Glenn Beck gushes over Carly Fiorina on his Radio Show post-interview

Last night, an hour long interview of Carly Fiorina by Glenn Beck aired on The Blaze, I thought she really knocked it out of the park.  She did so well that Glenn Beck was positively gushing about her on his radio program despite being a Ted Cruz guy.  That does mean a lot to me given that he is such a true believer and doesn't take crap from anyone.  You can hear his comments starting around the 1:02:00 mark.  She's the real deal folks.

Why was Trump so successful? Because he started out rich

One of the main reasons that a lot of the Trumpitistas support him is because he is "such a good businessman".  A lot of these people seem to think he came out of nowhere and built this vast empire.  Now I'm not arguing he is a horrible businessman but he had started with quite a leg up.  He inherited $40 million from his father in 1974.  Now remember this is not $40 million in 2015 dollars this is in 1974 dollars which are worth a whole lot more.  Adjusting for CPI, his $40 million is worth $190 million in 2015 dollars.  He essentially started out about as rich as Mitt Romney without lifting a damn finger.  And let's not forget the power of compound interest, he has had 41 years since his inheritance to become a billionaire.  According to Bloomberg, he is worth $2.9 billion today, so he increased his real net worth by 15.3 times over those years.  Doing that math that means that he has had a 6.9% real annual return  for the last 41 years, which of course includes his probably lavish expenses.  Look, that certainly isn't bad and has made him a billionaire but when you do the math out, does that really sounds that fantastic considering he lived through the 80's and 90's booms and was a real estate giant during the biggest real estate bubble in history in one of the most booming cities in the country?

Former Lucent Execs calls Carly Critics "Dead Wrong"

There is a pretty great piece in Fortune from someone who used to work with Carly:

I first met Carly Fiorina when we were both working at AT&T. I began reporting directly to her in 1991, when she was heading up of worldwide strategy and I held a similar role for the company’s European division. That arrangement lasted until 1993—though we continued to work together on and off until she left Lucent in 1999.

I’m here to tell you that Fiorina’s detractors, including Donald Trump, couldn’t be more wrong in their assessment of her leadership. Fiorina was bright, insightful, and dedicated to growing our company and developing relationships with employees and customers. There is a reason she rose from a secretary to a CEO – Fiorina is the real deal.

...

Fiorina, as the head of North American sales, knew that Network Solutions needed to immediately solve this problem. She found that Network Solutions’ competitors were responsive to customer needs, while our engineers and developers were not. Then, in true Fiorina fashion, she rolled up her sleeves and got to work.

As a non-Network Systems insider, she immediately met with fierce resistance to the changes she proposed. The issue was complicated by a leadership team that was entrenched in its ways and unfriendly to “outsiders”—even when they were from within AT&T.

Fiorina realized the crux of the issue was R&D funding. After a major campaign, she was able to convince some of the higher-ups to move funding into the Sales Organization. Then she created a unit within Sales that controlled the funding and acted as a liaison between Product Units and Sales, determining which products to fund and develop.

Fiorina called this concept Customer Architecture. It completely revolutionized Network Systems, pulling a stodgy, lagging company into the 21st Century. Network Systems once again became competitive—and it was this customer architecture that eventually turned Network Systems into Lucent Technologies.

We at AT&T saw this pattern time and time again: When Fiorina put her mind to something, she accomplished it. She was relentless, and through persistence, perseverance, and personality she gradually won people over. In the end, her changes were made and all those working within Network Systems benefited. Fiorina’s genius was recognizing the problem, analyzing the situation, developing a solution and implementing the fix. And those of us lucky enough to work with her reaped the rewards of her leadership.

NBC/WSJ Poll: Over half of GOP primary voters can't see themselves supporting Trump

Carson, Fiorina and Rubio seem to be the only GOP candidates in the race without low ceilings, according to the latest NBC/WSJ poll (note I just have the top ranked candidates here in terms of "yes, could see self supporting" if you want to see the entire list, see page 14-15):

In one answer Trump goes from saying we need to end ISIS forcefully to saying we shouldn't do anything and let our enemies deal with it

Does Trump actually listen to a thing that Trump says?  More from his 60 Minutes interview:

Scott Pelley: We're at war with ISIS as we sit here. How do you end it?

