Fetterman’s a no
-
It is funny. A cabinet member comes for vote. They have years of actions and words that show they are unqualified for the job.
A senator from the party in power says, "yes, I know there was years of him (or her) saying and doing things that make them unqualified. But, I had a good 5 minute talk with the (VP/Presidents chief of staff/candidate, etc), and now I am 100% convinced that they are qualified!!!!) "
-
It's not like it's objective fact that based on prior behavior, both those cabinet members would be bad at their jobs. That is a perspective, and a politicized one.
@Horace No, but it is a good indicator.
What is the saying? "Usually, a tiger does not change his stripes"
If someone believes something, and then is hired for a job where he is supposed to believe the opposite, most likely, he will be less effective or not give 100%.
-
@Horace No, but it is a good indicator.
What is the saying? "Usually, a tiger does not change his stripes"
If someone believes something, and then is hired for a job where he is supposed to believe the opposite, most likely, he will be less effective or not give 100%.
@taiwan_girl It's a big leap from having theoretical concerns with vaccine safety to the horror narratives about all vaccines being banned. The notion that RFK has stripes that indicate he'd ban all vaccines is just an opposition political narrative. Meanwhile, it's difficult to overestimate the real concern over obesity and T2 diabetes, and my optimistic hope is that he can make a dent in the culture about eating habits.
Or if you're talking about Tulsi, then I'd have to know exactly what stripes you think she's shown and how that would make her bad at her job as intelligence director.
-
@taiwan_girl It's a big leap from having theoretical concerns with vaccine safety to the horror narratives about all vaccines being banned. The notion that RFK has stripes that indicate he'd ban all vaccines is just an opposition political narrative. Meanwhile, it's difficult to overestimate the real concern over obesity and T2 diabetes, and my optimistic hope is that he can make a dent in the culture about eating habits.
Or if you're talking about Tulsi, then I'd have to know exactly what stripes you think she's shown and how that would make her bad at her job as intelligence director.
@Horace I will answer a question with a question. LOL
Is Mr. Kennedy the best candidate out there to lead the department? (I am guess the answer is no). If the answer is no, why did they settle for him? Did the fact that he was a Democrat who ended up bashing them and endorsing President Trump have anything to do with it?
Same question about Rep. Gabbard. Though I admit I do not know much about her and her past statements.
-
They are both demonstrably independent of the political establishment. I predict that whomever you might have in mind as a "more qualified candidate" who can be trusted to be "better at that job" will have zero track record of pushing back on the establishment. You are treating cabinet picks who were chosen because they aligned with Trump's anti-establishment perspective, as if they are only there because they brown nose. When in fact these are people who have demonstrated through their lives that they do not brown nose. Meanwhile, whomever you would suggest as a better qualified candidate, my guess is that they will be known quantity toolish establishment climbers (a la Fauci). You conflate that with "experience and ability", when it's ultimately the ability of a social climber. Similar to many of the generals who I am sure you would consider more qualified than Hegseth.
-
I disagree a bit. Based on past history, how does President Trump treat people who disagree with him or push back to him?
I think that both Kennedy and Gabbard are smart people, but it would nave to think that they are not aware of the past history and what happens to people who do not answer "yes" to every question and suggestion from President Trump. (Okay, maybe a slight exaggeration there. :P)
So, while being a brown nose to President Trump is not their only qualification, I am sure it was a significant part of the selection.
Re: Fauci and generals being better choices.
I still believe that is the case. Generally (of course nothing is 100%), you will get someone more qualified and better able to run a large complex organization if they have the background and experience in that field. The odds are more in your favor. -
I have every confidence in Russian state controlled media reports that Tulsi Gabbard will do one helluva job sorting the wheat from the chaff in her capacity as Gatekeeper and Chief for the president’s intelligence briefings. Moreover and perhaps most importantly, she will do a stellar job ensuring the necessary objectivity so that the president will hear only what he wants to hear.
Who knows but someday she may even receive a medal from a perennially peace loving foreign nation that spans much of Eurasia, for her selfless efforts as a fellow traveller.
Elbows up!
-
@taiwan_girl Trump didn't choose those people to maintain a steady ship in a massive public sector bureaucracy. You want people qualified to do a different job than the one Trump wants them to do. (And the one his voters want them to do.)
Education is extremely important.
-
I have every confidence in Russian state controlled media reports that Tulsi Gabbard will do one helluva job sorting the wheat from the chaff in her capacity as Gatekeeper and Chief for the president’s intelligence briefings. Moreover and perhaps most importantly, she will do a stellar job ensuring the necessary objectivity so that the president will hear only what he wants to hear.
