The Hegseth "incident."

[Horace]

@taiwan_girl said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@Jolly I agree with you.

But I think if Senators looked at this with ration, it would be much better. Tell the President to be that this candidate just is not qualfied. Dont make us reject him.

(yes yes yes yes, both sides are guilty. If VP Harris won, and she nominated a Sec. of Defense with the same qualifications, all the Dem senators would be talking about how great he was.)

At some point, putting blind loyalty in front of good of the country is not a good thing.

Corporations are judged by easily quantifiable measures of success. There is no such measuring stick for government organizations, and that fact complicates the selection process of the employees at every level, including the top. We can say that a bad CEO will be bad for the corporate profits. What can we actually say about a "bad secretary of defense"? Some hand waving about geopolitical stuff that armchair generals have lots of opinions about?

[taiwan_girl]

@Horace Part of the problem is that most government appointed positions like the one we are talking about force the leader to be very short term focused because they know they are gone after just a few years and really have no accountability for their actions.

"Oh, I did this and it resulted in this immediate positive impact" Even though in five years it is a major problem and the initial thing never should have been done.

Good CEO's have the ability to think longer term. (Yes, they are also watching the stock price on a day to day basis........ LOL)

[Jolly]

@taiwan_girl said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@Horace Part of the problem is that most government appointed positions like the one we are talking about force the leader to be very short term focused because they know they are gone after just a few years and really have no accountability for their actions.

"Oh, I did this and it resulted in this immediate positive impact" Even though in five years it is a major problem and the initial thing never should have been done.

Good CEO's have the ability to think longer term. (Yes, they are also watching the stock price on a day to day basis........ LOL)

The U.S. military is not a corporation. Any sane corporation would have cut its expenses and fed Taiwan to the Chinese Dragon a long time ago.

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@George-K said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":(in electoral votes)...

Not a valid comparator over time as the number of total EVs has increased.

Are you saying that Biden‘s margin of victory in 2020 should be discounted?

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

Not a valid comparator over time as the number of total EVs has increased.

Since 1912, the number of electors has risen by 7.

Still a greater margin than Bush (twice), Carter, and Biden.

[jon-nyc]

In that list he’s 20th out of 26. Still 76th percentile.

[jon-nyc]

@George-K said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@George-K said in The Hegseth "incident.":

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":(in electoral votes)...

Not a valid comparator over time as the number of total EVs has increased.

Are you saying that Biden‘s margin of victory in 2020 should be discounted?

Seems like a whattaboutism fail.

I never mentioned anything about ‘discounts’. I merely used his 75% performance as counter evidence that his opponent party ‘collapsed’. That just doesn’t apply in such an historically narrow victory. I wouldn’t say the GOP collapsed in 2020 either. Or the Dems in 2000, etc.

[89th]

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

Recall Nixon not only lost in 60, he then lost statewide election in CA. Everybody, including Nixon himself, wrote off his future political career.

He did pretty good in the 1972 election, too.

[jon-nyc]

If(!) this checks out, it sounds like there are lots of incidents. The Koch bothers even pushed him out of a charity they run. He seems to have a problem with his cups as well as with women.

Bad combo for a SecDef. They feed on each other.

(Again, if...)

[taiwan_girl]

@jon-nyc Detailed article on this. If even half is true, not very good at all.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/pete-hegseths-secret-history

I still think he unqualified, but this additional stuff will make me think that he will soon come out with a statement, "although untrue, it is becoming a distraction to the great work ahead by President Trump, and therefore, I am withdrawing from the nomination."

[Jolly]

He's a horndawg, no doubt about it.

Makes Jon look like an amateur...

[George K]

I'm sure Collins and Teh Murk will also vote "no."

[Horace]

I hope Elbridge Colby replaces him.

[George K]

Who was Sec Def when this occurred? It certainly wasn't Hegseth, Fauxahontas.

Best response:

[jon-nyc]

???

Is he confusing the FTC with the CFPB?

[jon-nyc]

Re her post, the reasons he shouldn’t be SecDef have nothing to do with the DoD, and everything to do with Pete Hegseth.

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

???

Is he confusing the FTC with the CFPB?

Yeah, it's still funny.

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in The Hegseth "incident.":

Re her post, the reasons he shouldn’t be SecDef have nothing to do with the DoD, and everything to do with Pete Hegseth.

No, she says that because of unproven allegations, that's disqualifying.

As was posted above, Tower might have been a womanizer, but we would have gotten someone who could run the DoD. He would have been competent.

[George K]

Oh - I also listened to the first part of Megyn Kelly's interview with him.

About the NDA - he claims that her attorneys approached him at a time when his career was taking off and they threatened to expose this affair unless he paid up.

There was a lot of "Jesus is my savior" thrown in too. I gave up after about 15 minutes.

[jon-nyc]

I wasn’t summarizing her post, I was disagreeing with it.