Not sure I would completely agree with that characterization, at least based on what I've read about this subject. Fiorina-Hurd seems to have been more a refinement in execution than a fundamental change in strategy, and the overall result was to put HP on more competitive footing again. Now, that didn't quite last post-Hurd, and things haven't looked particularly bright for HP for some time. But things have also changed a lot over the past decade, and it's hard to pin HP's recent troubles on decisions she made more than a decade ago.
Either way, few objective people would say she was anything more than mediocre as HP's CEO. Her time there didn't show she was good at running a large, complicated organization. It also seems hyperbolic to call her a complete failure, though, or to accuse her of running HP into the ground. That doesn't seem borne out by the facts.
He had credibility with both conservatives and moderates, his electoral record in Wisconsin gave him a good argument for his electability in a general election, and earlier on he had a significant lead in Iowa. He seems to me someone who can make conservatives love him, and at the time convince the establishment to back him. Chances are he'll still have some opportunities down the line to capitalize on those strengths, but who knows.