Carly Fiorina: Big Tech Has Unprecedented Economic Power

Published on
January 15th, 2021
Duration
63 minutes

Iran: Investing in One of the Best-Performing Stock Markets


Carly Fiorina: Big Tech Has Unprecedented Economic Power

The Interview ·
Featuring Carly Fiorina and Ed Harrison

Published on: January 15th, 2021 • Duration: 63 minutes

Carly Fiorina, founder and chairman of Carly Fiorina Enterprises and 2016 Republican Presidential candidate, joins Real Vision managing editor Ed Harrison to discuss the value and challenges of regulating big tech and the enormous economic power it has amassed across the globe. Hailing from an extensive career in tech and finance as former CEO of HP, she discusses the opportunities that business can bring to the political table and the challenges she faced as a woman in male-dominated industries, and the value of regulating big tech. She also shares her views on current events from the storming of the Capitol to the political climate to the effects of the pandemic on public policy. Filmed on January 11, 2021.

Key Learnings: Fiorina argues that focusing on results rather than partisan issues encourages competition and accountability to restore political systems and revitalize the economy.

Comments

Transcript

  • PR
    Paulo R.
    31 January 2021 @ 18:11
    Ed, a lot of respect for you and Real Vision, but please take politics out of this forum. When someone starts an argument laying down what the "truth" is all about... shouldn't one immediately ask if that statement isn't in itself a form of indoctrination and therefore divisive? That is indeed the problem.... everyone seems to think of himself/herself to be the all-knowing, the all-wise, the all-moral encompass and therefore the legitimate owner of the "truth"...
  • DB
    Dan B.
    28 January 2021 @ 20:51
    Great interview! Thanks Ed!
  • ZY
    ZHENG Y.
    27 January 2021 @ 13:43
    I still dun know why discussion on politics are so unbearable for some ppl. I always to hear what the other side are talking and point of view. Then we understand each other better. Good job RV, discussion bring understanding, does not mean u need to agree, but to exchange view. Same as investment...
  • TT
    Tiggy T.
    27 January 2021 @ 10:57
    Probably better if Real Vision stays away from soapbox politics? Teach us about business, Your business interviews are super Thats why we are here!
  • EH
    Edward H. | Real Vision
    15 January 2021 @ 15:21
    Ed Harrison here: As the interviewer, I liked this interview for one simple reason: Fiorina had a very cogent understanding of the problems with Big Tech and potential solutions. I personally believe Big Tech regulation will be a defining issue of the next several years. So, anyone asking why this interview matters, should stop right there because Big Tech is massive as a percentage of overall US and global market cap. And what happens to them matters for investors. As to her solution, what is most important is that she delineates the problem into two realms: bigness and 'free speech'. In her view, the two are related but different, meaning concentrating on Big Tech's bigness won't necessarily give you a solution to the free speech side of things. So the issues around Section 230 loom as large as antitrust regulation in that framing. Very good discussion in my view. PS. - You can't avoid the political side of the discussion (unfortunately). But the crux of the discussion is big tech
    • DB
      David B.
      15 January 2021 @ 20:16
      Spot on Ed ... shame it looks like a lot of RV community haven’t appreciated this interview
    • DS
      David S.
      15 January 2021 @ 23:59
      Mr. Harrison: interviews addressing some political issues is helpful in our investments and macoviews. They are a small but important part of RV. This interview helped me understand better how Ms. Fiorina thinks compared to how she has chosen to take action. It is true we need to govern more from the middle. Is this just a new political position for her? IMO she needs to explain to herself why she supported Senator Cruz in 2015. Senator Cruz has always been consistent. He never wanted to govern from the middle. Was she mistaken then or now? Thanks for the interview. DLS
    • HK
      H K.
      16 January 2021 @ 01:06
      Makes sense. Agree on the theme of understanding how the govt may interact with these companies.
    • jl
      johan l.
      16 January 2021 @ 18:54
      if you could get Ben Thompson or Benedict Evans to talk on BigTech and how they affect everything, that would probably make for a fantastic interview.
    • WM
      Will M.
      26 January 2021 @ 20:36
      Ed, love 99% of your efforts. The problem with this particular "lightning rod" was that there was only about 35% on the topic of big tech and the rest was politics. I see the value of having folks on here who might polarize the RV community, but it can be mitigated a bit by truly emphasizing the components geared to the macro outlook. Perhaps a minimum of 65% on big tech would have been more watchable.
  • BC
    Bill C.
