Google’s CEO Gets Political

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, has decided to publicly endorse a candidate in this years presidential race. Schmidt says that Google is still neutral even though he has come out in favor on one candidate and is advising the campaign on tech issues. What do you think? Can you really be “neutral” if you are our on the campaign trail for someone?

Schmidt says the endorsement of a party nominee is his own, and not a statement on behalf of his company. "I'm doing this personally," he said in an interview with the Journal. "Google is officially neutral."
Click to expand...
 
I don't think you can favor a party or individual while remaining neutral.
 
Well, as an individual he has the right to endorse a candidate, but it's nice to see he is attempting to separate his personal politics from his business. Google is not equal to Eric Schmidt so yes, I think the company Google can keep a neutral stance, which it should, while the CEO, and individual, can endorse whom he wishes.
 
CEO Magazine did a survey of their own. They asked which cantidate did the CEOs think would be better for jobs and the economy. Of 750 CEOS 610 chose McCain.
 
caw2007 said:
Well, as an individual he has the right to endorse a candidate, but it's nice to see he is attempting to separate his personal politics from his business. Google is not equal to Eric Schmidt so yes, I think the company Google can keep a neutral stance, which it should, while the CEO, and individual, can endorse whom he wishes.
Click to expand...

Usually it's smart to keep personal endorses out of public eye when you are talking about executive management because while it's a personal choice, it still represents the companies foundations and morals. If you are at the helm, things you say or do, can effect the image of your company.
 
Google is and always has been a leftist organization. The statement to neutrality is a farce.
 
I personally believe that, if you are speaking for a company in general, it is a good idea to keep your politics to yourself. If you back one party....you piss off 50% of your customers.

Besides, we all know how well it works when celebrities / companies / CEOs endorse a candidate...they are like the kiss of death.
 
Steve said:
I personally believe that, if you are speaking for a company in general, it is a good idea to keep your politics to yourself. If you back one party....you piss off 50% of your customers..
Click to expand...
You took the words right out of my mouth Steve (first time for everything I guess). This is the number one reason not to do this, whether you are a CEO or an actor or whatever. You alienate half of your customers, when your duty is to your company and investors to court them.

It's hard for me to watch some leftist douchebag in a movie after he spouts off. I'd imagine libs would feel the same way, assuming 1) he was watching a movie with one of the 4 Republicans in Hollywood and 2) said Republican dared to actually speak out and risk his career.

I know that Google's leftist crap (and its hypocrisy, like its China policies) makes me want to use Yahoo more.

If I was a Google shareholder (I was actually consideing it last week), I'd be pissed. Pissed for the reason Steve states, and pissed that if Obama wins, my capital gains tax rates will double. What CEO in his right mind would want to do that to shareholders? :rolleyes:
 
I don't think you can keep the company and the CEO's political views seperate. When you think of big companies like Microsoft or Google you think of their CEO's, therefore if you think of the CEO's their political view will be that of the company.
 
jpcahn said:
CEO Magazine did a survey of their own. They asked which cantidate did the CEOs think would be better for RAPING THE ECONOMY AND THE FINANCES OF THE COMMON MAN. Of 750 CEOS 610 chose McCain.
Click to expand...

fixed
 
Do you people think that Democrats don't go to E-bay because of their rampant support of Republicans? Do you people think that Republicans don't go to Google because of they dare go against the corporate standard and they support Democrats? Do you really actually think that 50% of the country is Republican (after 8 years of Bush)? No where near 50% of the country is Republican and of those people who are Republicans how many are such psychotic hyper-partisans that they want to boycott Google because it's CEO supports a Democrat? Idiots. That's who.
 
jpcahn said:
CEO Magazine did a survey of their own. They asked which cantidate did the CEOs think would be better for jobs and the economy. Of 750 CEOS 610 chose McCain.
Click to expand...

Eh... I don't know if you were trying to go for a position of authority for backing mccain, but an endorsement from ceos is like getting an endorsement from hitler.
 
snowden said:
Do you people think that Democrats don't go to E-bay because of their rampant support of Republicans? Do you people think that Republicans don't go to Google because of they dare go against the corporate standard and they support Democrats? Do you really actually think that 50% of the country is Republican (after 8 years of Bush)? No where near 50% of the country is Republican and of those people who are Republicans how many are such psychotic hyper-partisans that they want to boycott Google because it's CEO supports a Democrat? Idiots. That's who.
Click to expand...

