Carly Fiorina, a McCain spokesperson and former CEO of Hewlett-Packard, says Sarah Palin doesn’t have the experience to run a major business. But that’s okay, because she isn’t running for CEO. Now, my question is this. If you had to hire someone to run your business and your choices were Barack Obama, John McCain, Joe Biden, or Sarah Palin, who would you choose?
Three of them have experience running a Senate office, three of them have experience running a national campaign (McCain and Biden did it twice), and one of them has almost two years of executive experience as a governor. On that basis it is hard to distinguish between them. I’d look at the quality of the organizations they’ve put together. And, on that basis, I think Barack Obama leaps off the page as the obvious person to hire. A look back at McCain’s fits and starts in trying to run his campaign (especially in 2007) doesn’t inspire confidence. He did get the job done, but at a tremendous cost, with a severe episode of downsizing, and then only after a complete retooling of his staff and message.
On the whole, just based on the resumes and their records, I’d hire Palin before McCain. But I’m pretty confident Palin would fall to last place after going through a one-on-one interview. She’s not a serious person and she tries to bullshit her way through life.
What say you?
This coming from a CEO who cut HP’s stock price in half, laid off 7,000 people, but still got a $21 million golden parachute on her way out the door (HP has since recovered from the Fiorina era). I don’t think she’s making any sense here, what qualities do the two positions not similarly require? Ability to manage budgets, set strategic priorities, negotiate with other powerful entities, holding people accountable?
Downsizing is a plus if your goal is to downsize the government and get a tax cut in the deal.
to echo rolla’s comment;methinks dr.rotwang got the answer right:
assuming, of course, it wasn’t a trick question.
….
Sarah Palin doesn’t play well with others, as we’ve seen from her tendency to fire people who disagree with her. I think McCain’s explosive temper rules him out as well….they’d be too toxic to create a positive work environment.
Joe Biden strikes me as a harassment suit waiting to happen, based on his big mouth reputation, but he’d probably be fun to work with, and Obama would be the guy you’d want on your team in a high pressure situation, since he doesn’t seem like the type to take his stress out on everyone around him. Besides, wasn’t one of the ground rules for his campaign that everyone had to have fun, and there were no prima donnas and attitudes?
obama’s directive was “no drama”…and that’s cool.
palin doesn’t just not play well with others, she took a tiny alaskan hamlet, with no debt…and one might assume a balanced budget…and left it over $20m in debt.
she wouldn’t even get an interview in a sane world.
.
On Tuesday, three state representatives and two state senators sued Democratic Sen. Hollis French, who is overseeing the investigation; Juneau Democratic Sen. Kim Elton, who heads the Legislative Council; independent investigator Steve Branchflower; and the Legislative Council itself.
The lawsuit seeks to either delay the investigation until after the Nov. 4 general election or remove French and Elton.
“There is no nonpartisan reason to complete this investigation until after the election,” said Anchorage attorney Kevin G. Clarkson. “We just want to take the politics out of it and bring fairness back into it.”
Clarkson said he and a nonprofit legal firm in Texas, Liberty Legal Institute, were donating their work on the suit. A phone message for French was not immediately returned.
The Legislative Council, made up of four Democrats and eight Republican, voted unanimously to investigate the circumstances of Monegan’s dismissal.
≈ Cross-posted from my diary — Palin and Alaska’s Sexual Assault Cases ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."I’ve read his books, the guy is fucking smart. I don’t think McCain or Palin are very smart. McCain’s been riding his POW record and his wife’s money, his campaign was a disaster until Schmidt came along, and he obviously isn’t trustworthy. His pick of Palin shows he is a poor judge of character.
Palin, of course, is an ideologue and hack who ran Wasilla into the ground and rewards cronies over competency.
Biden would be my second choice, although I could see him being a sort of absent-minded, talks too much at board meetings kind of CEO. Then again, when it comes decision time, there are few I’d prefer over him.
If Barack Obama was a CEO, he’d be one of the wealthiest men in America.
Obama sure has run his campaign like a top flight CEO … big organization, big budget … it’s expertly branded, there’s no internal drama, they execute the mechanics perfectly. In other words, everything that Hewlett-Packard under Carly was not. I worked for IBM at the time, we mourned the day she got fired, another year of her and H-P would have been chopped up and sold for scrap.
I’ve played this little thought experiment a few times and this is the conclusion I come to. Why on earth would you hire someone who was openly hostile to your company. Republicans for years have been saying that government is the problem not the solution and when they are in power they prove that is correct. The Democrats, in my mind, at least have a basic philosophy that government can be an agent for good.
So for me qualifications are secondary to commitment to the company. Qualifications are hugely important and commitment, in a normal world, wouldn’t be an issue, but I’m not going to hire someone who wants to take my company and drowned it in the bathtub.
Careerism is not a qualification for president. Ambition in and of itself just doesn’t cut it. Feels like we are watching some reality show where the contestant who climbs a tree in X seconds flat is deemed the winner.
“She’s not a serious person and she tries to bullshit her way through life.“
Agreed. And yet, she must be pretty good at bullshitting because she has been quite successful at it so far.
o Needs to turn a lot of bad situations around. (Needs to recognize those bad situations, first.)
o Needs to stem the flow of red ink.
o Needs to be able to earn the trust of the Board.
o Needs to be able to communicate with stockholders.
o Needs to be able to bring in a strong and competent team.
o Needs to identify long-term strategic goals.
Hiring McCain would be like hiring someone internally, and a frequent supporter of the existing CEO at that. He also fails to properly identify risks or solutions, alienated a lot of his colleagues, and did a terrible job of vetting his #2, who was under investigation during his pick, no less. He wouldn’t get a first interview.
Palin’s thin resume has too many skeletons already, and her team selection has been rife with picking friends with no qualifications. She might get an interview on the basis of demonstrating good faith in diversity recruiting efforts.
Biden and Obama have their relative strengths. I think a typical Board (not that there is one) would be more comfortable with Biden and his length of experience, but picking Obama might give a better boost to share prices, and his team of advisers seems to be quality people.