Potential Republican candidate Carly Fiorina claims she could neutralize Hillary Clinton in 2016 Presidential race

 Carly Fiorina is exploring a Presidential run in 2016 as a potential Republican candidate. I have to be honest here: I know nothing about her but I think that is forgivable because she is not a politician and in fact has never held a political office before. She did run for the Senate in the state of California in 2010 but that is the extent of her foray into politics.

  Yesterday she made some interesting comments on why she would be the best Republican candidate to square off against Democratic presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton in the general election and it comes down to this; she is a woman.

  Here is more:

Potential Republican presidential contender Carly Fiorina said Thursday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won’t be able to “play the gender card” if she faces off against a woman in the presidential contest.

“I think that if Hillary Clinton were to face a female nominee, there are a whole set of things that she won’t be able to talk about,” Fiorina told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. “She won’t be able to talk about being the first woman president. She won’t be able to talk about a war on women without being challenged. She won’t be able to play the gender card.”

Fiorina said in a female vs. female presidential match-up, Clinton would have to run on “her track record, her accomplishments, her candor and trustworthiness and her policies.”

“And I think that’s what elections should be run on — not identity politics, not what you look like, but who you are, and what you believe, and what you’ve done, and what you will do,” she continued.

  She does make an interesting point about her candidacy forcing Hillary Clinton to focus on her record because gender will be off the table, but while making the claim that a campaign should not be run “what you look like” is she not making the claim she should be the nominee based on what she looks like? It certainly looks to me as if she is using “identity politics” to offset “identity politics” and I do not think she realizes it–or she hopes that we do not.

  As I said above, I do not know anything about her but on the surface she appears to be the female version of Mitt Romney: a person who has been successful in business and the CEO of a large corporation but that alone does not qualify her to be President any more than being a doctor qualifies Ben Carson.

  While her candidacy may eliminate the gender issue it will reignite the left’s war on income inequality and much like Mitt Romney the left would use her as an example of everything that is wrong with capitalism in their fight against those who have been successful in their lives. Plus Mitt Romney had more political experience than Carly Fiorina and we saw how that worked out…

  If she decides to run for President I will listen to what she has to say and I will make a decision based on her political positions, I will not base my decision on the fact that she is a woman and if she does run for President I believe that is how she should be judged.

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium