This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/08/carly-fiorina-cannot-win-help-hurt-clinton

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Carly Fiorina can't win, but she can help the men of the party hurt Clinton Carly Fiorina can't win, but she can help the men of the party hurt Clinton
(about 3 hours later)
In a campaign as long and filled with unnecessary months as this one, it’s easy to get carried away – like in the rush to proclaim that there is a Carly Fiorina boom going on. We wanted it for our soap opera; we’d already seen so many stories of the brash businessman, the gifted doctor, the young Latino gentleman. But in the latest PPP poll, Fiorina stands at just 6% – better than only Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, and the people still running because their moms won’t let them quit. It’s not a winning number.In a campaign as long and filled with unnecessary months as this one, it’s easy to get carried away – like in the rush to proclaim that there is a Carly Fiorina boom going on. We wanted it for our soap opera; we’d already seen so many stories of the brash businessman, the gifted doctor, the young Latino gentleman. But in the latest PPP poll, Fiorina stands at just 6% – better than only Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, and the people still running because their moms won’t let them quit. It’s not a winning number.
It was easy to get caught up in the drama, once Fiorina displayed a minor flair for it and exceeded the early, low expectations for her candidacy. I’d seen her present at CPAC, and it was strikingly dull even in a room full of dedicated fans: she spoke with an almost peevish cadence, as if she disliked shaping her mouth around her crisply articulated consonants, and she rarely raised her even tone, stopping only at a kind of exasperation. It is probably a remarkable corporate boardroom approach, one that makes others literally lean in to hear her calmly berate someone, but it didn’t seem like it would translate well to the stump. It was easy to get caught up in the drama, once Fiorina displayed a minor flair for it and exceeded the early, low expectations for her candidacy. I’d seen her give a presentation at CPAC, and it was strikingly dull even in a room full of dedicated fans: she spoke with an almost peevish cadence, as if she disliked shaping her mouth around her crisply articulated consonants, and she rarely raised her even tone, stopping only at a kind of exasperation. It is probably a remarkable corporate boardroom approach, one that makes others literally lean in to hear her calmly berate someone, but it didn’t seem like it would translate well to the stump.
Months later, in the second debate, that fine control paired perfectly with her moral outrage about Planned Parenthood, her defense of her record at HP, her barely concealed disgust with Donald Trump and her itemized list of foreign policy actions. This was a candidate who could seethe within composed limits, who cared enough about you to have done the research, be passionate for her beliefs and yours, and never be unprofessional. (And, to play to the sexist view, it showed a woman who could be strong and fed-up without seeming “shrill” or “unhinged.”) The only problem was that, her well-earned contempt for Trump aside, everything she said was complete twaddle. What she claimed to have seen on the Planned Parenthood video doesn’t exist. Her defense of her business record relied on apples-and-oranges data and metrics non-contributive to her point. Her foreign policy platforms verged on the farcically nonsensical.Months later, in the second debate, that fine control paired perfectly with her moral outrage about Planned Parenthood, her defense of her record at HP, her barely concealed disgust with Donald Trump and her itemized list of foreign policy actions. This was a candidate who could seethe within composed limits, who cared enough about you to have done the research, be passionate for her beliefs and yours, and never be unprofessional. (And, to play to the sexist view, it showed a woman who could be strong and fed-up without seeming “shrill” or “unhinged.”) The only problem was that, her well-earned contempt for Trump aside, everything she said was complete twaddle. What she claimed to have seen on the Planned Parenthood video doesn’t exist. Her defense of her business record relied on apples-and-oranges data and metrics non-contributive to her point. Her foreign policy platforms verged on the farcically nonsensical.
But pairing nonsensical policy positions with a no-nonsense approach to politicking probably isn’t going to work going forward. Ronald Reagan could get away with telling completely made-up stories because he always seemed so cheerful about them. Why, that sunny guy just wished they were true so much that you couldn’t fault him for thinking they were. But Fiorina’s biggest selling point – that clipped, efficient competency – undermines her stints at being a fabulist. Ronald Reagan sold hope in spite of whatever everyone was talking about, but her core appeal to voters is that she knows better.But pairing nonsensical policy positions with a no-nonsense approach to politicking probably isn’t going to work going forward. Ronald Reagan could get away with telling completely made-up stories because he always seemed so cheerful about them. Why, that sunny guy just wished they were true so much that you couldn’t fault him for thinking they were. But Fiorina’s biggest selling point – that clipped, efficient competency – undermines her stints at being a fabulist. Ronald Reagan sold hope in spite of whatever everyone was talking about, but her core appeal to voters is that she knows better.
Worse, the one thing that usually grants a free pass in modern conservatism – business acumen – is one of the most challenged aspects of Fiorina’s campaign. It’s hard in an era of Trumpian populism to sell your job-creation skills when Trump himself is hammering you for laying off 30,000 workers before floating away in a golden parachute. It’s harder, too, to be a successful woman candidate for a party whose members celebrate Donald Trump and punish Megyn Kelly for her asking him reasonable questions and his suggesting she’s only doing it because she’s in the process of shedding her uterine lining.Worse, the one thing that usually grants a free pass in modern conservatism – business acumen – is one of the most challenged aspects of Fiorina’s campaign. It’s hard in an era of Trumpian populism to sell your job-creation skills when Trump himself is hammering you for laying off 30,000 workers before floating away in a golden parachute. It’s harder, too, to be a successful woman candidate for a party whose members celebrate Donald Trump and punish Megyn Kelly for her asking him reasonable questions and his suggesting she’s only doing it because she’s in the process of shedding her uterine lining.
