2016 Presidential Election Candidates
Posted by LaissezFaire 8 years, 11 months ago to Politics
Which presidential candidate for next year's election has the most Objectivist views? Which are you supporting? I think all of the GOP candidates have both good and bad qualities.
I am not religious but definitely think that we need a moral code to live by. Although imperfect, religion has provided a moral code for the intellectually lazy. It is fine, even preferable, to move away from altruistic faith but with no moral compass at all, we are asking for disaster. Our intelligence is what allows us to be free and not a danger to ourselves. Without it we are blindly running around oblivious to objects with which we are sure to collide.
I turned the offer down, and told Bill that as opposed to elected office that "I'd rather shovel shit. It smells better, and shoveling shit is at least honest work."
My guess is that many capable people feel the same way.
I like Scott Walker so far (even though he hasn't officially declared). I would also vote for Rand Paul or Ted Cruz.
I'm dubious on Ben Carson, but I think he'd make an excellent Surgeon General and I'd love to put him in charge of the VA. I'm also on the fence regarding Marco Rubio: his gaffes on immigration are a high hurdle for me.
I wouldn't vote for Carly Fiorina (I used to work at HP). Nor would I vote for Huckabee (he split the Primary voters in 2008, allowing McCain to get the nomination). He's the one person I blame most (aside from a complicit press) for giving us eight years of Obama.
Others should they run:
Chris Christie. Not just no but ____ no!
Jeb Bush. Even more ____ no!
Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana) - Way yes! This guy gets it. I don't think he'll run yet, though.
Would also vote for Nikki Haley or Rick Perry. Can't see anyone else on the list I'd even think twice about.
Anyone with a (D) by their name is an automatic "when ____ freezes over".
Ted Cruz
Scott Walker
Rand Paul
As I have learned more about Scott Walker he has moved up the list. I think any of these three have the ability and will to improve things.
I like Ted Cruze for his ability to debate issues and back up his arguments with facts.
I like Scott Walkers record as governor
I like Rand Paul but think he does not have the Charisma needed to lead in today world. He is more valuable as a legislator.
A side of me likes Walker best because we keep Cruz in congress and don't risk a seat to falling to a Democrat or a party republican.
I am also of the opinion that Cruz and Lee have plans they are working together and the alliance they have formed (and likely friendship) would be exceptionally helpful to Cruz in the white house.
Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are the two most solid members of the senate today and I think they may just be able to really do something.
In regard to the subject on this page, we think so much alike that we would likely have boring conversations. They'd go like--
Uh, huh.
I agree.
Hear, hear.
I concur.
Ditto.
Truer words were never spoken.
That dog can hunt.
Yep.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUdcrYvh...
Oh, the shame! The shame! Oh, boo-hoo-hoo!
Then on top of that, I tried to mooch my mate's din-din!
Ayn Rand wouldn't like me!
Waaaah!
1. Her degree was in History yet somehow she managed to finagle her way into being CEO of Lucent Technologies (a tech firm that made telecomm equipment). She rose to power just as Lucent was making huge profits and then bailed out after two years to take the job at HP after having been groomed by Lou Platt (HP's then-time CEO). Lucent plunged immediately afterward into irrelevancy. Note: It takes about two years for a CEO's policies to fully take effect.
2. After coming on board at HP, she simultaneously changed the name of the company to HP Invent and at the same time oversaw a slashing in the R&D departments in order to beef up flagging profitability. She poured a ton of money into marketing (her forte) and gutted new product development budgets. To give you an idea how far she went, when the company was run by Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, they mandated that 12% of gross revenues be put back into the R&D of the next product lines. Under Carly that dipped to below 2%. She cancelled all their research agreements with well-known universities in California who were working on things like nanotechnology before it was cool.
3. She purchased two brand new corporate jets at a time when corporate profits were slim and the stock price was stagnant - and they already had two! These were $15 million each and for reserved use - hers. At the same time, she layed off 5000 people (her first round of layoffs). At that time, a typical employee at my plant was probably making $75K. You can do the math.
4. She basically blackmailed a bank into supporting the buyout of Compaq, from which she made $40 million in direct pay from the merger and which she openly declared would be going into her war chest as a future politician. The Compaq CEO made another $30 million and then moved on. The merger tanked HP's stock price, and all HP really got out of it was egg on their face and Compaq's server business. If they would have waited even a year - and preferrably two - they could have paid 1/10th the price or less for the same assets - Compaq was already on its way down. And it wasn't as if other companies were in a bidding war for Compaq's assets. In the end it just made HP Compaq #1 (instead of #2 in server sales - Compaq was #1) and #1 in PC Sales (Dell was #1). Both of these were short-lived, however, as Dell soon overtook HP in both and it has been back and forth ever since. HP used to be the only name in the game in printers, but now even I would rather buy a Brother than an HP because HP's quality has sunk so far.