    17 January 2021 @ 20:37
    Kudos. Personally, I like that RV would allow this politicly oriented interview. But there is so much to be said. I'm probably 10 minutes in so I hope there is more balance to the issue mentioned here. Some of what I'd like to see addressed; Was the claim of Trump/Russia Collusion story that was screamed from every Leftist media outlet, and every Democratic politician...for 3+ years...true of false? Was the claim of a Trump Ukraine situation true or false? There were calls to impeach him even before he was sworn in. There was illegal surveillance of his campaign. The Steele Dossier was fake. Did anyone here see the Kavanaugh hearings? My understanding is there are lists of documented lies that were used against him. In regard to election irregularities it seems an amazing number of people have come forward to give affidavits suggesting, at the very least, questionable behavior. How can these and other claims, and their associated hyperbolic vitriol simply go away overnight? Though I completely condemn the breaking into the capitol, there were thousands upon thousands of people at that DC protest that there because of the questions I mention above, along with many other issues not mentioned here. I would also submit the DC protesters and so many others, many Democrats included, even if they don't know the exact figures, have an idea of what our deficit is, and what the debt figure is, and that unfunded entitlement promises are 6 - 8 times what the amount of the debt. How did these untenable promises get started and why when, over decades, anyone that said this spending, and promises of ever more, wasn't going to work, was shouted down by at least half of politicians, and the vast majority in the media. And some wonder why people are upset when the latest plan for a fix is unimaginable money printing? This and so many other situations, to my mind, demand truths and bona fide investigations to get to the truth. I tend to believe the charges and much more were simply conjured by the same people that want to continue with the blind eye towards the real problem. But I also want to know if I'm wrong. Is everything hunky-dory and I'm wrongly convinced that are really bad? How the hell did we get to this point financially and economically? In regard to the diversity, the supposition is that there are mountains of talent just sitting around not being utilized because of discrimination. If there is such a mountain of talent I would suggest to them to get out there and start a company. Personally, I'm willing to do business with anyone that can do a good job. But you've got to show me the product or service. I willing to bet there are millions who would jump at the chance to do business with a minority owned, or women owned business, not because of any protected class status, but because everyone, everywhere is looking for performance. There is so much more that could be said in this regard that is politically and socially too sensitive for this website. I'm all for diversity as long as performance isn't hindered. Let the cream rise to the top. If I go the doctor, or hire an architect, or anyone anywhere else, I want to know they can do the job. Color and sex (sorry, "gender") matter not to me. I doubt Ed Harris and Raoul Pal hire people they think cannot do the job. But as Thomas Sowell emphasizes one has got to get and have the skills to fit in or start something for themselves. So there's that, for a quickly worded train of thought.
    • RT
      Robert T.
      17 January 2021 @ 21:27
      Beautiful, balanced and insightful -- cheers
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:19
      The irony is that the constant appeal to diversity as I have said (and they can't even really define it), shows anyone paying attention that people aren't equal, so you have to make up terms to make them "more equal than others" as Orwell put it in his book.
    • WM
      Will M.
      26 January 2021 @ 20:07
      I do have to agree with you on this in general, especially your diversity comments. For me, Trump was always an outsider and therefore the "inside the beltway" career types were always going to try to trash him. Unfortunately he did not help himself at all. Just staying off Twitter alone would probably have got him an extra 1% of the votes. I think the most important point for me is that the majority of politicians are in it for themselves and not the good of the nation, both left and right. Carly will never get nominated and besides, like so many politicians, her position changes depending on what she thinks she can gain from the situation.
  • JN
    Jerrick N.
    16 January 2021 @ 04:17
    Who tf is this lady???
    • WM
      Will M.
      26 January 2021 @ 19:51
      Why not google before you make such a comment?
  • RS
    Ryan S.
    20 January 2021 @ 21:28
    I love Real Vision. That's why I hope you will keep the politics off the platform so it doesn't get ruined like everything else these days.
    • BC
      Bill C.
      26 January 2021 @ 19:35
      Politics is the No. 1 reason our country is bankrupt.
  • PE
    Paul E.
    25 January 2021 @ 16:29
    I tried to watch this one, but couldn't handle the political, self serving narrative. Nothing against Ed or his abilities, simply couldn't continue to listen to Carly.
  • CL
    Christopher L.
    25 January 2021 @ 07:59
    Oh look, the shortest serving VP nominee in history lol
  • RM
    Robert M.
    23 January 2021 @ 14:29
    Fiorina is nothing more than a true modern day politician. Good interview Ed.
  • TM
    The-First-James M.
    20 January 2021 @ 15:54
    I can see the anti-Orange Man stance of the interviewee got some die-hard Trumpers aggravated on here. Speaking as a Brit, I am no fan of Biden or Harris and think the Orange One did a great job of putting the CCP threat squarely on the table; indeed, I worry that Biden will sweep this under it. However, I couldn't stand the narcissistic lies and his blatant talking up of the S&P500 (anybody else here remember his frequent mentions of the 'tremendously beautiful' Chinese trade deal); not to mention his hypocrisy in dissing the Fed, QE and the "Big Fat Ugly Bubble" on the election trail in 2015 and 16, then doing an about face and calling for rate cuts, QE and NIRP while he was in power. Seriously, what a two-faced hypocrite. Anybody who gets triggered by my comments on Trump above and cannot look upon the situation dispassionately must have lost any semblance of objectivity they might have once had...
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:09
      The problem is that those of us who know the facts also knew what Trump was and are honest and accurate about it. That's why we don't get triggered by you (and you seem to be reasonable) or others, only the lefties get triggered. We dislike fake news, lies and want the truth to be told = why we may object to things here or there. It's funny that the term narcissism gets used only for Donald Trump, too. And you wonder why we who call people out on disingenuous things are bothered by the application of certain words only for certain people when the system was and has been more narcissistic than Mr. Trump ever was. He was just a mirror.
    • RM
      Robert M.
      23 January 2021 @ 14:15
      Triggered? Yes, I'll admit I am. Is wanting transparency and HONESTY something that the entire world should desire and expect? How much did we really get? How much of the evidence did you personally examine? I suspect you never read Dr Navarro's reports that I have listed in my post above. I'd love for you to read them, and prove where they are not correct or accurate. Isn't that how a real debate is conducted? Why did those in the 6 swing states fight so hard to prevent a forensic examination of the ballots and the Dominion voting machines, especially if it was as clean an election as so many want to portray?
  • JC
    John C.
    21 January 2021 @ 01:03
    I tend to lean right politically and although there were things said that I fundamentally disagree with, I appreciate Real Vision having the respect and courage to post a video that so powerfully articulates what’s on the hearts and minds of roughly half the country.
    • MP
      Michael P.
      21 January 2021 @ 03:52
      I would'nt necessarily call it "courage". It's the prevailing narrative in main stream media, universities and tech CEO's, Hollywood elites and leftist virtue signaling coastal elites. She's not brave at all. She is a self serving opportunist.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:05
      100%, Michael P is spot on. If you want another johnny come lately in the vein of RINO sellout McCain/Romney, it ain't hard to find with the groupthink™ crowd.
    • RM
      Robert M.
      23 January 2021 @ 14:05
      I have to agree with Michael and Lemony. I have to wonder how much real investigation Ms Fiorino did into the ballot and voter fraud to come to her conclusion. I watched almost every hour of the presentations made (almost exclusively by those who swore affidavits under penalty of perjury) to the 6 swing states' legislatures. The fact that only 2 of the 40-50 cases filed with the courts were actually heard by the courts and not summarily dismissed without allowing the evidence to be presented is more than a little troubling - including the Texas case that the US Supreme Court is constitutionally (Article 3, Section 2 ="controversies between 2 or more states") designed to be adjudicated . Dr Peter Navarro lays out the actual ballot and vote issues in 3 reports (most current to oldest): 3. https://fortruthandfreedom.com/03-Navarro-The-Navarro-Report-Volume-III-Final-1.13.21-0001.pdf 2. https://fortruthandfreedom.com/02-Navarro-The-Art-of-the-Steal-1.5.21-FINAL.pdf 1. https://fortruthandfreedom.com/01-Navarro-The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf
  • LS
    Lemony S.
    22 January 2021 @ 21:29
    I jumped around and listened to 6 of the 17 sections. Did this woman not fall on her face in any of the 11 remaining? It's like a robot answering questions who is programmed to give the most inane, unrealistic answer possible. Please direct me to one section that is reasonable that I might have missed. I thought that a broken clock was right once a day but now I'm starting to doubt even that axiom ...
  • DG
    David G.
    15 January 2021 @ 13:16
    Fiorina is a joke. She literally drove HP into the ground as its CEO and was forced to resign (given a very nice golden parachute on the way out btw). I guess because she is a woman it is all good. I can't even believe she ran on the republican ticket, she sounds like a socialist with non stop talk about equality. I have always been for electing and employing those upon merit, she seems to want to make the world flat.
    • DS
      David S.
      16 January 2021 @ 01:38
      Merit is important. As a society we need to work toward making as many children as possible succeed by preparing each one of them for success. DLS
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:25
      Which means stop incentivizing the dissolution of family, David, yes.
  • ZM
    Zac M.
    16 January 2021 @ 14:06
    1. While not condoning the method of the protesters at the US Capital, what is wrong with requesting an audit of a vote? An investigation as serious as the one into the Trump teams relationship with Russians might have given Trump/Republican voters some confidence in the Biden presidency. Dismissing concerns is only going to lead to more division and distrust and is antithetical to the concept of accountability Fiorina claims to want. 2. The implication that there are unequal outcomes, some along racial or sex lines, and these are a result of some ill-defined "injustice" and not a result of a great propensity to commit crime, differential talent or levels of effort put in during the education, etc needs to be proven through controlled empirical study. Most inequalities are usually found to have causes people don’t want to talk about. This interview is the sort of gibberish you’d expect from the NYT or the Guardian.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:24
      1. The narrative of the Capitol protests was fraudulent. 2. People, and groups, are unequal. Anyone who lives life for even a week knows this fact. I wonder if Carly will start a movement for "Equal representation of Asians in the NBA."
  • TH
    Thomas H.
    16 January 2021 @ 21:51
    Carly is very articulate and nice to listen too but her message is confusing and circular. The interview starts with accountability and how the people that object to the election results must be punished; Ted Cruz and the republicans. At the end of the interview she talks about people need to speak up when they see issues that are wrong in business or politics. Speaking out about the election results and how people changed the election rules leading up to November seems to be a subject we can not speak up about; maybe this is the basis for the riot in Washington.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:22
      Bingo. Confused thoughts and chaos are insight into what really drives the "spirit of the age" here
  • SM
    Sergio M.
    17 January 2021 @ 00:05
    Very brave of her to be so political for a Real Vision video. With that said I appreciate what it takes to become who she is - showing up to the strip club to move the rankings.
    • JJ
      John J.
      17 January 2021 @ 23:15
      "Brave?" She has always been a RINO and way, way left. That strip club story is fiction. Her record at HP was hardly noteworthy. The only thing that was noteworthy was her HUGE severance payout, along with the other five CEOs who also did a horrible job. Typical for what is WRONG with corporate America. Shameful.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:22
      Identity over competency ... haha John knows the game. Simple as that.
  • SP
    Steve P.
    17 January 2021 @ 07:22
    Comments from a "Down Under' resident living in NZ. It's not difficult to see why America is slowly losing its social, economic and political grip globally. Partisan politics aside, this lady threw up so many very poignant home truths about the problems currently besetting the US. And judging from the comments and split Ratings so far for this interview, the 6th January doesn't seemed to have bothered half the American population one iota. Sorry USA but in case you haven't noticed, the rest of the world is not exactly enamored with your current methods of problem solving. Far from it. And as global citizens, that's potentially dangerous for all of us.
    • GH
      Glen H.
      17 January 2021 @ 19:11
      I would argue that one of reasons the US has been so successful is because we can be messy... we allow messy. You have to surface the issues before you can solve them. Many countries hide them, suppress them or worse until things blow apart. We’ve worked through worse and we’ll be stronger for it.
    • DD
      Dan D.