Our nation is split, that is a fact. No need to insult a political party here, take that to genmay.
 
It's not split anywhere near 50%, or even 33%R /33%D/ 33%I.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans

Fewer and fewer people want to associate themselves with the political party that has ruled for 8 years. From the non-partisan Pew Research website:

""In 5,566 interviews with registered voters conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press during the first two months of 2008, 36% identify themselves as Democrats, and just 27% as Republicans.

The Democratic Party has also built a substantial edge among independent voters. Of the 37% who claim no party identification, 15% lean Democratic, 10% lean Republican, and 12% have no leaning either way.""

And this was just the first two months of this year, prior to the stock market nuclear meltdown. Where did I insult a political party anyway? I just said only an idiot would base their personal business decisions over what political party some guy/girl in a company chooses to PERSONALLY support. Anyone who is that hyper-partisan IS an idiot. Well, whatever politically party you belong to, feel free to pretend like you're being attacked if it will make you feel better.
 
If you are publicly endorsing a candidate, you are not remaining neutral. That's why you PUBLICLY endorse a candidate: to show your non-neutrality.

We may be asked to believe that he will keep his business and personal life separate, but his public endorsement does little to give us faith. And faith is not something I like to have to place in CEOs or politicians. It is nice that he understands the value of keeping up the pretense though.

Many won't care if he's throwing his corporation's money around anyway (for hopes of returns later) because he's supporting our future Supreme Commander: President-for-life Obama. (I'm an independent, but I'm sure even the most of the center left is getting a little tiered of the disciples of Obama preaching the true faith to us)

As for most CEOs backing McCain... that's a no-brainier for anyone who has put any effort at all into finding information out about the candidates. Based upon proposed tax policy alone -something the president doesn't really have direct power over- any CEO voting in the interest of his corporation (the majority at least - non-profit CEOs may have some leeway because of current tax policy) would go with McCain. However, CEOs are people, and most people vote based upon some personal conviction, typically driven by fear, prejudice, vanity, or some other vice; we can't assume all CEOs will vote in their financial best interest: few do - for good reasons.
 
Steve, I agree with you that any CEO needs to keep his private opinions on... well, just about EVERYTHING, to him/herself. He/She is there to represent the COMPANY... and that even means keeping his private opinions about the company close to his vest, and give the corporate line. Besides, most CEOs, actors, etc., you pretty much know their opinion long before they bother to endorse a candidate... I could even hazard a guess at yours, and you don't talk politics much.

However, I'm going to have to take a cookie away from you.... you fed the lunatic left and the rabid right and gave them a place to argue politics and call each other idiots again.... Bad Steve! No Cookie for you! Don't feed the Poly-Ticks Trolls! :)
 
Vaelin said:
As for most CEOs backing McCain... that's a no-brainier for anyone who has put any effort at all into finding information out about the candidates. Based upon proposed tax policy alone -something the president doesn't really have direct power over- any CEO voting in the interest of his corporation (the majority at least - non-profit CEOs may have some leeway because of current tax policy) would go with McCain. However, CEOs are people, and most people vote based upon some personal conviction, typically driven by fear, prejudice, vanity, or some other vice; we can't assume all CEOs will vote in their financial best interest: few do - for good reasons.
Click to expand...


Go to your local university (or even community college) and find the library. Bring a bill with your home address on it and get yourself signed up with a library card (or just read the book inside the building). Go find a basic economics TEXT BOOK with actual science in it and turn to the index. Read everything you can find about "externalities" in that index.

Now you can come back here and I may be able to educate you enough for us to have a really low-level discussion on economics.

Maybe you'll even start to understand why the rest of the world are holding global summits to rebuild the capital system (the system people borrow money from) around the Euro, essentially destroying the value of the $ Dollar. God, too much you morons don't know... just go sit in front of the tv an believe everything they say.
 
SnakeIRye said:
Eh... I don't know if you were trying to go for a position of authority for backing mccain, but an endorsement from ceos is like getting an endorsement from hitler.
Click to expand...