Who knows but someday she may even receive a medal from a perennially peace loving foreign nation that spans much of Eurasia, for her selfless efforts as a fellow traveller.
@Renauda It may well be that Tulsi's perspective is preferred by Russia as compared to the perspective of her predecessor. But I'm not interested in being beholden to doing the opposite of what might coincidentally be advantageous to another country, unless that advantage demonstrably works counter to the interests of my country. I am confident that any boon to Russia that Tulsi represents, is coincidental, and that secondary effects will be considered if those advantages are not to America's advantage.
Education is extremely important.
-
@taiwan_girl Trump didn't choose those people to maintain a steady ship in a massive public sector bureaucracy. You want people qualified to do a different job than the one Trump wants them to do. (And the one his voters want them to do.)
@Horace said in Fetterman’s a no:
(And the one his voters want them to do.)
To split hairs, because a person is voted into office does not mean that everything that person does is what the voters wanted.
If we go that far, then would you agree that when President Biden was elected in 2020, the voters wanted him to increase transgender rights, etc?
Anyways, you always have good, well thought out points and make me think!
-
@Horace said in Fetterman’s a no:
(And the one his voters want them to do.)
To split hairs, because a person is voted into office does not mean that everything that person does is what the voters wanted.
If we go that far, then would you agree that when President Biden was elected in 2020, the voters wanted him to increase transgender rights, etc?
Anyways, you always have good, well thought out points and make me think!
@taiwan_girl said in Fetterman’s a no:
@Horace said in Fetterman’s a no:
(And the one his voters want them to do.)
To split hairs, because a person is voted into office does not mean that everything that person does is what the voters wanted.
If we go that far, then would you agree that when President Biden was elected in 2020, the voters wanted him to increase transgender rights, etc?
Trump campaigned on anti-establishment stuff; it is fundamental to his brand. Biden (and Harris) intentionally kept away from branding themselves with the more fringe progressive ideas. Those ideas are an important part of the religious aspect of their voters, but their campaign strategists are very clear that they diminish electability.
Anyways, you always have good, well thought out points and make me think!
Thanks TG! That means a lot coming from an international woman of mystery.
-
@Renauda It may well be that Tulsi's perspective is preferred by Russia as compared to the perspective of her predecessor. But I'm not interested in being beholden to doing the opposite of what might coincidentally be advantageous to another country, unless that advantage demonstrably works counter to the interests of my country. I am confident that any boon to Russia that Tulsi represents, is coincidental, and that secondary effects will be considered if those advantages are not to America's advantage.
@Horace said in Fetterman’s a no:
@Renauda It may well be that Tulsi's perspective is preferred by Russia as compared to the perspective of her predecessor. But I'm not interested in being beholden to doing the opposite of what might coincidentally be advantageous to another country, unless that advantage demonstrably works counter to the interests of my country. I am confident that any boon to Russia that Tulsi represents, is coincidental, and that secondary effects will be considered if those advantages are not to America's advantage.
Well, I guess we’ll just have to find that out although her past would betray a distinct tendency towards sloppy thinking.
Personally I would, like Fetterman, not give her the benefit of the doubt. My vote would be a No as I favour a candidate for the role who has a demonstrated and consistent track record in the exercise of caution and sober thinking.
-
I disagree a bit. Based on past history, how does President Trump treat people who disagree with him or push back to him?
I think that both Kennedy and Gabbard are smart people, but it would nave to think that they are not aware of the past history and what happens to people who do not answer "yes" to every question and suggestion from President Trump. (Okay, maybe a slight exaggeration there. :P)
So, while being a brown nose to President Trump is not their only qualification, I am sure it was a significant part of the selection.
Re: Fauci and generals being better choices.
I still believe that is the case. Generally (of course nothing is 100%), you will get someone more qualified and better able to run a large complex organization if they have the background and experience in that field. The odds are more in your favor.@taiwan_girl said in Fetterman’s a no:
I disagree a bit. Based on past history, how does President Trump treat people who disagree with him or push back to him?
I think that both Kennedy and Gabbard are smart people, but it would nave to think that they are not aware of the past history and what happens to people who do not answer "yes" to every question and suggestion from President Trump. (Okay, maybe a slight exaggeration there. :P)
So, while being a brown nose to President Trump is not their only qualification, I am sure it was a significant part of the selection.
Re: Fauci and generals being better choices.
I still believe that is the case. Generally (of course nothing is 100%), you will get someone more qualified and better able to run a large complex organization if they have the background and experience in that field. The odds are more in your favor.Why are your better choices always Swamp Critters or Democrats?