Donald Trump: I would end ISIS forcefully. I think ISIS, what they did, was unbelievable what they did with James Foley and the cutting off of heads of everybody I mean these people are totally a disaster. Now, let me just say this, ISIS in Syria, Assad in Syria, Assad and ISIS are mortal enemies. We go in to fight ISIS. Why aren't we letting ISIS go and fight Assad and then we pick up the remnants? Why are we doing this? We're fighting ISIS and Assad has to be saying to himself, "They have the nicest or dumbest people that I've ever imagined."

Scott Pelley: Let me get this right, so we lay off ISIS for now?

Donald Trump: Excuse me, let --

Scott Pelley: Lay off in Syria, let them destroy Assad. And then we go in behind that?

Donald Trump: --that's what I would say. Yes, that's what I would say.

...

Donald Trump: If you look at Syria. Russia wants to get rid of ISIS. We want to get rid of ISIS. Maybe let Russia do it. Let 'em get rid of ISIS. What the hell do we care?

So he starts off by saying he would end ISIS forcefully because they are so unbelievably evil and then right after he argues that we essentially shouldn't do anything and let Assad/Iran/Hezbollah/Russia deal with them.  I guess he can never be attacked for flip flopping as he has come for and against attacking ISIS in the same answer!

It's as if the interview asked "what do you think we should do on ISIS"  and Trump answered "yes".  Of course his Trumpitista's will say his answer is brilliant and oh he is so smart. 

Donald Trump proposes a massive increase in Medicaid

Trump was just on 60 minutes last night and he was asked what kind of Republican he is, he said he is a "very good Republican", yet he also makes statements like this:

Donald Trump: Obamacare's going to be repealed and replaced. Obamacare is a disaster if you look at what's going on with premiums where they're up 40, 50, 55 percent.
 
Scott Pelley: How do you fix it?

Donald Trump: There's many different ways, by the way. Everybody's got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, "No, no, the lower 25 percent that can't afford private. But--"

Scott Pelley: Universal health care.

Donald Trump: I am going to take care of everybody. I don't care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're taken care of now.

Scott Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?

Donald Trump: They're going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably--

Scott Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?

Donald Trump: --the government's gonna pay for it. But we're going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it's going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything.

So the government is going to pay for people's insurance if they can't afford it and everybody is going to be covered.  Isn't that pretty much the same as having an individual mandate with a massive increase in Medicaid to pay for those who can't afford a private plan?  How is this much different than Obamacare?  I think Trump is pitching Obamacare to replace Obamacare, which will probably be called Trumpcare.  Is that the change we are looking for?

Some interesting information from the CNN/WMUR poll in NH

The latest CNN/WMUR poll asks a lot of the usual questions, but also asks some questions that aren't frequently asked.  One is which candidate would you never vote for under any circumstance.  So I took that data and subtracted it from the data on which candidate is your first choice.  I figure you want to be as positive as possible in this as having a lot of haters creates a low ceiling.  So let's see what we have:

So as you can see, Fiorina is actually doing pretty well, she has the second largest percentage of voters who say she is their first choice but then only 1% would never ever vote for her.  Rubio is also doing well as he is #3 in the poll and has nobody who says they would never vote for him (he really is in that magical place where the conservative activists like the Club for Growth can be firmly behind him but then also not scare the establishment).  Of course Trump is in the lead in both categories, leaving him with minimal net support.  JEB is really not doing well as he is firmly in the negative camp.  I think if the race ends up boiling down to Fiorina vs. Rubio vs. Kasich, we will have a pretty interesting primary season and the story will move on from Trump insults.

What about Carson you ask?  Doesn't he have high net favorables all across the country?  He is really not someone I want representing me or the Republican Party.  Tell me again why a Muslim can't be President?  Is he saying there are NO good Muslims out there at all?  Look, I am not a fan of radical Islam and am worried about the Muslim Brotherhood in this country but as the song Ebony and Ivory goes, there is good and bad in everyone.  He also claimed Satan influenced Darwin's theory of evolution.  Really?  Give me a break.  We can't have someone who says such things as the standard bearer of our party. 