Godwinned, already? I sure hope you are joking.




As for Google CEO's endorsing a Obama? Who cares. I don't give a rat's ass about who the CEO of my company endorses, let alone Google's CEO.

I suppose there are the people that suckle at the tit of Google that would eat this stuff up, or be outraged, depending on their alliegences.
 
snowden said:
Maybe you'll even start to understand why the rest of the world are holding global summits to rebuild the capital system (the system people borrow money from) around the Euro, essentially destroying the value of the $ Dollar. God, too much you morons don't know... just go sit in front of the tv an believe everything they say.
Click to expand...

Condecension ahoy! Thanks for not contributing to the discussion.
 
snowden said:
Do you people think that Democrats don't go to E-bay because of their rampant support of Republicans? Do you people think that Republicans don't go to Google because of they dare go against the corporate standard and they support Democrats? Do you really actually think that 50% of the country is Republican (after 8 years of Bush)? No where near 50% of the country is Republican and of those people who are Republicans how many are such psychotic hyper-partisans that they want to boycott Google because it's CEO supports a Democrat? Idiots. That's who.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
snowden said:
It's not split anywhere near 50%, or even 33%R /33%D/ 33%I.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/773/fewer-voters-identify-as-republicans

Fewer and fewer people want to associate themselves with the political party that has ruled for 8 years. From the non-partisan Pew Research website:

""In 5,566 interviews with registered voters conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press during the first two months of 2008, 36% identify themselves as Democrats, and just 27% as Republicans.

The Democratic Party has also built a substantial edge among independent voters. Of the 37% who claim no party identification, 15% lean Democratic, 10% lean Republican, and 12% have no leaning either way.""

And this was just the first two months of this year, prior to the stock market nuclear meltdown. Where did I insult a political party anyway? I just said only an idiot would base their personal business decisions over what political party some guy/girl in a company chooses to PERSONALLY support. Anyone who is that hyper-partisan IS an idiot. Well, whatever politically party you belong to, feel free to pretend like you're being attacked if it will make you feel better.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Yes, lets believe what a poll says... shit, lets just go and pick a president already because the polls are acruate! If it was such a land slide dedicated to one side, we wouldn't even need elections.

snowden said:
Maybe you'll even start to understand why the rest of the world are holding global summits to rebuild the capital system (the system people borrow money from) around the Euro, essentially destroying the value of the $ Dollar. God, too much you morons don't know... just go sit in front of the tv an believe everything they say.
Click to expand...

Next time try actually talking about this subject without insulting everyone in the thead.
 
Steve's comment should of ended this thread, too many people on the internet with long winded political theories who never even took government in high school, let alone college.
 
Trimlock said:
Steve's comment should of ended this thread, too many people on the internet with long winded political theories who never even took government in high school, let alone college.
Click to expand...

Standardized education doesn't make one more intelligent about a topic that affects people of all stature, creed, race & ethnicity in this country. All are inclined to give their feelings, beliefs, & opinions regardless of how much head knowledge that one may have. Experiences in life can give just as much & politics is something everyone experiences at any given time.
 
Well I'm personally glad that Google's CEO has the right to say what he says. I don't agree with what he said, but I'm glad he has that right. But like Steve said, I don't think it will be good for his business. Our nation has been divided for a long time, and it's not a good time to endorse a candidate imo. Maybe when 80% of the people are for one side, it would be a better time to say something like he did.
 
Google's politics are hardly neutral. Just go looking at what makes their cut for "evil" and what does not.

They aren't Ben & Jerry's, but they sure as hell aren't neutral.
 
Steve said:
Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, has decided to publicly endorse a candidate in this years presidential race. Schmidt says that Google is still neutral even though he has come out in favor on one candidate and is advising the campaign on tech issues. What do you think? Can you really be “neutral” if you are our on the campaign trail for someone?
Click to expand...

Haven't read the article yet (don't want to be influenced by who he supports), but I don't see the contradiction that you apparently see. He's not neutral, while Google is.
 
mryerse said:
Well I'm personally glad that Google's CEO has the right to say what he says. I don't agree with what he said, but I'm glad he has that right. But like Steve said, I don't think it will be good for his business. Our nation has been divided for a long time, and it's not a good time to endorse a candidate imo. Maybe when 80% of the people are for one side, it would be a better time to say something like he did.
Click to expand...

