and often verbose manner, so they are noticed. Even so, I must admit to not being a fan of Donald Trump. His approach is very self centered and turns everything (at least nearly everything) to being about him and in so doing he presents concepts that are not true or at least are misleading. No I do not want him as president. Carly Fiorina is the real deal. When she speaks it is based on well researched subjects so that she knows what she is talking about and she has considered the subject before opening her mouth. While she is considered a government outsider, she has pretty intense experience in the government. She performed unpaid service on the Defense Business Board, which looked at staffing issues, among others, at The Pentagon. But more significantly Carly Fiorina spent two years leading the Central Intelligence Agency's External Advisory Board, from 2007 to 2009, and became chairman of that board, when the board was first created in 2007 by then-CIA director Michael Hayden during the George W. Bush administration. Then add to this her world wide travels from a business position talking to foreign leaders and she is quite experienced. During the debate these differences came to the fore with Donald Trump making unsupportable statements and Carly Fiorina providing solid positions, such as with rebuilding the military as she provided specific figures of changes that will have to be made. I think that Carly Fiorina was way ahead of Donald Trump in this second debate. |
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Sept 17, 2015 16:47:31 GMT -5
I came away liking Jeb Bush a little better than I had before. That doesn't mean I'd vote for him but it means I will keep watching him closer until I form an opinion.
Sorry Menantol. I didn't care much for Fiorina. I read an article about her today that I will post later for you to consider.
|
|
|
|
Post by beth on Sept 17, 2015 17:15:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Dex on Sept 17, 2015 18:41:36 GMT -5
I came away liking Jeb Bush a little better than I had before. That doesn't mean I'd vote for him but it means I will keep watching him closer until I form an opinion. Sorry Menantol. I didn't care much for Fiorina. I read an article about her today that I will post later for you to consider. I might have read that. Is it the one where she was working for Hewlett Packard and helped them get around sanctions the United States had on Iran? That was really something.  |
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Sept 18, 2015 19:10:20 GMT -5
I think that Carly and Donald are birds of a feather. They are marketing people. They might be able to sell the Brooklyn Bridge to somebody, but I don't think they have the qualities they need to run the country, even with a lot of paid help. They would sit where the buck stops. All they would have to do would be listen to the wrong person or make the wrong decision just one time to cause a terrible mess. I'd rather trust Hillary than that. At least Bill wouldn't be too far away. If he didn't know the answers, he'd know the best people to ask.
|
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Sept 18, 2015 20:12:17 GMT -5
I think that Carly and Donald are birds of a feather. They are marketing people. They might be able to sell the Brooklyn Bridge to somebody, but I don't think they have the qualities they need to run the country, even with a lot of paid help. They would sit where the buck stops. All they would have to do would be listen to the wrong person or make the wrong decision just one time to cause a terrible mess. I'd rather trust Hillary than that. At least Bill wouldn't be too far away. If he didn't know the answers, he'd know the best people to ask. I do understand your feelings Anne. I must admit to a somewhat different point of view. Having work with all sorts of people in the private sector I have found far more capable and trustworthy people in the private sector than ever in politics. I have met my share of marketing people that. . . . . . shall we say . . . . . . should never leave marketing. However, most people in business have earned their experience by having to either produce profit or reduce cost and those are solid yard sticks defining the capability to achieve goals. In politics, there are no such yard sticks as making a mistakes very often means just getting more tax funds to do the mistake over with more money. Since you mentioned her, Secretary Clinton is (in my opinion) one of the worse examples of a politician lacking capability that we've had in modern times. I suspect that we will be far apart in any agreement on her. Even so, we (again in my opinion) are facing extremely challenging times and we need the best elected officials we can find inclusive of the Congress. I'm not overly confident that we will come up with the right person, but somehow when things get dark, the right person or persons seem to come along and we (people of the country begin to work together. |
|
Omega
