I don’t look at it the same way. I look at it as a leader placing people who will support what he is trying to accomplish as a President. I would assume Harris wants to align with people who support her and her values in her administration.
I don’t look at it the same way. I look at it as a leader placing people who will support what he is trying to accomplish as a President. I would assume Harris wants to align with people who support her and her values in her administration.
Harris has already committed to having a Republican on her cabinet (that is, someone *still* identifying as a Republican and not joining her party). To me that feels different than hiring only "loyal" staff, and it concerns me that Trump's impulse is to avoid people who might challenge or disagree with him. When we look back on the times in our country where bipartisanship felt more vibrant and active, we hear stories of people who could vehemently and passionately disagree but still chose to work together and stay collegial, because they understood that it's important to hear voices that don't just echo your own. Trump, by his own words and admission, does not feel that way. People are "smart" when they agree with him, and "stupid" when they don't (see his insistence recently to a room full of economists that they were ALL mistaken about tariffs and he was the only one among them who actually 'understood' how tariffs would work).
Any good leader SHOULD want people who occasionally disagree with them, have different perspectives, and have the courage to speak up about it on their team. Surrounding oneself with a bunch of "yes men" is weak leadership. It's what I see Trump aiming to do. That's how Authoritarians and Dictators work. And while one might argue that those people are "strong leaders" because what they want to get done, gets done by force, it's not GOOD leadership.
I agree with you. I am excited about having the people Trump has identified or hinted to be in his cabinet because of their leadership. But I agree with your thoughts on strong leadership.
The only person I've heard is Musk (who is literally trying to buy this election). Interviews with him have given about this possibility have thrown up many red flags. Who else have you heard? Possibly RFK, as that's the only way that RFK would agree to endorse Trump. Whether that will ACTUALLY happen...time will tell.
Interesting. While I'd love to have a conversation about this over coffee, I'm just going to leave it at that in an online forum. What excites one, very much concerns another.
I agree with you here. We all need to keep in mind the executive branch is just one of three branches for a reason. Many policies both candidates have proposed will require the backing (or not) of the legislative wing. I agree that those supporting Trump like RFK, Tulsi & Musk are a diverse group. All of whom have been in the Democrat party. I think each of them bring a lot to the table in terms of experience and knowledge. I think it would be a huge stretch to call either of them extreme Republicans b
Harris won’t ask for a loyalty pledge. Harris will want people who put country over party, who believe in the rule of law and who will honor their oaths to the Constitution. Harris won’t allow her team to make the deciding factor in hiring to be whether or not the prospective hiree believes Biden won the 2020 election. I assume Harris’s administration will to a certain extent reflect the makeup of the Democrat party, people of widely disparate thoughts and opinions who often disagree among themselves, listen to each other and finally come to some sort of consensus on what decision or direction will benefit the American people as a whole. It won’t be some monolithic group who makes decisions based primarily on loyalty or fealty to a person, especially a person as erratic, uninformed and mendacious as Trump.
I don’t look at it the same way. I look at it as a leader placing people who will support what he is trying to accomplish as a President. I would assume Harris wants to align with people who support her and her values in her administration.
Harris has already committed to having a Republican on her cabinet (that is, someone *still* identifying as a Republican and not joining her party). To me that feels different than hiring only "loyal" staff, and it concerns me that Trump's impulse is to avoid people who might challenge or disagree with him. When we look back on the times in our country where bipartisanship felt more vibrant and active, we hear stories of people who could vehemently and passionately disagree but still chose to work together and stay collegial, because they understood that it's important to hear voices that don't just echo your own. Trump, by his own words and admission, does not feel that way. People are "smart" when they agree with him, and "stupid" when they don't (see his insistence recently to a room full of economists that they were ALL mistaken about tariffs and he was the only one among them who actually 'understood' how tariffs would work).
Any good leader SHOULD want people who occasionally disagree with them, have different perspectives, and have the courage to speak up about it on their team. Surrounding oneself with a bunch of "yes men" is weak leadership. It's what I see Trump aiming to do. That's how Authoritarians and Dictators work. And while one might argue that those people are "strong leaders" because what they want to get done, gets done by force, it's not GOOD leadership.
I agree with you. I am excited about having the people Trump has identified or hinted to be in his cabinet because of their leadership. But I agree with your thoughts on strong leadership.
The only person I've heard is Musk (who is literally trying to buy this election). Interviews with him have given about this possibility have thrown up many red flags. Who else have you heard? Possibly RFK, as that's the only way that RFK would agree to endorse Trump. Whether that will ACTUALLY happen...time will tell.
RFK Jr, Musk, Tulsi Gabbard, and Ramaswamy get me excited.
Interesting. While I'd love to have a conversation about this over coffee, I'm just going to leave it at that in an online forum. What excites one, very much concerns another.
I agree with you here. We all need to keep in mind the executive branch is just one of three branches for a reason. Many policies both candidates have proposed will require the backing (or not) of the legislative wing. I agree that those supporting Trump like RFK, Tulsi & Musk are a diverse group. All of whom have been in the Democrat party. I think each of them bring a lot to the table in terms of experience and knowledge. I think it would be a huge stretch to call either of them extreme Republicans b
Harris won’t ask for a loyalty pledge. Harris will want people who put country over party, who believe in the rule of law and who will honor their oaths to the Constitution. Harris won’t allow her team to make the deciding factor in hiring to be whether or not the prospective hiree believes Biden won the 2020 election. I assume Harris’s administration will to a certain extent reflect the makeup of the Democrat party, people of widely disparate thoughts and opinions who often disagree among themselves, listen to each other and finally come to some sort of consensus on what decision or direction will benefit the American people as a whole. It won’t be some monolithic group who makes decisions based primarily on loyalty or fealty to a person, especially a person as erratic, uninformed and mendacious as Trump.
💯