Uh-oh, a video was unearthed of Carly Fiorina supporting the individual mandate in 2013

Well this is disappointing.  She was asked on Crossfire during a debate with Ralph Nader what she thought about the individual mandate and the ban on denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions, she responded that she supports both.  You can watch the video of that segment here (it's not embeddable) and a highly edited version below.



And here is another part of the same show where she talks about how inefficient government is.



None of this is a real deal killer for Fiorina as she doesn't support Obamacare or single payor, she supports an individual mandate where people can buy high deductible insurance, something Obamacare doesn't do.  What it does say is that she is a smaller, better government Republican rather than a small government Republican.  One of the hints that she was the former rather than the later was her answer to a question on libertarianism from Glenn Beck:

GLENN: Well, I think Libertarianism — other than being strong on individual rights and small government is really defined by the person. So how would you define Libertarianism, and do you have any of that in you?

CARLY: I certainly believe that this nation became the greatest on the face of the earth and in all of human history because our founders had basic confidence and trust in each individual and their potential, their God-given gift, and their ability to live lives of dignity, purpose, and meaning, with responsibility. I mean, that’s the foundation of this nation. And so, to me, that is the core of who we are. Because this is the only nation on the face of the earth, and truly in all of human history, that was founded on this basic belief in the capacity for life of dignity and purpose and meaning on the part of an individual.

That’s pretty profound. And it’s incredibly important. I also think that there are things that we know work better. You know, we know that children grow up stronger if they have a loving mother and father. We know that communities are stronger when people have a stake in their community. We know that two of the most telling signs of someone’s future success in life are whether they finish high school and whether they wait until they get married to bear a child. So those are issues perhaps of culture or lifestyle that I think also impact our ability to build strong communities. 

Her answer is just not the way I would expect someone who is a true believer in small government would answer it.  Here is how Reagan answered it (though it wasn't from Glenn Beck):

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path. 

Carly doesn't ever really mention the freedom of the individual or liberty or any of that stuff, instead she seems to take things from a very utilitarian perspective in that she will do what she thinks will work best.  If she thinks it requires government action, she'll do it. I still think she is to the right of folks like Mitt Romney but I might just have to go with Marco Rubio.  I'm not done with her yet but I'm definitely concerned as I don't believe government should be able to force you to spend money on something you might never need.  I also don't think the government should force insurance companies to cover people they don't want to cover.  It's like forcing State Farm to insure the house of someone who has had 7 houses burn down.  How can you force the insurance company to take the risk?

A great takedown of Trump by Charles Cooke

I bet this was really fun to write:

In the last month alone, Trump has threatened to sue a small-time T-shirt maker whose products bear critical slogans (“Donald Is Dumb,” “Stop Trump,” and “America Is Already Great”); he has attempted to begin legal proceedings against the Club for Growth on the grounds that it has had the temerity to oppose him and his policies (this, Trump says, is “defamation” — a stunted and preposterous piece of legal analysis that lends some credibility to the messages on the aforementioned t-shirts); and he has expressed a desire to use the federal government to censor unpliable journalists for the high crime of being amusing on television. That neither lawsuit has a shot in hell — and, indeed, that the FCC doesn’t actually have any jurisdiction over cable news — does not seem to matter much. What matters is that Donald Trump feels hurt, and that he doesn’t like it one bit.
...
That it might be unwise to give nuclear weapons to a man who routinely seeks revenge against even the most modest of quibblers seems not to have occurred to the 25 percent or so of the Republican primary voters who are at present sitting on Trump’s bandwagon. For the rest of us, though, I shall make the point clear: This is not a person who should be given access to a military — or even, for that matter, to a modest bully pulpit. Among the media figures that Trump has thus far called upon to be fired are Lowry (for suggesting that Carly cut him down to size in the testicles department), Jonah Goldberg (for proposing that he “behaves like a “14-year-old girl”), Stephen Hayes (for noting correctly that he is not a conservative), George Will (for arguing that he is a fraud), Charles Krauthammer (for discussing his unpopularity), Chuck Todd (for implying that he isn’t a serious person), Megyn Kelly (for . . . asking questions), and Hugh Hewitt (for the same offense). When maligned, Abraham Lincoln picked up his pen or arranged a debate. Donald Trump takes immediately to Twitter and shouts, “take him off the air!”

