RSS Feed Menu
Former Alaska Governor and Tea Party favorite Sarah Palin endorsed Republican Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate this afternoon. In a move sure to disappoint supporters of Chuck Devore, who Glenn Beck called “the tea party candidate”, Palin dropped her endorsement just hours before the crucial final debate between opponent Devore, Fiorina and Tom Campbell.
In a statement released by Fiorina’s campaign, Palin said:
Carly is the Commonsense Conservative that California needs and our country could sure use in these trying times. She’s not a career politician. She’s a businesswoman who has run a major corporation. She knows how to really incentivize job creation. Her fiscal conservatism is rooted in real life experience. She knows that when government grows, the private sector shrinks under the burden of debt and deficits. We can trust Carly to do the right thing for America’s economy and to make the principled decisions she has throughout her professional career.
This move is sure to disappoint supporters of opponent Chuck Devore, who had been painting himself as “the only real conservative in the race.” Asked for a response by the Washington Post‘s David Weigel, Devore spokesperson Josh Trevino said:
Sarah Palin’s endorsement brings with it tremendous media attention, but not necessarily votes. Conservative activists in California know and like Chuck DeVore — and that’s our bottom line.
Trevino also pointed to Sarah Palin’s Facebook page, which featured a mixed response to her endorsement of Fiorina. One disappointed commenter said:
I love Sarah, but she needs to keep her nose out of California’s politics. I’m really upset that she has endorsed such a candidate, when Chuck DeVore is the best we can vote for in our state.
Although it had been widely assumed that Devore was the tea party candidate, Fiorina’s campaign also distributed a Field Poll to illustrate prior Tea Party support for Carly Fiorina. In a survey released in March, Fiorina led both Tom Campbell and Chuck Devore among voters who identified ‘a lot’ with the tea party movement – Fiorina had 27% of this sub-group’s support, compared to 23% for Campbell and 12% for Devore. Among the sub-groups that only identified ‘some’ or ‘not at all/not aware’ with the tea party movement, Campbell led significantly.
The ideological split between Carly Fiorina and Tom Campbell was made clear by Palin, as in her endorsement Palin took the time to take a swipe at Campbell, the supposed ‘moderate’ in the race:
I’m a huge proponent of contested primaries, so I’m glad to see the contest in California’s GOP, but I support Carly as she fights through a tough primary against a liberal member of the GOP who seems to bear almost no difference to Boxer, one of the most leftwing members of the Senate.
A Campbell spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Palin’s endorsement is also somewhat surprising, considering that during the 2008 President election, Fiorina was mildly critical of Palin. Asked whether she thought Palin could run a corporation like Hewlett-Packard, Fiorina said: “No, I don’t. But that’s not what she’s running for. Running a corporation is a different set of things.”
View the entire endorsement press release here. View Sarah Palin’s Facebook note announcing the endorsement here.
Follow Tim Mak on Twitter: www.twitter.com/timkmak
There must be money in it for her somewhere! Cant think of any other reason.
A Palin endorsement can only work against Fiorina in the general election. In fact, I wonder if Boxer’s not this very second rubbing her palms together in glee, hoping CF wins the primary.
This is kind of off point, but I do not think Fiorina’s comment was really critical. I really can’t think of a single politician currently in elected office that that is qualified to be a CEO at a company the size of HP. Being an expert in one field does not mean one will even reach the level of mediocrity in another. I’m not arguing that Palin was an expert when it came to governing a state, but then again I doubt Fiorina would have much success running a commercial fishing operation. We also can’t be sure that Fiorina will be an effective Senator. Romney was apparentlyu a successful CEO, but we don’t know if he would have been a good president. The jury may still be out on whether he was a good governor. Let’s also not forget one of the more successful businessmen of their time, Herbert Hoover.
Carly did have the most bizarre campaign video I have ever seen, the infamous sheep in wolf’s clothing or whatever it meant (trust me, it made little sense) so maybe Carly and Sarah are both brain dead dolts who have a natural affinity for each other.