      18 January 2021 @ 03:13
      As an American, let me just start by saying we've definitely got internal social problems. I contend that most other Westerners actually lack the social/political cultural background to understand our shortcomings. We are an empire of peoples with 0 awareness of current events, curiosity, intellectual rigor, *terrible* understanding of history, and no true sense of nation. That all said, what I think others don't perceive about Americans is a part of the reason you think Trump is some ugly visage of America's worst. Trump is the first of a new American political paradigm. *We* have suffered the dysfunction of Social Justice. *We* are suffering the consequences of settling millions of people into millions of square miles using a credit market distorted by the exorbitant privilege of global reserve status. You get to judge and deride us because you have a social fabric and because you don't have to pay for your own defense.
    • SP
      Steve P.
      19 January 2021 @ 23:01
      Agree with all you have promulgated Dan except for the 'free defense' argument. Agreeing to back the Saudis in exchange for petrodollar usage plus keeping shipping lanes open for global trade to occur, is as much an advantage to the US as anyone else. It works both ways and that was one of the major blunders that Trump made - to snub so many allies in withdrawing from various global Institutions. The overall argument being that the Trump era has highlighted the fact he was only a product of the times. As this forum demonstrates, America is sharply divided. The fact that 'the establishment' has been returned to full power (both Houses) suggests Trump is likely only the opening chapter. With 'uncertainty' now likely built in for an extended period, investors need to be cognizant of the political climate more so than ever. That's why this interview is so valuable even though it circumvented discussion around it's Title. It hopefully may have shocked a few 'echo chamber' dwellers into thinking outside the Robinhood 'get rick quick' niche. That currently is sorely needed in the USA .
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:20
      I'm not a global citizen you lemming. "Partisan politics aside" LOL, you're a hoot, Steve.
  • SL
    Shawn L.
    18 January 2021 @ 22:56
    Fiorina says diversity increases everything from success to revenue and all we must do is care. Problem identified. Those in power are comfortable enough to not care. So in order to create this incentive the system must degrade more before people begin to care. Then the work of unity, diversity and all the good values we should hold dear, but simply don’t, can be brought up. In my opinion this is why systems fail. Once entropy is far enough removed that you are unaffected by it, why put any more energy into the system? It’s simple behavioral physics. Entropy must be reintroduced and sadly riots and institutions being degraded do this. Unfortunately this will be devastating to everything we hold dear. It’s ironic and counterintuitive that those who would happily and ignorantly tear us down as a nation are part of the solution. Putin, Xi, Trump, Cruz, Graham, McConnell, Ted Kennedy and others are the demo side of this nations remodel. The only real problem we have is how long will we have to live in a half remodeled state of affairs? And if you ask my wife regarding our current homes remodel, the answer is “...way to damn painfully long!”
    • SL
      Shawn L.
      18 January 2021 @ 22:59
      There was no diversity when we formed a more perfect union, so how much demo/remodeling will be needed? Answer: To the foundation, and we better have diversity in the designing of the next blueprint as we won’t get many more, more perfect unions.
    • SL
      Shawn L.
      18 January 2021 @ 23:10
      The more I continue to watch this video the more impressed I am with the cyclical nature of nations. Its said we are in the midst of a pandemic with 400k dead, massive unemployment, civil unrest and domestic terror coupled with an insolvency phase and depression. Yet many politicians are unmoved from their positions of combating the lie of the election being stolen. We are STILL too comfortable to consider real change. Your move ENTROPY.
    • SL
      Shawn L.
      18 January 2021 @ 23:14
      Sadly, it will take a world or civil war to bring change of this scale to a nation, as it always has historically.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:17
      Shawn, "diversity" is how she got paid so much for being so much of nothing. Why wouldn't she extoll it as a virtue? It's not like she stands for anything, especially important things like merit and competency.
  • TT
    Tokyo T.
    18 January 2021 @ 23:12
    How did she scam HP out of $42M in severance pay? It would be cool if Ed unpacked the strategy so we can all get a payout like it one day.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:14
      Exactly. But "mean" posters like you Tokyo are the problem, right RV commenters? Right? Ha!
  • JR
    Jorge R.
    19 January 2021 @ 18:11
    Even though I mostly agree with Mrs Fiorina I don’t come here for political content and RV hasn’t earned much trust as an unbiased high quality broker of political content, so I’m not interested. I would be interested if RV made an investment to earn my trust and found a way to apply the same first-principles data driven tribeless approach to politics as it does to trading. Mrs Fiorina mostly spoke like a career politician, she gave platitudes and anecdotes and not so much data and strong rhetorical arguments. Nothing like the latter exists and I want it so bad. Bring the latter and I’ll double my sub price.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:13
      I don't mind that they talk politics as long as they don't get all butthurt when we flame the guests for saying silly stuff or being weak. Fiorina was always at best an opportunist, this she proved after sinking HP. Then she acted like a "conservative" only to show us later she stood for nothing and as Jorge says, speaks in pol talk 24-7, which is exactly what corporate garbage encourages. I bet she also states she didn't get paid enough for being a woman even though the only reason she got any chance was because of a corrupt PC HR culture that extolls diversity (which is an excuse to hire less competent people).
  • CL
    Cyril L.
    19 January 2021 @ 20:30
    Funny how it's often the same people whining about their freedom of speech being allegedly suppressed who can't tolerate any speech not 100% consistent with their view, even when no one forces them to listen to it. Plus if you're not coming to RV to listen to political figures, fine, don't. There are other subscribers who are interested. RV doesn't belong to you exclusively. In short, if you have something constructive to contribute, please do. Otherwise please take your negativity elsewhere.