Why does Trump behave this way? Because he’s a preposterous little trust-fund wuss, that’s why. As was illustrated once again last night, the man is not really a “fighter” or an “alpha male” or an iron-cored “enemy of political correctness.” He’s a thin-skinned performance artist whose peculiar shtick falls to pieces the moment someone useful elects to return a punch. Look through Trump’s recent Twitter contributions and you will see a wounded man who is always a few harsh phrases and a modicum of bad publicity away from curling up in an oversized sweater and listening to “Everybody Hurts” on repeat.

South Park Takes on Trump

I haven't watched the show in years but this is hilarious:

Trump is our Hillary in terms of Honesty and Trustworthiness

From the latest Quinnipiac, it's pretty clear that people view Trump as honest and trustworthy as Hillary, which is not a good place for him to be:

They are also both underwater among registered voters in terms of net favorability:

It seems to me that Trump is only able to hold his own against Hillary in head to head matchups not because he is so good but because she is so bad.  He gets crushed though by Biden by a whopping 11 points in this poll and even loses to Sanders by 5 points.  We need to make sure we nominate someone with positive net favorables to even have a chance.

Lowry: Carly Fiorina Cut Trumps Balls Off With the Precision of a Surgeon

Just a must see segment from last night's Kelly File. Needless to say, Trump went Beserk after this:

My thoughts on the Republican field

I thought I'd go candidate by candidate on the current Republican field just to give my thoughts and who I think actually has a chance.  It's becoming clear to me that the race is really between Rubio, Fiorina and maybe Trump, JEB and Cruz though really it will depend on who gets out when and where do those supporters go.  We first need to weed out the non-Trump non-Carson candidates so that we can stop those two and then we need conservatives to coalesce around a non-JEB non-Christie candidate.  Anyhoo, here is what I think though I have a tendency to be completely wrong as I was a Phil Gramm, Steve Forbes, Jack Kemp and Newt Gingrich supporter in the past.

Carly Fiorina - As I currently have a Carly banner on my blog it is no surprise that I will have positive things to say.  I think she sounds more Presidential than anyone else in the field.  I've listened to her speak dozens of times and she really does have a very dynamic and interesting style.  When she speaks, she cuts to the chase and it simply is difficult to get bored.  I think her communication skills are on par with Clinton and Reagan and could really convince non-Republicans to vote GOP.  My one complaint is that she doesn't talk about how she will make the economy better, how is she going to improve the environment for businesses and jobs.  I know given her experience with CIA that she is more comfortable talking about foreign policy but Trump can't be the only one talking about bringing manufacturing jobs to the US. Hopefully she will get there. The really big unknowns are her finances and her organization.  Campaigns are not one-woman deals, you need organizations behind you to get out your voters especially in caucus states.  Does she have that organization?  How much progress has she made in building one?  I really have no idea.  My sense is that her campaign has been underfunded up until a week or so ago so it is possible improving poll numbers may not, in the end, lead to real votes, especially in a place like Iowa.

Marco Rubio - I'm really warming up to Rubio.  I've forgiven him for the immigration thing as he is pretty right on in terms of all other issues and has a great voting record.  Plus he is young, eloquent and is someone who can get crossover votes.  He is also about 30 years younger than all the Democratic candidates for President.  My only reservation is that he never really ran anything in his life and I do honestly get annoyed every time he makes a water joke, we get it, you are embracing drinking water during the SOTU response.  Please.  Stop.