@ltoro1
It is off-topic so I’ll be brief, but Fiorina didn’t stop at Palin:
“Fiorina went on MSNBC to defend her comments and decides to double down, arguing that John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joseph Biden couldn’t run Hewlett Packard either. The Obama campaign, seeking to compound the fallout of her earlier statement, highlights just the portion where she talks about McCain.
“If John McCain’s top economic advisor doesn’t think he can run a corporation, how on Earth can he run the largest economy in the world in the midst of a financial crisis?”
I think Carly got booted out of Camp McCain after that.
ktward, well I think she was obviously correct on all of them. What exactly had McCain, Obama, and/or Biden ever done to prepare them to run a corporation. Again to be fair Fiorina, certainly would not be prepared to command a fighter squadron.
ltoro1. It’s irrelevant if Fiorina was ‘right’ or not, it was a campaign PR disaster.
What has Fiorina ever done to run a big corporation!! She ran it into the ground. The share price plummeted and she was fired.
So she is a complete failure as a businesswoman. Why should she be a success as a politician?
terryf98: “So she is a complete failure as a businesswoman. Why should she be a success as a politician?”
So true. Perhaps failing at their jobs is now a requirement for running for higher office (Fiorina + Palin (mini-gov)=incompetence.
Palin’s ‘endorsement’ of *anyone* is utterly meaningless.
It’s not surprising to me. She claims she wants to serve the public, but quit in the middle of her term to do a book and speaking tour–for money. She charges big money to speak for the Tea Party and NRA, then abandons the Tea Party for someone with a bigger wallet–Fiorina. Sarah is all about Sarah–all the rest is a sham intended to sucker people out of their money. She’s as low as they come.
TerryF98: “What has Fiorina ever done to run a big corporation!! She ran it into the ground. The share price plummeted and she was fired. So she is a complete failure as a businesswoman. Why should she be a success as a politician?”
anniemargret: “So true. Perhaps failing at their jobs is now a requirement for running for higher office (Fiorina + Palin (mini-gov)=incompetence.”
Wow. Terry and Annie, I’m stunned by your comments. Carly Fiorina worked her butt off (starting as a temp and a receptionist) and rose to the very top of the business world by first rising through the ranks of AT&T , then by becoming the first female CEO of Hewlett Packard and the very first female CEO of a Fortune 20 company, ever.
We should all celebrate her accomplishments, but the two of you decide instead to impugn and backbite with your snippy little grade school comments because of her political affiliation and this rather bizarre endorsement from Sarah Palin. I guess this means that liberals will only support liberal women in the private sector workforce who smash the glass ceiling and find success at the highest levels of business…hmmm…are there any? I wonder if you can you name one.
TerryF98: “So she is a complete failure as a businesswoman”
If becoming the first female CEO of an iconic Fortune 20 American technology firm is being a ‘complete failure,’ then I think we could all use a little of that kind of failure in life. Your words are absolutely stunning to me.
jquintana // May 7, 2010 at 7:24 am
TerryF98: “So she is a complete failure as a businesswoman”
If becoming the first female CEO of an iconic Fortune 20 American technology firm is being a ‘complete failure,’ then I think we could all use a little of that kind of failure in life. Your words are absolutely stunning to me.
(Rob) It was great for her – horrible for HP.
At some point Palin will be talked to by the Republican Leadership and they will (and they may already) set her straight on her duties to the Republican
Snippy little grade school comments?
Surely you Fiorina acolytes are aware that Carly was among Portfolio’s Top 20 Worst American CEOs.
Lesser known, she is also one of Tech’s all-time Top 25 Flops:
http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/techs-all-time-top-25-flops-558?page=0,5
Dem or ‘Pub, glass ceiling or no, woman or no … a bad CEO is a bad CEO.
JQintanta, you obviously conflate position with ability. Carly had her chance at HP and she was a failure. No woman vs. man thing. No conservative vs. liberal thing. It’s a money thing. Her job was to add value to HP, and she failed. For her to then tout that as an accomplishment shows a remarkable lack of self-awareness. From Wikipedia:
When Fiorina became CEO in July, 1999, HP’s stock price was $52 per share, and when she left 5 1/2 years later in February, 2005, it was $21 per share—a loss of over 60% of the stock’s value. During this same time period, HP competitor Dell’s stock price increased from $37 to $40 per share.