    • SP
      Steve P.
      19 January 2021 @ 22:25
      ...well said.
    • LS
      Lemony S.
      22 January 2021 @ 21:10
      It sounds like you are the one who doesn't like free speech. Do you see any commenter actively trying to stop anyone from talking, commenting or posting? Nope. Get your vocabulary and thoughts straight first, then post, please.
  • CB
    Chris B.
    22 January 2021 @ 16:25
    Ed's interviewing skills really shine in pieces like this. Appreciating his work more and more. THank you.
  • GH
    Glen H.
    17 January 2021 @ 03:26
    I couldn’t watch this entire video. I had to double check that I was on RV and not CNN. I think Carly’s goal was to piss off half the subscribers. I appreciate now more than ever that Ed, Ash, Raoul and the crew stay politically neutral.
    • JJ
      John J.
      17 January 2021 @ 23:11
      I agree but Ed has never been neutral. He was obviously for Biden and it really detracts from the objectivity of this channel.
    • MP
      Mitchell P.
      21 January 2021 @ 06:00
      Maybe run back to your safe space then. There's no doubt she spouted a lot of disagreeable notions in this interview but plenty of people can handle hearing stuff we don't agree with - I want RV to bring a diversity of views and interview subjects on here
  • MH
    Martin H.
    20 January 2021 @ 00:28
    I think the thumbs up and down probably reflect the real election result. LOL
  • GL
    Glen L.
    19 January 2021 @ 19:46
    I LOVE LOVE Real Vision and it's a constant part of my life, but this is not what I come here for. From reading the comments, it doesn't seem I'm the only one...
  • NI
    Nate I.
    19 January 2021 @ 13:47
    I'm sorry, but I couldn't get past 5 minutes. After what Fiorina did to HP, listening to her is like nails on a chalkboard. Bill Hewlett and David Packard are screaming in horror from the great beyond.
  • DF
    Dominic F.
    15 January 2021 @ 07:57
    The election was not stolen
    • GH
      Glen H.
      17 January 2021 @ 03:13
      Until the actual votes and signatures are reconciled in key states I don’t think I’ll ever 100% trust the outcome and I think many people feel that way. And as long as Biden, Pelosi and the media continue to stomp on the necks of republicans, then it will further inflame the lack of trust.
    • JL
      J L.
      17 January 2021 @ 15:19
      Sigh. 1) The Trump legal team lost approximately sixty court cases, many in front of Trump-appointed judges, not because their evidence was thrown out or contested but because they had no court-admissable evidence at all. Trump not only had his day in court, he had it sixty-plus times, and came up with nothing. 2) The administrators in most of the key swing states were Republican (e.g. Arizona, Georgia) and in Georgia they literally counted the vote three times, including a round by hand. 3) Trump had telegraphed his intention to contest any election that he lost months before the election, outright saying, repeatedly, that if he lost it was rigged, and casting aspersions on the mail-in ballot process months before the election started as part of a discrediting strategy; he furthermore even called the 2016 election that he won "rigged," claiming with no proof that millions of illegal votes were cast, as a way to feel better about losing the popular vote. 4) In stating their intention to question the process, Hawley and Cruz used the circular logic that, because a lot of people felt the vote was rigged, it should be contested, even though the reason people felt that way was not because of evidence, but because Trump had cried "rigged" over and over and over and over again, with no evidence, and Republican officials coddled him. It seems we are entering an era where a significant percentage of the Republican party faithful will believe that ANY significant election loss by a Republican candidate, under any circumstance, was "rigged," simply by dint of the fact that the Republican side didn't win.
    • IB
      Ian B.
      19 January 2021 @ 00:02
      It seems obvious that far more robust processes and procedures to verify the ID of who is voting are required, particularly with reference to any votes not being cast in person. Until that occurs we will continue to see accusations of vote rigging from whomever has lost the vote. As a technology leader in so many fields it seems odd that the USA is so far behind the curve in this area. Maybe the fact that each State is responsible for the process and systems within that State is an obstacle to progress across the board.
    • JL
      J L.
      19 January 2021 @ 00:53
      No, it actually seems "obvious" that claims of voter fraud are by and large complete bullshit. If you compare the actual cases of documented, prosecuted U.S. voter fraud instances to the total number of votes cast in an election year, e.g. 160 million votes to fewer than a dozen, there are so many zeroes to the right of the percentage decimal point one could wonder if there are more cases of death by lightning or alligator bites in a given year. It was an issue, entirely made up from whole cloth, by Trump, in a strategy he has used for years (even once claiming "rigged" in relation to his TV show not winning an emmy) and telegraphed well in advance.
    • IB
      Ian B.
      19 January 2021 @ 02:33
      JL, I wonder if you would be quite so sanguine about the integrity of the election results if the wafer thin margin had fallen in favor of Trump ? I am not a US citizen and don’t vote in US elections, so I don’t have a dog in the fight, but with millions of voters not trusting the results, it is obvious that steps need to be taken to build greater confidence in the results of future elections.
    • JL
      J L.