SO you think people will avoid google because their CEO supports a particular candidate? The guy could come out for removing term limits and re-electing Bush and people will still use Google.
 
nilepez said:
SO you think people will avoid google because their CEO supports a particular candidate?
Click to expand...


Possibly. I avoid google news now just because google promotes nothing but left leaning media. I still use their search though.
 
Steve said:
I personally believe that, if you are speaking for a company in general, it is a good idea to keep your politics to yourself. If you back one party....you piss off 50% of your customers.

Besides, we all know how well it works when celebrities / companies / CEOs endorse a candidate...they are like the kiss of death.
Click to expand...

Assuming he not supporting your favored candidate, are you going to stop using Google? If he is supporting your candidate, would you have stopped if he supported the other guy?

I just don't see how it matters. Aside from the base of each party, I suspect most people like both of them. Of course the republican base dislikes both candidates, because McCain is super liberal...but not as liberal as Obama, who is Super Duper Uber Liberal, while the Democratic base thinks McCain is just short of the Anti-Christ (obviously Bush still holds the ultimate title for that group).

But maybe I'm unusual. Maybe half the country is going to switch to lycos as a result of his move. Presumably we should find out within a few weeks....if not a few days.
 
No surprise there. Everyone is backing BHO. It's the cool thing to do. I'm doing it so I can erase my white guilt.

</sarcasm>
 
nilepez said:
SO you think people will avoid google because their CEO supports a particular candidate? The guy could come out for removing term limits and re-electing Bush and people will still use Google.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah. A seed has been planted in my head to not like Google as much. Just recently I influenced a quarter million dollar technology package. I'm still young, so who knows what I'll do in my career. And while I'll try to keep this BS asside when making decisions, any honest person like me would tell you that liking the vendor does has an affect, even if just a small one, on whether you buy from them or not.

And what's wrong with Bush? We should all be flogging Barney Frank (for saying nothing is wrong with Fannie and Freddie, while being the chairman of the financial services committee) and the EU (for being a bunch of bitches re: Iraq/Afghanistan and everything else that doesn't involve their own personal gain). I know why the EU hates what we're doing in Iraq. It has nothing to do with civilian life. It has to do with the oil they aren't getting illegally anymore. But I know, I know, it's all Bush's and the GOP's fault.

Bring on another depression. I'm ready for it. Are you?
 
uclajd said:
You took the words right out of my mouth Steve (first time for everything I guess). This is the number one reason not to do this, whether you are a CEO or an actor or whatever. You alienate half of your customers, when your duty is to your company and investors to court them.

It's hard for me to watch some leftist douchebag in a movie after he spouts off. I'd imagine libs would feel the same way, assuming 1) he was watching a movie with one of the 4 Republicans in Hollywood and 2) said Republican dared to actually speak out and risk his career.

I know that Google's leftist crap (and its hypocrisy, like its China policies) makes me want to use Yahoo more.

If I was a Google shareholder (I was actually considering it last week), I'd be pissed. Pissed for the reason Steve states, and pissed that if Obama wins, my capital gains tax rates will double. What CEO in his right mind would want to do that to shareholders? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I am sure that Google will not miss you; thanks for insulting people for their point of view. When did it become that in order for you to be right that the other had to be wrong. As a independent I look at both parties perspective and see good points. I like that the republicans want smaller governments, however, the current stem of Republicans in power have done just the opposite. They call Obama a socialist; doesn't signing a bailout of banks and lenders (Bush and republicans) an area of socialism?

On taxing capital gains, the middle class cannot carry the country anymore, with the bailout that could reach trillions of dollars (socialism) and the trillions that we have in debt the money has to come from somewhere, we can no longer be a country defined by "consumers." We need to become a country of exports, savings, investment, etc.

Instant gratification as broken our foundation and we will need to take drastic financial measures to fix it. Tax breaks are nice and can still exist provide that spending is under control and justified. We wouldn't need tax breaks if our dollars where spend accordingly instead of inflating the wallets of CEOs, lobbyist, Senates, Congressmen/women, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top