Of course, Palin’s massive failures as mayor (taking a town with a surplus and leaving it with a $20 million deficit and a lawsuit for building a sports facility on land they didn’t own) and pathetic record as half-term governor (scandals out the wazoo, a moronic pipeline deal, but she did help rake in federal earmarks) would certainly match up with Carly’s record of crushing the share price of a previously successful company.
Just to get on the bandwagon….
Fiorina suggests that McCain, Obama et al couldn’t run HP? Neither could she, certainly not very well. Ask anyshareholder who lost their butt during the Carly years. Ask the longtime, learned Board who fired her. This sort of bravada is exactly what California doesn’t need-a failed executive touting her bona fides and ignoring reality. Ah HA- I totally get the Palin connection now.
As someone who lives and works in Silicon Valley, I have to chuckle at the whole Carly situation.
She was a DISMAL CEO. Absolutely awful. She was full of herself. Her decisions had no basis in business logic. She was rude and callous to those around her and was known to be harsh to her employees. And during her entire tenure at HP, the company performed poorly, leading to her eventual dismissal. I had friends at HP that were literally dancing in the hallways on the day of her firing.
To turn this into a man versus woman thing is quite frankly, infantile. As stated above, a bad CEO is a bad CEO. Pure and simple. And that includes many men as well.
If you want to regale a successful female CEO, try Meg Whitman. Her political positions notwithstanding, she was a GOOD CEO.
And if you want to trash a white male CEO, let’s start with Dick Fuld of Lehman Bros. Of course you could say he was “successful” in that he collected about $22 million in compensation in the year before he drove Lehman into the dust.
How would you respond if he was running for office to represent you, and he bragged how Obama or McCain couldn’t be a CEO of Lehman (assuming, of course, that it still existed)?
@Diomedes // May 7, 2010 at 1:56 pm
Whitman was a good CEO. For a time anyway. She was in a tough market to keep up with. (A legit epitaph for many Biznet pioneers.) Since I’m not in CA, I’m not following the latest Gov stuff.
That said, Senate drama affects all of us, so I’ve some interest in Fiorina. As I mentioned way above, now that Carly has an official endorsement from Palin, I suspect Boxer’s giddy over the implications. Palin is an albatross in any non-Southern GE.
(An aside: I’ve quite a few Lucent/ex-Lucent friends. They had no words of praise for Carly, except for her departure.)
LFC, my response would be that Dick Fuld was correct, neither Obama nor McCain could be successful CEOs of Lehman. I don’t understand what would be contoversial about that. Of course we now know that Dick Fuld was also not capable of being a successful CEO of Lehman.
Since when did running a business equate directly with running government? They are completely different beasts, each requiring many shared skills sets, but they are not the same.
If nothing else, maybe with Palin’s endorsement Carly will quit half-way through her term.
Palin’s track record in public office has been exemplary and has withstood the test of the most demanding scrutiny of investigative news media.
ktward:
The key point is how much ammunition Carly’s track record is going to give the Boxer campaign.
Barbara Boxer can easily make Carly’s record the issue, rather than her own track record. I can see Carly being on the defensive from the day she is nominated.
The GOP has three choices; Carly, Campbell, or deVore. Of them, Campbell seems the least objectionable and the one most likely to give Barbara Boxer a run for her money. With deVore, Boxer can make him the issue by painting him as an ideological extremist (which won’t sit well with CA voters).
Campbell ain’t perfect either, but at least he can survive the expected Boxer onslaught. Carly won’t.
sinz54.
Sounds like you and I are on the same page re: Carly, though my take is admittedly a little more snarky.
Frankly, I don’t see CA ‘Pubs voting for Carly over Campbell. And I absolutely don’t see the GE going to Carly over Boxer. Though weirder things have happened.