      19 January 2021 @ 04:18
      If the margin had fallen in favor of Trump, and there was no court-admissible evidence of fraud, the result would have been accepted and Trump would have had a second term. The frustrating thing is that objective standards exist, and those standards are being ignored. An independent judiciary, for example, is a crucial pillar of a functional democracy. In the case of the 2020 election, the judiciary did its job. Roughly 60 court cases were filed, and all of them were lost, apart from one which revolved around a technicality impacting something like a dozen or fewer votes. That is supposed to matter. The fact that the Trump campaign had no credible evidence is supposed to matter; the fact that Trump's own attorney general, William Barr, said there was no viable evidence of election fraud, is supposed to matter; the fact that the Trump administration's own cybersecurity team said 2020 was the most secure election in history is supposed to matter. The "what if Trump won" inquiry doesn't work because rational people who believe in democracy are willing to accept credible evidence, whether they like it or not. If Trump had won the popular vote, or won the electoral college, and there was no credible evidence (e.g. evidence that stands up in court) that the win was illegitimate, then those who believe in democracy would have accepted the win. That is how it is supposed to work. Way too many Trump supporters just wanted their guy to win, and refuse to believe that he lost because they are indulging in a personal fantasy that Trump has encouraged by yelling loudly that he lost. Rational people accept credible evidence, and people who believe in democracy accept the concept that someone will win and someone will lose. If the contest is credibly deemed fair, that's it. That is what happened here. Those who do NOT accept that their candidate lost -- even with no true credible evidence to back their claims -- are either fantasists or fascists. They are either choosing to believe an alternate reality because they don't like the reality that exists, or they are making some internal moral judgement that says their side is good and the other side is evil, and so their side deserves to win no matter what. It is silly and embarrassing and stupid and destructive. And for any person who would be willing to break democracy for the sake of Trump, or otherwise engage in these kinds of games for Trump, I ask you to imagine a President AOC in ten years, riding high on the strength of votes from broke millennials, who then gives herself a second term by stealing the election and in doing so says "screw you guys, you did the same thing." Breaking democracy is stupid, because the other side can do the same thing when they get the power back. Unless you go full fascism, which presents a different problem. All of this is idiocy and those who refuse to accept an overwhelming body of evidence, just because they don't like the outcome, should remember that "elections have consequences" as Trumpers loved to parrot over and over again after 2016, and stop embarrassing themselves.
    • JL
      J L.
      19 January 2021 @ 04:19
      * by yelling loudly that he didn't lose rather
    • JL
      J L.
      19 January 2021 @ 04:25
      And by the way, Biden won by a margin of more than 7 million votes and 74 electoral college votes. That isn't actually "close" at all. Trump got stomped, just as he claimed to have stomped Hillary in 2016 (when Trump won 306 electoral college votes, the same as this time around). Trump lost. There is no credible evidence to the contrary. People need to grow up.
  • TW
    Terry W.
    19 January 2021 @ 00:55
    I think I stumbled onto the wrong website. I meant to listen to Real Vision, not Twitter or CNN. That's where I'd go if I wanted a bunch of political hogwash. How the heck is listening to Carly Fiorina's political opinions supposed to help me as an investor? Less of this, please.
  • JK
    John K.
    19 January 2021 @ 00:04
    LOOOOLLL I heard the first 5 minutes of this and I knew there were gonna be some massive dislikes on this video. Thank you, Ed Harrison and Carly Fiorina for doing this. It IS NECESSARY and the dislikes go to show the state of the Union even on a platform that I considered to be relatively sophisticated compared to a free one like twitter. Power through the hate knowing that you will keep democracy alive in America. This should be a wake-up call that there is something deeply wrong with our system and that we need new policy that address the root of the cause and not just treat the symptomns. Treating the symptoms only is how we had economic malaise from 08-2020 and the continued political upheaval in the face of historic income inequality. I am gravely concerned that Biden will not be radical and righteous enough to ensure a more sophisticated Trump will not come along in 2024. If he truly meant nothing will radically change then everything will radically change for the worst post his presidency.
  • SM
    Suzanne M.
    16 January 2021 @ 20:25
    Fantastic, fascinating video with someone that was not really on my radar. Insightful questions, great dialogue. More women interviewed, please!
    • JB
      Jamie B.
      17 January 2021 @ 08:59
      Wow!!! 4 dislikes to 1 like on this comment (until I liked it as well) which simply asks for more inclusion and is complimentary of the interview content and the participants. There's something seriously concerning about that ratio.
    • BC
      Bill C.
      18 January 2021 @ 23:29
      This interview was insightful because it revealed Fiorina as a Leftist. She use to be on my list for consideration if she ran for higher office. No longer.
  • PJ
    Paul J.
    18 January 2021 @ 21:25
    Should the title of this interview be: Big Tech Has Unprecedented POLITICAL Power?
  • PT
    Philip T.
    18 January 2021 @ 15:59
    CF's anti-Trump bias is consistent with her endorsement of Biden, being Co-chair of Romney for President & Victory Chair for John McCain. Hopefully, Ed will interview a more libertarian savvy techie to shed more insights on potential solutions for our problems with BIg Tech. We need to address the threats to our democracy that impair having an informed (not censored) electorate.
  • kR
    kirk R.
    18 January 2021 @ 09:29
    I did not sign up and pay for political opinion pieces. Very disappointed in RV with this.
  • AK
    Aurimas K.
    17 January 2021 @ 13:11
    Now U became political TV. When U going to block views that are different fro your opinion ?
    • JJ
      John J.
      17 January 2021 @ 23:09
      How about just allowing a rebuttal or alternative view? How about equal time for an alternative position?
  • JJ
    John J.
    17 January 2021 @ 21:49
    What a bunch of BS. I am shocked that RV would allow a public figure such as CF to have such a sensitive and liberal political platform. Will you now give an equivalent platform to a conservative alternative view? This is unbelievable. Maybe if you had a more fair and objective interviewer the result would have been better. I was expecting a discussion of big tech and its unprecedented economic (and political) power. This was anything but. Very disappointing. If I wanted to watch a political show, I would tune into MSNBC. This is against RV's mission.
