Summary
Donald Trump’s second-term cabinet is criticized as a disjointed team unified only by loyalty to him, rather than qualifications or ideology.
The picks include controversial figures like Pam Bondi as attorney general, Pete Hegseth as defense secretary, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for an environmental role, raising concerns about conflicts and competence.
While some selections, like Marco Rubio for secretary of state, appear conventional, others reflect Trump’s focus on personal fealty and populist goals, including mass deportations and deregulation.
Critics expect chaos and impulsive governance similar to his first term.
Appointing people who will do what you tell them is basic effective governance. The alternative is people who will prevent you from doing what you were elected to accomplish.
Imagine if Biden appointed a head of the DEA who agreed to legalize cannibis, a head of the department of education who agreed to delete all student debt, a head of the DoJ who threw Trump in prison, etc.
This would be a good thing if the party was doing it to accomplish good things instead of Trump.
Competent, effective leaders are better than sycophantic yes-men to advise and lead government offices.
Only an incompetent or malicious leader would appoint people who will prevent them from doing what they were elected to do.
It’s not a virtue to let the system stop you from helping the people who elected you in the name of compromise or norms or whatever, it’s a betrayal of the voters.
I will say the same thing in 2028 if the dems somehow win with a centrist who immediately ties their hands behind their back by appointing future enemies to positions of power.
I disagree with you in general, but you’re right on target when it comes to that dipshit Merrick Fucking Garland.
Which is why the constitution gives Congress to power to approve or reject appointments.
Unless they go along with his recess appointment nonsense.
The Turtle is saying no way. He might do something halfway decent on his way out.