The question then is, outside of being heralded as the next front runner by a media industrial complex desperate for a new narrative to sell viewers, what Fiorina’s role in the Republican race is from here on out. To paraphrase the last honest man in American politics, Hannibal Lecter, we need to return to first principles. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature? What does she do, this woman we would nominate?The question then is, outside of being heralded as the next front runner by a media industrial complex desperate for a new narrative to sell viewers, what Fiorina’s role in the Republican race is from here on out. To paraphrase the last honest man in American politics, Hannibal Lecter, we need to return to first principles. Simplicity. Read Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature? What does she do, this woman we would nominate?
Going forward, it’s hard to see Fiorina’s job as anything other than an exculpatory mouthpiece for the worst attitudes of movement conservatism toward women.Going forward, it’s hard to see Fiorina’s job as anything other than an exculpatory mouthpiece for the worst attitudes of movement conservatism toward women.
On Monday, she went on Megyn Kelly’s show and said, “There are a lot of liberals who find me kind of scary right now, because I am doing really well in the polls and – horror of horrors – I am a conservative woman ... We know that most of the media is very liberal, and we know that liberal women have trouble accepting that there are many, many women who don’t agree with them.”On Monday, she went on Megyn Kelly’s show and said, “There are a lot of liberals who find me kind of scary right now, because I am doing really well in the polls and – horror of horrors – I am a conservative woman ... We know that most of the media is very liberal, and we know that liberal women have trouble accepting that there are many, many women who don’t agree with them.”
Beyond the fact that being a member of a marginalized group who defends the existing power structure for personal profit isn’t a new gig, this isn’t even a new statement for Fiorina in particular: it was her selling point at her campaign launch. Carly Fiorina said she would run to prove there isn’t a War on Women, and her greatest asset would be not what she could talk about but what Hillary Clinton could not: “If Hillary Clinton were to face a [Republican] female nominee, there are a whole set of things that she won’t be able to talk about.”Beyond the fact that being a member of a marginalized group who defends the existing power structure for personal profit isn’t a new gig, this isn’t even a new statement for Fiorina in particular: it was her selling point at her campaign launch. Carly Fiorina said she would run to prove there isn’t a War on Women, and her greatest asset would be not what she could talk about but what Hillary Clinton could not: “If Hillary Clinton were to face a [Republican] female nominee, there are a whole set of things that she won’t be able to talk about.”
But as much as Fiorina undermines some of the easy identity-politics talking points that Hillary Clinton gets to enjoy, her ultimate role will probably take the form of a mouthpiece for the final Republican contenders. Every Fiorina hit-quote about the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s treatment of women, children and fetuses might as well now be prefaced by the male-voiced comment, “Even my esteemed colleague and friend Carly Fiorina says that...”But as much as Fiorina undermines some of the easy identity-politics talking points that Hillary Clinton gets to enjoy, her ultimate role will probably take the form of a mouthpiece for the final Republican contenders. Every Fiorina hit-quote about the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s treatment of women, children and fetuses might as well now be prefaced by the male-voiced comment, “Even my esteemed colleague and friend Carly Fiorina says that...”
Carly Fiorina is running for president now – and in this senselessly, agonizingly protracted campaign, she can probably keep running for months – but in the long run she will be most likely be running as cover for the retributive, punitive, invariably masculine rhetoric of movement conservatism.Carly Fiorina is running for president now – and in this senselessly, agonizingly protracted campaign, she can probably keep running for months – but in the long run she will be most likely be running as cover for the retributive, punitive, invariably masculine rhetoric of movement conservatism.
Being used as their cover is the best, most profitable thing that Fiorina can do in the long run, both to advance her party’s interests and guarantee her a lifetime of ample speaker’s fees on the big-business and wingnut welfare talk circuit. Maybe, in the short term, she’ll be rewarded with a cabinet position or a vice presidential nod, but neither would be as lucrative as putting a “legitimizing” female stamp of endorsement on systemic anti-women policies.Being used as their cover is the best, most profitable thing that Fiorina can do in the long run, both to advance her party’s interests and guarantee her a lifetime of ample speaker’s fees on the big-business and wingnut welfare talk circuit. Maybe, in the short term, she’ll be rewarded with a cabinet position or a vice presidential nod, but neither would be as lucrative as putting a “legitimizing” female stamp of endorsement on systemic anti-women policies.
Instead, ironically, her story of the “secretary-to-CEO” will wind up being a lot more like a secretary than Madame Secretary. In effect, either by appearances on the news or by taking the form of an endlessly exculpatory feminine rescue quote, her job will eventually be to convey to the people asking hard questions the unpleasant news that the men behind the closed doors will not be able to address them, but, in their absence, here is what they wanted to say.Instead, ironically, her story of the “secretary-to-CEO” will wind up being a lot more like a secretary than Madame Secretary. In effect, either by appearances on the news or by taking the form of an endlessly exculpatory feminine rescue quote, her job will eventually be to convey to the people asking hard questions the unpleasant news that the men behind the closed doors will not be able to address them, but, in their absence, here is what they wanted to say.