Ted Cruz-  Is it just me or does he seem more likeable?  He seems less used-car salesmany than he used to for me but I still don't think he has a chance.  I know he thinks he can get a lot of the Trump supporters when Trump blows up but I'm not so sure.  Cruz is still viewed as extreme by much of the nation and frankly much of the party.  He'll always have my respect for speaking for almost an entire day, still being lucid and even asking for more time but I don't think this is his cycle.

JEB - As he is now polling at #3 in his home state of Florida, I have to wonder why is he still here?  Parental pressure?  I really hope he drops out, otherwise he splits the anti-Trump anti-Carson vote and might kill the candidacies of people who might actually has a chance.  Republicans don't particularly like JEB and guess what, the rest of the country doesn't either.  The problem is he probably has so much money behind him that he can stay around for a long time. 

Donald Trump - I think Trump fever is breaking.  Someone as abrasive as him eventually starts wearing on people no matter how much they like his spunk.  Plus, if you watch his speeches he says the same thing over and over again with no detail.  The only reason to watch him really is to see if he insults anyone and that gets boring.  Finally, if you want someone with spunk, why wouldn't people go with Carly?  She has spunk, discipline and details.  Trump only has spunk.

Ben Carson - I like him as a person, really I do, but some of his views are weird/wrong.  He doesn't think a Muslim should be President?  I really can't think of one that I would vote for today but what if a small government Muslim who is tough on Iran and ISIS comes around.  If there can be Muslim members of Likud in Israel, there can be Muslim believers in small government.  And I would vote for one of them in a heartbeat.  He has also said that he believes Satan encouraged Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.  Give me a friggin break.  He is so not electable.

John Kasich - I could be wrong about his chances, he might be able to get some of the moderate vote and do well but he is really to the left on Iran and I think he can be erratic at debates.

Chris Christie - No matter what his poll numbers are, he is still a jerk.  I also think it was really telling that during the second debate he lambasted Donald Trump and Carly Fiorina for talking about their private sector records.  It seemed to me as if he was looking down on people who didn't spend their lives working in government.  You never heard him attacking Walker or Kasich for talking about their records as Governors.  He is way too left for me and for the party.

Rand Paul - I'm a libertarian but I really find him grating.  Not like his father mind you who never hesitated to air some weird conspiracy theory but grating nonetheless.  He keeps talking about issues that only libertarians really care about instead of issues like the economy which everyone cares about.  He's also lost the plot on foreign policy.

Mike Huckabee - Is it just me or has he ballooned since quitting Fox?  I think he is regretting it now (think of all those lost millions).  Carson seems to be getting a lot of the evangelical vote which essentially leaves Huckabee without much of a constituency.  He needs Carson to blow up fast just to get some oxygen.

Bobby Jindal - I always liked him but he isn't polling well in his home state and Ill never forget his botched SOTU response.  I think he is a great manager but not a great candidate.

Rick Santorum - I think if he had any blue collar appeal, Trump probably stole it.  And to get evangelicals he first needs Carson and then Huckabee to quit.  He is doing so bad that he is polling at 1% in Iowa, a state he won last time.  But who knows, he can be like a bad rash that never goes away.

Lindsey Graham - He was really funny at the last happy hour debate and if the primetime debate was more lackluster, he probably would have received more press for his performance.  But running on sending troops to Syria?  I think he would get more support by campaigning on just nuking them.

George Pataki - Look, he seems like an able guy but I don't know why he is running.  Does he even believe he has a chance?  Did he ever?

Jim Gilmore - Who?  Exactly.

JEB is polling #3 in Florida, time for him to drop out

I'm not kidding.  In a recent poll, Trump has 31.5%, Rubio has 19.2% and Bush has 11.3%.  That is just abysmal.  It's one thing to be behind in a head to head matchup with a Democrat in the state you were Governor of, it's another to be #3 in a Republican primary, with less than 1 out of every 8 Republicans wanting you to be President.  I know it's just one poll and things could change but with Rubio polling at nearly double the level, it would require a major debate flub by Rubio for Bush to pass him and I just don't see that happening.  Nor do I see Bush doing particularly well in future debates.  He's been trained all his life for the political spotlight and debates and what we've seen is probably the best he can do.  Seriously, if he didn't have the Bush machine behind him he would be at the kiddie debates or already out of the race like Scott Walker.