  • MH
    Michael H.
    17 January 2021 @ 19:57
    Can RV locate and interview people that are working on a more secure, transparent , bona fide , voting system?? blockchain technology or any technology that would increase the peoples trust in our voting system. I am sure that half the people RV interviews in the crypto space could find a solution. We can find cures for certain cancers but the voting system remains antiquated?? Its 2021! i dont get it.
  • RM
    Robert M.
    17 January 2021 @ 17:25
    Clearly ratings reflect divide in the nation. Very insightful. USA has a long road ahead if we continue to work against each other as we appear to be divided on our principals (vs just our policies).
  • JF
    John F.
    15 January 2021 @ 21:10
    I enjoyed this interview even though it was very political. Carly Fiorina is by every stretch of the imagination an accomplished career women, especially as the CEO of HP. However, her legacy as a candidate for President and as Ted Cruz’s VP candidate in the 2016 election cycle will always be what's she publicly recognized for many people. She's a political figure, and that's fine. But this is a growing departure from RV’s focus on apolitical informative content for investors and people trying to get the inside perspective. If RV plans to get into the Political interview business I will support that and would encourage the creation of a “RV Politics” Channel. That is something I would support and gladly pay for as a consumer of RV content. However, calling this interview a discussion on big tech may be a tad bit disingenuous as it focused mainly on Jan 6th, Trump the Businessman, Diversity in the Work Place, COVID-19, Small Business struggles, and then big tech. If your topic is meant to match the discussion, it should be leading from the front and not the rear.
    • ZM
      Zac M.
      16 January 2021 @ 14:42
      If RV are going to delve into politics, I hope they manage to maintain balance, Carlys claim that diversity benefits workplaces is contentious. Ethnic diversity damages social trust (see Putnam 2007 and Dinesen, Sønderskov & Thuesen 2019), and lower levels of social trust lower growth (Knack 2002) and cooperation (Irwin & Berigan 2016). Moral arguments aside, increasing diversity in North America and Europe could be turning them into highly diverse, low trust, low growth economies in perpetuity. If you accept the argument, it could also be one of the reasons that many nations in Africa that have high levels of ethnic diversity within straight-line post-colonial state boundaries don’t function particularly well.
    • JB
      Jamie B.
      17 January 2021 @ 09:14
      Wow @Zac_M. So ethnic diversity damages social trust?? So which 2 of the RV presenters are you going to stop listening too? Ed, Raoul or Ash??? I cannot believe the comments on this video.
  • JT
    John T.
    17 January 2021 @ 02:15
    Great interview, I really think Carly has some excellent points. One issue I think is crucial and ignored in US politics is how to get the long-term unemployed back into the workforce. Many have been homeless for quite some time. My big idea is to bring back the CCC and organize it like a military branch. Citizens can sign up and take orders from there. They get uniforms, they’re relocated to a barracks, they eat at a mess hall, and the government has to find a productive use for them. Right-to-work laws go way back and we should consider them, because there is a lot of useful work we need done and there is no other way to give some people a chance to rejoin the workforce and ultimately move to private sector employment. Anyway, thanks for reading and good luck!
  • KC
    Kirk C.
    17 January 2021 @ 01:53
    The 'consent of the governed' seems to be a big problem for Carly. Makes me wonder how she would cope with Jefferson's 'blood of patriots'. Would she be fine with ordering the tanks to attack the 'bonus army'?! I kept going thru the interview hoping to hear her say something of value.
  • jl
    johan l.
    16 January 2021 @ 18:50
    Might be that I am too critical now, but this is not on my list of favourite interviews on RV. In general, I found Carly Fiorina to be speaking in such a general and grand terms that it really gave me little. "We must all come to the table and sit down and figure this out." say what now? Was it that type of bold mission statements that landed you the CEO job at HP? There is a depth to Ed's reasoning that I can't say that I found in what she said, but in fairness to her, Ed is very good at this.
  • KB
    Kirk B.
    16 January 2021 @ 00:42
    Carly's specific take on "accountability" is disturbing. For a democracy to survive and thrive, there must of course be the rule of law, and importantly, trust and respect for the rule of law. Clearly, those that engaged in sedition, insurrection, and riot must be held accountable. However, it is chilling to hear Carly likewise demand "accountability" for those in Congress who requested a constitutional procedure (like in 1876) to determine that the votes in particular states were indeed lawfully processed. According to a Gallup poll taken after the election, 89% of Republicans expressed concern about about the election process (accentuated certainly by claims that the election was "stolen"). How can confidence in the elections process and our democracy be restored? Certainly, not by endlessly repeating that this perception is "baseless" or by seeking "accountability" for those who sought a procedure that would make the truth visible, a goal that Carly advocated in her interview..
    • jl
      johan l.
      16 January 2021 @ 18:40
      I guess one might say that context matters, and that if those in Congress took up the same constitutional procedure against a different backdrop, the question of "accountability" would be very different. And, along the lines of the interview, one might say that BigTech's platforms amplification of the messages from some parties have exacerbated the doubt that the general public feel based on statements from some politicians/news networks/other stakeholders. The Daily (NYT podcast) had a good interview of Representative Peter Meijer, Republican of Michigan. He had some very unequivocal words to say on the motivations some of those stakeholders had for voicing some opinions that has undermined people's trust in the outcome of the election, and seemed in general aligned with what Carly proposed. Saying something is baseless is the right thing to say if in fact something is baseless. (If you use the framework that is presented in "The power of habit" I guess one would have to address the trigger events, and not the outcomes from those trigger events. For instance what would happen if you shut social media down tomorrow? Would the outcome from the next election be as contested as this one has turned out to be?) That said, I am agree much more with the points you raised than might be apparent from what I wrote above.
