A VC - Latest Comments in The Google President

Re: The Google President

delaram — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:18:01 -0000

Mir hossein mousavi is my president.

Re: The Google President

EthanBauley — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:37:40 -0000

Tom's criticisms are somewhat legitimate but they are pretty pale compared to Larry Lessig's withering critique of Clinton's mischaracterizations and knowingly false statements about Obama's record.

Larry Lessig on Obama v. Clinton

Lessig was right when he termed these tactics "Rovean", as in Karl Rove. I love both Clintons' policies but they are completely committed to working within an unsustainable system.

Clinton thinks "change" means "no more Bush"; it really means shifting the culture of Washington, which starts with where the money comes from. And Obama is leading the way there (among other important places he is innovating).

Re: The Google President

crawford — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:08:14 -0000

Nice post Kate.

Re: The Google President

phoneranger — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 08:53:53 -0000

"where she still has huge polling leads" please link to polls that support this. Haven't seen any

"it's hard to see how Obama can win the nomination losing Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania" so to be clear if he DOESN'T lose all three, you will support Hillary's withdrawal from the campaign?

"but it has been done with the strength of the black vote" Something wrong with that?

"Obama can't just win the delegate count by a small margin" but implicitly you are saying that Hillary CAN?

Disaster? If Obama has polling lead and delegate lead and supers go with Hiilary. That's the perfect scenario.

Re: The Google President

David B. — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 04:03:19 -0000

I'm not interested in promises of "Do No Evil". Obama's record has confirmed it for me. And this is what changed me from being a Hillary supporter (which I was back in 1992 before she ran!), her record is atrocious. Every bad decision that Bush has made, she has supported. She voted for the war multiple times, the Patriot Act, etc. Her record says to me that she can say many things, but when we needed her, she wasn't there. Obama was. That's the difference for me.

Re: The Google President

Cranky Kate — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:52:51 -0000

Well said, Michael. As a recent Clinton-turned-Obama supporter thanks to Bill supremely disappointing me, I have seen that it's difficult to challenge her fairly when her gender makes even her ideas and platform beyond reproach. Tom, as for Obama's status as "The One" - I'd like to share part of what I wrote to Paul Krugman today in response to what I felt was his inaccurate interpretation of this phenomenon. And although I am not young enough to speak for them, I'd guess this is part of why Gen Y is mobilizing for him too: "I am sure that the cult of personality issue may exist for some, but I would offer this juxtaposition. The Clintons were a cult of personality, at least for people like me. I loved the IDEA of Bill, and the legacy of Bill, and the good times of peace and prosperity that came along with Bill... and I held out hope that he'd rubbed off on Hillary. Even if I didn't find her particularly engaging or inspiring, I was engaged and inspired by the idea of More Clinton Times. By contrast, Obama is not all about Obama, he's all about ME. We are the ones who are important, we are the ones who will take responsibility... we are the ones that matter in this race, not him. He's The Great Facilitator, if you will... a conduit for us to affect change for ourselves. So last year WE were Time's person of the year - this year, WE get to be president. The cult of personality is our infatuation with our OWN ego. Yes there are dangers associated with this as well, but to the extent that it (a) engages the populous in government again and (b) holds politicians accountable to us, it's a good thing.

Re: The Google President

fredwilson — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 21:54:02 -0000

Does it have a place in business?

Re: The Google President

Zaid — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 16:01:06 -0000

The most troubling thing for Clinton is that more people get to know Obama, more they like him. This trend isn't local to one region or demographic but across the board. With the big Hillary states slated for March, that gives Obama a lot of time to campaign heavily and catch up.

State after state Obama has erased healthy Hillary lead into a win for himself, with Maine being the latest example. He was down by over 10 points on weeks ago.

Re: The Google President

Crawford — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:34:12 -0000

I don't know how many of you have read Obama's first book, but I recommend it. I got behind him a couple years ago, but not before reading everything I could to validate that he wasn't just packaging. (In my view, he's not. But that's just my view).

Re: The Google President

Sam — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 15:11:49 -0000

here's a link (hilzoy not sullivan): http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2...

Re: The Google President

Sam — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:58:17 -0000

Andrew Sullivan has some interesting posts today discussing Clinton's replacement of her campaign manager and the fact that they ran out of money so quickly. Given Clinton's huge lead just a few months ago in virtually every state, doesn't an argument about competence and/or experience have to factor in all of the missteps in her campaign, the gaffes and the subsequent reorg? Her "Ready on Day One" slogan seems weaker in this light.

Re: The Google President

Scott Rafer — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:41:57 -0000

Defining "evil" either positively or negatively has no place in a democracy. Those judgments are how totalitarian societies are built. He merely needs to be truthful and protect the rights of the minority.