JEB dropping out would also help the anti-Trump forces as his voters would tend not to go to Trump.  So please JEB, for the good of the party and the country, drop out.  You probably won't even win your own friggin state.

The left is really reaching in their latest Carly Fiorina smear

Today in the Daily Beast there is an article titled "Carly Fiorina's $4 Billion Job Scam", sounds pretty ominous right?  As if she is some evil con artist who stole $4 billion from someone.  The actual subject of the article though is pretty innocuous, they are talking about the tax repatriation holiday that was enacted in 2004.  It allowed companies to bring offshore profits back into this country at a one-time tax rate of 5.25% instead of the usual 35%.  Many multinational corporations were sitting on billions of dollars that were earned offshore and not bringing them back into the US because they didn't want to lose over a third of the cash.  As a result of this tax holiday, $362 billion was brought back into this country though instead of going to create jobs, much of it went to shareholders in the form of stock buybacks, dividends and acquisitions (oh the horror of shareholders getting money without the IRS getting their pound of flesh first!).

So what was Carly's role in all of this?  Pretty minimal.  Hewlett Packard was part of a lobbying group formed by multinational corporations and trade associations called the Homeland Investment Coalition.  I can't really see any information that HP was at the forefront of this campaign or anything as I remember just about every large corporation wanted this act enacted. 

Also, importantly this had strong bi-partisan support.  Here is the list of Senators voting for it (it passed the Senate by a vote of 69-17):

YEAs ---69
Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Allen (R-VA) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Bingaman (D-NM) Bond (R-MO) Breaux (D-LA) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Cantwell (D-WA) Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Cochran (R-MS) Coleman (R-MN) Conrad (D-ND) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) Daschle (D-SD) Dayton (D-MN)	Dole (R-NC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Feingold (D-WI) Fitzgerald (R-IL) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hagel (R-NE) Harkin (D-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lott (R-MS) Lugar (R-IN)	McConnell (R-KY) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Nickles (R-OK) Pryor (D-AR) Reid (D-NV) Roberts (R-KS) Santorum (R-PA) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Stevens (R-AK) Talent (R-MO) Thomas (R-WY) Voinovich (R-OH) Warner (R-VA) Wyden (D-OR)

Note that two of the Democratic Presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Lincoln Chafee both voted for this bill, as did many liberal democrats like Schumer, Mikulski and Harkin.  In the House, it passed by a similar margin, 280-141 and then signed by George W. Bush. 

So even if Carly and HP decided not to lobby for this legislation, it probably would have passed anyway.  So how exactly is this Carly's job scam?  Yes, HP profited from it and passed the money along to shareholders.  Wouldn't it have been a violation of Carly's fiduciary responsibility if she didn't take advantage of tax repatriation? 

The left is clearly scared of Carly and they are trying to throw everything at her to see what sticks.  Note they didn't do this with Trump despite a hell of a lot more ammunition to work with.  Why?  Because they know he would be a general election disaster.

Who is most likely to benefit from Scott Walker dropping out? Fiorina and Rubio according to the latest PPP poll in Iowa

I'm really shocked by Scott Walker dropping out, I knew that his poll numbers were abysmal (<1% nationally in the latest CNN poll) but given his Iowa infrastructure I would think he would have tried to make it at least to the caucuses.  I guess there must have been extreme financial mismanagement at his campaign and he got too big too quickly and without the campaign money (not including Super PAC dollars) to back it all up.  He probably listened to too many people who said he was great and so didn't think his star could fade this fast.  Think about it, just a month and a half ago he was center stage at the first debate, then he was closer to the fringes in the second and now he is completely gone.  Just a shocking descent.  I actually liked him and supported him early, as many people did, and was just turned off by his debate performance at the first debate.  I also supported Tim Pawlenty last cycle around the same point (I can pick 'em can't I?  I guess I like nice guys up until I want them to stop being nice).