5. Following the merger, HP layed off 15,000 people just from HP alone. But it specifically targeted those who were within five years of retirement because HP's hiring policy had been that a retiree from HP was guaranteed health insurance benefits for life. They made sure to throw in just enough people to make it hard to prosecute in court, but everyone knew what they were doing and why because they wrote in a non-litigation clause into the separation package. My father was one of the casualties after just having been treated for cancer. This was especially egregious because during HP's earlier hard times - which included the disintegration of DMD, they would relocate and retrain their employees and only lay them off if there was no other choice.
6. Under Hewlett/Packard, the bonus program extended to every HP employee no matter what their job description. I knew janitors that got quarterly bonuses that made all the difference to them. Under Lou Platt (and some of his disastrous decisions regarding Disc Memory Division), the bonus program was restricted to just managers. Under Carly, that program was further restricted to just VP-level employees and above.
7. Carly Fiorina completely destroyed the HP Way. She turned the greatest tech company in history into nothing more than an consumer electronics manufacturer.
8. She was fired. No matter how she wants to try to spin her story at HP, it ended in failure. She got paid a lot for failure, no doubt, but never let her tell you that she was successful at either Lucent OR HP because the facts say otherwise. She left neither company stronger for her "leadership".
9. She couldn't even defeat Barbara Boxer for a Senate Seat despite out-spending her.
Carly Fiorina is a politician. I was there while she was CEO and my father worked at HP for 22 years before his ouster at her hand. She's no more a producer than James Taggart. She has nothing to crow about that anyone with a little Google search help can absolutely destroy. She'd get blown out of the water by Hillary Clinton because everyone already knows Hillary didn't accomplish anything, while all of Carly's "achievements" were nothing more than political opportunism at the expense of the company's long-term (sound familiar at all?).
I assume then you remember the Fusion Project, AND the triage centers to address all the screw up from their IT merging project..
I was a TC3/PM5 in the Storage Practice, and had a very different viewpoint from a different angle, and if you combine all the angles, not matter how you cut it, HP's problems had NOTHING to do with the tech bubble bursting.
That said, I will write in a name of my choosing before I will vote for another progressive RINO scumbag. I am proud to say that I did not vote for McCain or Romney
As for this one coming up, I would cast a vote for Cruz, Walker, Paul, and maybe a couple others (Haley, Jindal, for instance). I will NOT vote for Jeb, Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, etc. under any circumstances.
Put another way, The RNC does not have a blank check when it comes to my vote. That is reserved strictly for me and my best judgement.
Membership in either one is a non starter. They have had their chance for many decades and failed each and every time. How many new federal police agencies started by each since there were four then three in 1980, (And I really hate the barrage of propaganda.) Sorry..I don't serve the party and don't subscribe to the lesser of two evils statement. Supporting evil only proves the chooser is a supporter of evil.
When it's all done ho hum tweedle whomever will, as usual, set campaign rhetoric aside and continue in the same fashion. Carville-ests get behind me.
Anyone who puts citizens controlling government first and government controlling citizens last.
Anyone who keeps one foot in the sacred ground of the Constitution.
Anyone who seeks to make changes - legally.
Fat chance...
Democrats are Blue
Neither one Gives a Crap about You!
We need;
An Objectivist with balls AND charisma. And enjoys wrestling with pigs.
Back to reality.
Rand Paul or Ted Cruze would at least slow down the "progress" we have been making so much of.
For President, gimme Ted Cruz. He just gets it, and he's got a spine. Unlike many of the gutless wimps that stand for nothing that the GOP has been running for president since 1988, Cruz knows exactly what he's about. Although he may not be as popular (defined by the main stream media) as others, Ted Cruz is, in my opinion, a natural born leader. The only knock I have on Cruz is his lack of executive leadership on the resume, but I can live with that from him. I just think he is the real deal.
Next, for Cruz's running mate, gimme Scott Walker. Where Cruz has no executive position on the resume, Walker does in spades. To do what he has done in deep blue Wisconsin with billions of outside dollars working against him at every step is spectacular. Like Cruz, this guy knows exactly what he's about, and he doesn't compromise. There is no go along to get along with either of these two.
As an aside, I do admire one thing about President Obama. While I despise everything about the man and his politics, I do admire the fact that he is willing to fight for what he believes in, no matter how ____ed up it may be. If we are ever going to reverse this progressive nightmare, we need people with passion that runs deep and that will fight every bit as fervently as Obama does for his policies. I think Ted Cruz and Scott Walker are easily the cream of the crop when it comes to this, and that is why those two are essentially 1A and 1B on my list. Ideally, Cruz at the top of the ticket (more articulate) and Walker at VP, but I could easily support that ticket in reverse order as well.
The third candidate that is an absolute beacon for me is Rand Paul. I admire everything about this man's politics. Even on the very few issues where we disagree, I understand the principles driving his mindset, and that is something I can wholeheartedly respect. The reason I would choose to support Cruz/Walker as President/VP is because I think Rand fails the leadership/charisma test. If you look at his words on paper, he's the man. If you listen to him speak or debate, he comes off as whiny to me. Don't get me wrong, he's make a great Senate Majority Leader, with someone of courser material behind him as whip, but he just comes up short in the "I'm gonna ram this legislative reform down your GD throat whether you like it or not" test to me. I have no doubt he'd cut government spending and vote the right way every time in the Senate, but he just doesn't come off as bully enough for the presidential bully pulpit in my opinion. He's a rock star in the Senate, but come back and talk to me in 16 years about the White House when he's got some thicker hide.
As for the others:
Ben Carson - extremely impressive man in his profession, but we differ on too many things politically.
Bobby Jindal - A lot to like about this guy, but like Rand Paul, not quite ready for prime time.
Rick Perry - He comes off as a dumbass good ole boy when he speaks, but there's no denying that Texas has it going on in terms of economic growth. I am a Texan and a Aggie (as is Rick Perry), and I sincerely thank him for his service to my state, but I can think of 4 or 5 others I'd rather see as president. Now, gimme Rick Perry as Ted Cruz's replacement (or better yet, John Cornyn's) in the Senate, and he gets my vote in a half a nanosecond.
Chris Christie - I get a scuzzy feeling about this guy. I do admire his tenacity and aggression toward the liberal media in New Jersey, but he strikes me as a RINO with some Tea Party snarkiness mixed in. The Bridgegate thing is pretty lousy as well. I would stay home before I would cast a vote for Chris Christie.
Carly Fiorina - I need to learn more, but she strikes me alot like Ben Carson. Somewhat impressive in her personal life but not especially right for the job in DC. If I though Dr. Carson were the best man for the job, I would support him in a second. Same goes for Ms. Fiorina. In both cases though, it just feels like the RNC is grasping at straws to find acceptable tokens to run as GOP candidates. I don't care one way or the other about who the first woman president or GOP black president is. I don't care that Ted Cruz is a Cuban/Canadian/American hybrid. I don't care that Bobby Jindal's family came from India. None of that matters to me in the least.
Marco Rubio - I love him as a Senator, but like Rick Perry, I don't want him as my president. Not a horrible candidate, but several better choices to pick from over Rubio.
Nikki Haley - There's a lot to admire about Nikki Haley. I could see myself casting a vote for her if she won the primary, but Cruz/Walker get my support up to that point.
Jeb Bush - Read my lips, "_____ NO!!!" You can keep your progressive policies and your stategerie. I just want my country back.
He is the only candidate that could really make a difference. He would be a breath of fresh air. Ok you have to get past his ego but he is proud of himself as he should be. Unfortunately the Republican establishment will never let him win the primary unless there is huge support for him. They will probably throw a tisy fit.
Voting for any of them (possible exception of Rand Paul - yet to see) is no different than putting a "Wesley Mooch 2016" bumper sticker on your car.
I worked my tail off for Ron Paul - who does fit the bill. Maybe not a pure objectivist because of some of his religious views. But, he is the only one in my life so far that believed in individual liberty and rights. And, he is the only one not willing to bomb little brown children because their parents believe in a different magic sky daddy.
Plus - the RNC and DNC have already chosen their candidates. Most likely even the presidency itself has already been decided.
Rand Paul, has some "issues"
Scott Walker, Many good points, but too much of a politician
Ted Cruz: Too inconsistent for me and waffles too much
Carly Fiorina, ARGHHHhhh, if she ends up GOP, or VP I will just vote HIllary.
Isn't it fortunate that we DONT HAVE TO VOTE FOR EITHER OF THE WORTHLESS LOOTERS.
As far as Carson for Surgeon General, I think he'd be the ideal pick except for one thing. Why exactly do we have a Surgeon General anyway? Dr. Oz has more influence over how we think about medicine than whoever the current SG is. I don't really understand the need for the government to have a paid policy shill in that particular position other than to be the go to guy for Congress to grill the next time we get hit with the scourge of Equine Flu or Siamese Fever or whatever.