  • SU
    Shakeel U.
    16 January 2021 @ 08:31
    If being too big is dangerous, than this also applys to governments. Governments are the greatest danger to society.
    • HR
      Humberto R.
      16 January 2021 @ 17:46
      Governments are the reason why societies exist in the first place. Read up on some basic history.
  • JC
    JAMES C.
    16 January 2021 @ 16:49
    Think back to use of virus as rationale for vote manipulation (immoral, if not illegal). Think back to a march on the Capital to protest (mob? I understand up to half of Americans thought the mail voting hastily implemented were at least immoral or illegal.... prior to SCOTUS). Think back to a policing breakdown (why were protesters allowed on the site, police do follow orders) and a significant radical component allowed loose within the site. Now, think of the media narrative and political response..... how will this not further divide the halves? and make the situation worse?
  • JT
    JF T.
    16 January 2021 @ 12:26
    Join the Democrats...wrong Party.
  • VB
    Vincent B.
    16 January 2021 @ 10:50
    Always the hate...
  • MF
    Michael F.
    16 January 2021 @ 07:11
    She sounds like a Democrat, is she in the wrong party? You can sense the brainwashing through years in the corporate world. Instead of treating humans as individuals, it's the typical divisive race/gender obsession that seems to permeate almost all of her thinking.
  • JN
    Jerrick N.
    16 January 2021 @ 04:18
    she sounds like a robot
  • mw
    michael w.
    15 January 2021 @ 22:28
    More smoke and mirrors. There are larger issues this country needs to be focusing on.
    • DS
      David S.
      16 January 2021 @ 01:40
      Smoke and mirrors in places, but very important issues. DLS
  • Se
    Sandra e.
    15 January 2021 @ 22:01
    I love the way that Ed interviews people...intelligent questions, excellent listening, and bio-based pacing. This is the first time I could tolerate hearing Carly's voice. Everytime I've heard her in the past I feel she's very defensive and in her head. In this interview I found her calmer and had very thoughtful and valuable responses. Thank you, both of you.
  • DS
    David S.
    15 January 2021 @ 20:52
    It is possible that a Senator Cruz for President supporter in 2016 can change her positions in four years to proposing Democratic Party platform positions? Is this a mea culpa? Normally I enjoy learning from anyone who I feel is sincere, regardless of political position. This just does not seem sincere, sorry. DLS
  • DS
    David S.
    15 January 2021 @ 20:34
    To support the lessor evil in 2016 was also a poor decision. Senator Cruz is cut from the same cloth, just not as effective. DLS
  • BS
    Bradley S.
    15 January 2021 @ 20:24
    as for big tech i don't have facebook but i recall hearing a few years back people talking about the people posting on facebook about how there boycotting facebook there's your problem add that to big tech being able to kill competitors current news story parler yet another problem the political end of things in the usa my 2 cents are the country is divided in 3 major groups the R's D's and the i don't do politics groups Lindsey Graham Dianne Feinstein praise each other at end of Amy Coney Barrett hearing and the dems are outraged at Dianne Feinstein over what was just a nice exchange of thanks so i don't see coming together being an option on either side and I'm sure there's examples the other way around of the something but again there's your problem can't work together can't compromise i think the biggest thing to remember is humans are resistant to change so i predict positive change is coming it's just going to be slow for me i try to take a step back listen and ask question also for some reason today it seems asking questions is frowned upon to put it mildly also reflection looking back and really thinking about how things were then and how they are now i feel a lot of positive change has happened it's just so slow we don't notice it it's not like pushing a button
  • AA
    Alberto A.
    15 January 2021 @ 19:51
    Thanks Ed...this was different...always looking for another point of view...not sure I got a lot from Carly Fiorina this time as it seems she is preaching the obvious...but always good to listen and see if there is a nugget to grasp...
  • JM
    Jake M.
    15 January 2021 @ 18:56
    thanks for the interview. Please keep doing this to bring people with diverse view points!
  • pt
    popejumpingjohnpaul t.
    15 January 2021 @ 17:51
    when i hear americans whine about the 'silencing of conservatives voices', stop the bs, its not. its the silencing of people who are fundamentally, blatantly and obviously dishonest. a genuine conservative is not a narcassistic conman who shags hookers, insults anyone and everyone, lies constantly. a genuine conservative does not take advantage of simple minded religious folk or their less educated or less privileged fellow countrymen. so lets not talk about conservative voices, leave the changing of established word meanings to the college left, please. if you think these people should be allowed to lie on social media to enrich and empower themselves, by establishing and then provoking a cult-like audience, thats fine, i hope your kids get to join one someday. but again please dont call them 'conservatives'!
  • MB
    Michael B.
    15 January 2021 @ 17:17
    Extremely biased
  • HK
    H K.
    15 January 2021 @ 11:05
    As an interview this is all right, but I'm not sure what the theme is for having it on realvision - Most interviews / videos help in either understanding the macro environment and trends or talk about specific investment related opportunities. This one seemed like a very generic interview
    • EH
      Edward H. | Real Vision
      15 January 2021 @ 15:24
      See my comments elsewhere in the comment thread here for why this interview matters
  • NR
    Nathan R.
    15 January 2021 @ 13:52
    This is a joke, right?
  • PJ
    Peter J.
    15 January 2021 @ 13:30
    Interesting interview, enjoyed it but can understand why Trump supporters won’t. Good questions Ed.