Re: The Google President

Greg Cannon — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:28:12 -0000

I guess the difference is that the "chosen one" schtick is Obama getting caught up in the moment. I don't think the guy has a messianic character. If I did, I'd steer clear of him. And I guess I think that, in the end, the reality of the Oval Office will knock him back to reality whereas I don't think that will be enough to cure Hillary of what I think ails her. In fact, I think it will only make things worse.

Re: The Google President

usedToGoogle — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:39:33 -0000

Google has modified their do no evil motto to:
You can make money without doing evil.

http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html

Re: The Google President

Michael — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 12:30:26 -0000

Tom, please allow me to put this plainly: You wrote a post levying certain assertions, and I challenged them. It's fair and fine if we disagree, but backpedaling on those assertions (and their effect) after the fact is ... well, you're better than that. (And for the ur-literal: no, you did not categorically state I am a misogynist; I followed your line of "sexist" / "feminist" accusations to their logical conclusion in a manner actually less-frothing as the way in which you issued them.)

But perhaps you were indeed too cynical -- 'The Audacity of Hope' was meant as mini-teleology, an ironic twist on what Jed Purdy might otherwise have entitled 'For Common Things', the finality or end-run of cynicism. It's no wonder that eluded you! ; )

Re: The Google President

fredwilson — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:55:02 -0000

Of course Lefsetz embellished it

That's what I love about Bob

fred

Re: The Google President

Andrew — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:48:49 -0000

The Google president must be CS savvy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4RRi_ntQc8

Re: The Google President

Tom W. — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:29:02 -0000

Wow, I feel just the opposite - to me, "chosen one" is much scarier.

Re: The Google President

Chipotle — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:27:11 -0000

My only question is how does a tech savy person miss something on television?

Re: The Google President

Greg Cannon — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:18:02 -0000

In the end, I will of course support her if she's the nominee. My two biggest problems with her: Iraq and the sense that she's entitled to the nomination. For me, the latter is worse than Obama's willingness to accept the "chosen one" mantle.

Re: The Google President

Tom W. — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:13:07 -0000

Michael, no one said you're a misogynist - I respect your choice (though it seems you don't respect mine - the anti-Clinton stuff just came tumbling out there). I do believe that Senator Obama would be better served by not remaining silent on the bitter sexist attacks on his opponent - someone, by the way, who shares virtually all of his policy views when compared to the GOP, and someone whose constituency he'd need quite desperately in the fall.

No one said you're cultish either. That doesn't mean the cult ain't out there, because it is. And I don't get a "sense of country" from the Obama movement. I get a sense of savior - and I naturally recoil. Can't help it. Just me, but many others feel the same way.

And yeah, I'm a cynic - I don't believe in the audacity of hope. I think it's crap (indeed, not even a decent metaphor English - hope isn't audacious, it's more of a common denominator). A pop slogan. Give me universal health care in the richest nation on the planet instead.

Re: The Google President

Tom W. — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:04:21 -0000

Greg - I actually went the other way on "not screwing up" part. The whole movement feel on Obama's side is so troubling. Part of him seems to be a regular progressive Democrat, and another part seems to accept "The One" status - which could get us into tons of trouble on every front. With Hillary, I know exactly what I'm getting. And I respect her.

Re: The Google President

Mike Champion — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:01:12 -0000

That wasn't quite the quote from Obama about Google -- it was: "There are a lot of companies that have been around longer than Google, but Google is performing", in response to a question about experience.

Re: The Google President

JDScott — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:47:06 -0000

Fred, while momentum is important, old networks are even more so. Obama will win again this week in the "Potomac Primaries" but will lose two large states in Pennsylvania and Ohio. These two are white, union states, where Clinton's name and organization will carry the day and where she still has huge polling leads.

The two states to watch are Wisconsin and Texas. Wisconsin is very independent leaning (a purple state) in which Obama is closing the gap. RealClearPolitics still has Clinton with a double digit lead in Texas, and it's hard to see how Obama can win the nomination losing Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Obama has done well in the south, but it has been done with the strength of the black vote. In Texas, there will be a large hispanic vote, where Clinton has had a huge edge over Obama so far.

Also, Obama can't just win the delegate count by a small margin, otherwise the superdelegates that Clinton has been lobbying for years will stay with her. Obama has to win by that much more to convince the superdelegates that supporting Clinton would spell disaster for them.

Re: The Google President

Greg Cannon — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:43:58 -0000

I'm supporting Obama, but actually expecting little from him beyond the basics of not actively screwing things up a la Bush. And while it's not Hillary's "fault" that Bill got to the White House first, she can't very well claim those two terms on her resume and then blame me and many like me for having Clinton fatigue. It's not her "fault" she's married to Bill, but it's not mine either.