:1orglaugh
So Meg Whitman just flushed $160mil down the toilet...sigh.
- Thread starter titsrock
- Start date
:1orglaugh
Maybe you're just being stubborn :dunno: She didn't have the special interest support. Shouldn't that have clued her in a little? She was going to be a boon to special interests and, yet, they assessed her chances for winning as nil. She got her ass kicked. It wasn't close.
Most of the alternative expenditures that have been suggested here (maybe not the lawn burning) would prepare her to be Guvnor moreso than whatever she did on the campaign trail.
I guess she could always move to Alaska and run there next time :dunno:
Let me get this straight, you want me to be outraged that a politician spent money trying to get elected? Like, a lot of money? Huh, seems to me that's been the case for the past 50 or so years. :dunno:
If you're talking about her losing by 12% of the vote, so what? It's the nature of the beast. I don't think anyone has really thought all along that Whitman would win.
She spent (err invested) a record amount of her own money and lost.:dunno: What's the huh-bub....
Is it a story...yeah. Otherwise we wouldn't know it's a record because the previous record amount wouldn't have been a story.
Bottom line, Mr. Meg Whitman probably won't be cheering her on with her next surge of hormonal impulses.:o
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Witches? I thought that was the flakey female from Delaware. :dunno:
I think Meg would have made a good U.S. Senator. I never really understood why she went for the governor's office instead of the senate seat. Instead of that ditz Carly Fiorina vs. Boxer, I think Meg Whitman would have been the best of that bunch to put in the Senate - since California seems to have designated its senate seats as "female only". And then Jerry Brown could have laid the beatdown on Crooked Carly for governor. Between those two, I'm not sure it would matter who won.
Meg is very bright. And unlike Fiorina, she actually did a very good job as a high tech CEO. She's not a wingnut or an extremist (like Sharron Angle or Christine O'Donnell) or a chattering moron (like Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann). But I'd say this race lightened her pockets enough that we probably won't see her run for office again. And that's too bad (IMO). I would listen to what Meg had to say - whether I agreed with her or not. I wouldn't listen to an idiot like Sarah Palin describe her ideas on making popcorn. But that low brow fraud is the one getting into the limelight. Another case of U.S. voters going for the superficial over substance.
Good post. I agree with almost everything you said. My one rejoinder would be that as the CEO of Ebay Meg never really gave a shit about the little people - the small sellers who collectively made Ebay the unique venue it was. I was concerned that proclivity might carry over to an elective office; that she might turn out to be nothing more than a self-serving special interests pawn.
in the end $160 million doesn't change the fact that she looks like emperor palpatine
Rey C.
Racing is life... anything else is just waiting.
Well, that is possible. Other than how Whitman performed as CEO and for the shareholders, I don't know enough about eBay to know what she did or how she treated smaller sellers. So your concerns might be entirely justified. :dunno:
But my feeling on Fiorina was that her first act as Senator, Governor or dog catcher would be to open a secret Swiss bank account for herself and gubment checks would really start bouncing with her in there. She was incompetent as H-P CEO, but to her credit, at least she's not a complete and total wingnut moron like Palin. You can use Palin's approval rating to track the number of dimwits in the United States, IMO.
Similar threads