So the question is who will get Scott Walker's supporters now that he is out of the picture.  I realize his actual number of voter support is small at this point but his donor support/rolodex is kind of important.  Most people think they will go to Marco Rubio, which does make some sense but people have to remember this is a 15 candidate field, so it's split many ways.  Luckily, the folks at PPP just did a poll of Iowa voters and did ask people who their second choices were:

Carly Fiorina actually gets the most Scott Walker voters, netting 19% while Marco Rubio gets 15%.  And importantly for Carly, she is now the top 2nd choice candidate in the race, so she should continue to profit as people drop out.  Carson, who I think will inevitably be a train wreck could net Fiorina 30% of his support, head and shoulders above any other candidate.

What's also interesting about this is that it is conventional wisdom to say that Ted Cruz is positioned to benefit from Donald Trump losing support because he has refrained from criticizing him.  The numbers don't seem to support this belief.  According to this poll, Cruz is the 2nd choice of only 6% of Trump voters in Iowa.  The people who will most benefit are the other true outsiders, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina.

Carly Fiorina was one of the most successful statewide GOP candidates in California in the last 15 years

People keep bringing up the loss in California as if she messed up something that was truly winnable by the GOP.  The fact of the matter is, it would have taken a miracle for Carly Fiorina to have won a Senate seat in California, one of the bluest of blue states.  Other than Arnold Schwarzenegger (who benefits from Trump-like celebrity and being the Terminator), California has been a graveyard for Republican candidates in statewide elections for major offices.  I looked at Every election for Senator, Governor and President in that state since 2000 and the average percent of the vote for a Republican candidate was only 39.4% during this time period.  Neel Kashkari only received 40% of the vote in 2014 in his race for Governor, Mitt Romney only received 37.1% of the vote in 2012 (which was almost identical to the 37% for McCain in 2008) and in the most recent Senate race, the candidate Elizabeth Emken only received 37.5%.

Notably, Carly Fiorina outperformed everyone except for Arnold Schwarzenegger and George W in 2004 (though she outperformed his 2000 percentage) with 42.2% of the vote (and was essentially tied with Bill Simon's performance in 2002), which is abysmal in most places but actually was an extremely good number for California.  She even outperformed Meg Whitman, former CEO of Ebay, who was running for Governor in the same year and spent more than an order of magnitude more money than Carly Fiorina did (Whitman spent $322.5m compared to only $22m for Carly yet only hit 40.9% of the vote).  The funny thing is that Whitman was the successful CEO of Ebay, a household name and didn't have the "stock run into the ground" and "30,000 layoffs" memes running around her yet she still didn't do as well as Carly.  Seriously, if Carly Fiorina's HP record is such a disqualifier, why did she outperform every Republican other than a popular celebrity and a sitting President in California?

Carly Fiorina on Fox News Sunday

Carly does a good job answering some tough questions from Chris Wallace:

Fiorina is #2 and Walker at 0% in latest CNN National Poll

I don't think things have settled yet but so far Fiorina looks like she has vaulted up to #2 in the latest CNN national poll.  Based on the numbers though her support looks like it has come mainly from the other "outsiders", Trump and Carson, since the last CNN poll (the "outsider" total went from 54% last poll to 53% this time).  Shockingly, Scott Walker is at 0% after another disappointing debate outing.  Looks like he may be the Tim Pawlenty of this cycle (another upper midwesterner who I supported early last cycle but flamed out, maybe they are too nice/understated?). Finally, Rubio has recovered nicely and is now in fourth place after a good debate outing.  I think the GOP could do much worse than a Fiorina/Rubio or Rubio/Fiorina ticket and I can't imagine a pairing that would have the Democrats more afraid.

