Presidential Politics V - Carly Fiorina

I used to like Presidential candidate Carly Fiorina for her practical viewpoints on how to proceed to restore our nation to its former greatness. She seems experienced.  She seems knowledgeable.  She does make some great sound bites.   

Yet she scolds, and even preaches to us, explaining mostly how she is the perfect choice to solve the big problems of our day, and also how she could confront delimit and then defeat Hillary Clinton.  She deprecates everyone, not just the democrats.    She talks to us as if we are ignorant and the government is doing nothing and can do nothing.  On security, she talks about applying big data algorithms as though she understands them, but she betrays her ignorance of the size of the data sets (zettabytes) she wishes to examine.  Her broad strokes on security are designed only for the masses and newscasts. 

Let’s face it.  The Presidential job has become almost too large for anyone.   We, the country, may be seeking what we cannot have, or what does not exist.   As the government becomes larger, this search multiplies itself.  The size itself creates a systemic incompetency, an impossible problem of governance, a source of perennial corruption, and a system within which general compliance is not possible.

Fiorina does have experience based on business expertise.  This is true, but it is her single claim.  She has demonstrated little political expertise on how to work with the disparate forces that comprise a government.  She claims to have met the big time leaders in the world, but she has not developed programs with them.  A business meeting does not constitute a relationship.  

What the business candidates running in this cycle tell us is that their experience is needed to run the government.  What none of them, Carly in particular, realize is that the size of the government is on a scale at least four orders or 10,000 times the size of what they previously controlled. To put this in perspective, imagine a leader of a ten million dollar concern ( a modest sized company or a small city) claiming they could jump to command a one hundred billion dollar company (say like IBM), where little actual control is possible from an executive standpoint.   Yet our country is yet ten times this size.   A moment's consideration indicates financial business experience is not impressive and possible not the answer.    For example, I run a modest $100,000/year household, but I do not claim to be capable of running a $1 billion dollar enterprise. 

On the other hand, strictly political experience is not the answer either.  We need an executive with both fiduciary and political experience, or at least a working knowledge. Few of them, on either side have these.   Particularly, the children (Rubio and Cruz) do not have either.   We are left with no clear choice based on criteria; we are left with our intuition.