Carly Fiorina at the Heritage Action Rally

She keeps the momentum going and had quite a few standing ovations:

Carly Fiorina knocked it out of the park last night

Last night was a great example of why I support Carly Fiorina.  She is smart, she is poised, she is strong and I think she is one of the few who can unite the party, tea-partiers and establishment, economic, social and national security wings.  In one answer she was quite convincing that she will bring "America back into the leadership game" and  I think social conservatives will love the passion she evoked when discussing Planned Parenthood de-funding:




Oh and if you missed the Kelly File, the Frank Luntz focus group totally loved her:

A liberal Congressman eviserates the Iran deal

Congressman Ted Lieu (D-CA) has a 23 page statement on why he opposes the Iran deal.  He has a very clear and convincing argument why it is a disaster even if Iran follows the deal to the letter, never mind cheat in any way.  Read the whole thing:

You gotta watch this Trump documentary from the 80's.

Trump originally had this documentary suppressed but it's now available on YouTube.  He basically screwed his workers, screwed his investors and is basically a total schmuck:

What happens to Trump when the media gets bored with him?

Leon Wolf at RedState posted the stats below on Trump's primetime media coverage on CNN:

Is it any wonder that he is at the top of the polls?  While most other candidates essentially only get exposure at once monthly debates, CNN has become the Trump channel.  While poor debate performances can seriously harm others, his poor performance last time didn't hurt him because the debate was a small percentage of the number of times people are seeing him.  Hell, CNN mentioned his name 239 times in one 24 hour period in July as documented by this Trumpgasm video:



As Brendan Behan put it, "there is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary" and that definitely seems to be the case here.  But as we know, the media does tire of stories eventually, whether they be missing flights or shark attacks or Lindsay Lohan.  At some point Trump's media coverage will wane and you can bet, so will his support.  Personally, I think people are already starting to get tired of the same old schtick coming from him.  How many times can you listen to someone say, "I will solve X problem because I have the smartest people and all the other candidates are nice but are really losers"?

Carly is #3 in New Hampshire!

The latest poll out of New Hampshire, run by WBUR, shows Carly is #3 in New Hampshire with 11%, behind Trump and Carson.  She also has the second highest favorables. And this is all before the debate tonight where she will hopefully shine. Here is the vote preference:

And here is the favorable data:

I'm really happy the Club for Growth is going after Trump

The Club for Growth has released some anti-Trump ads and all I can say is about friggin time.  I hope they and other organizations like them carpet bomb the airwaves with all the crap that Trump has said over the years. I'm sure the Trumpitista's are all in a tizzy over the ads, full throatedly calling Club for Growth RINO's but that will ring hollow for anyone who actually knows anything.  The Club for Growth is full of good principled conservatives and libertarians who are fighting the establishment and rightly call out Trump for his positions.  Trump could easily run as a Democrat just be tweaking a couple of positions.  See the ads below:




And here is an ad which focused on his support for the Kelo decision.

A Great Conversation Between Newt and Bill Kristol on 2016

This is very much worth watching for all of you political junkies out there:

Putting the California drought into historical perspective

Guess what, droughts used to be a lot worse as well as pretty extended.  Californians just got used to a period of above average rain:

Carly Fiorina is really taking advantage of Donald Trump's insulting comment about her face

Check out her new campaign ad, I would think almost all women would respond positively to it:



Note the comments from her that are featured in the ad are from her speech Friday at the National Federation of Republican Women:

Who would you rather have as Commander-in-Chief?

First choice is Donald Trump, who when grilled by Hugh Hewitt on his knowledge of the radical islamist threat says that he is a delegator and that most of the leading terrorists mentioned by Hewitt "won't even be there in six months or a year" (one of the names Hewitt mentioned was Nasrallah, who has headed Hezbollah for 23 years now).  Watch the whole thing below:



The second choice is Carly Fiorina, who when asked almost the same questions by Hugh Hewitt (without prior warning), answered them intelligently, like she actually knows what she is talking about (and boy does she support Israel!).  Of course, it's no surprise that she is good at foreign policy, she chaired the CIA's external advisory board.  Here is her segment:

Carly Fiorina has the second best favorables in Iowa

According to the latest Monmouth poll of likely Iowa caucusgoers, Carly has the second highest favorables and the second lowest favorables of the entire GOP pack.  Considering 71% can see themselves supporting at least 3 of the candidates in the field, she is in a good position to gain support once we get consolidation (I'm looking at you, Pataki, Gilmore, Graham, Perry and Santorum).