Which scenario concerns you more?

1. 71

   Kathleen Cochranposted 8 years ago

   Which scenario concerns you more?
   
   Trump appointing cabinet members to oversee agencies they have histories of being against or appointing military generals to oversee the military?

   replyreport
2. 75

   Shyron E Shenkoposted 8 years ago

   1st appointing generals to oversee the military concerns me more, isn't that what Hitler did when he was building his army?
   
   2nd. His cabinet members, is also frightening, appointing Andy Pudzer as Labor Secretary, Pudzer is a destroyer of labor.
   Then he chose Scott Pruitt as head of the EPA the very same Scott Pruitt who has worked to shut down the EPA.
   Retired General Michael T. Flynn, trump has chosen as his National Security Advisor.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Alternative Primeposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Frighteningly Inept ~ But here's the GOOD News ~ Constitutional REQUIREMENTs ~ An "Electoral COLLEGE" should Determine if Candidates R Qualified, Not Engaged in Demagogy & INDEPENDANT of Foreign Influence ~ Trump can NEVER be U.S. President

      replyreport
   2. 71

      Kathleen Cochranposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      In my home state (Georgia) 44% of us voted for Clinton.  But all 16 of our electors will be Republican because we are a winner take all state.  So 44% of us cast votes that will not count.  How is that constitutional?

      replyreport
   3. 75

      Shyron E Shenkoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      that is the same like Texas, we who voted for Clinton, our votes will not, and did not count.

      replyreport
   4. 60

      Alternative Primeposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It's True Kathleen ~ In California we SLAMMED "CON-Man Trump" ~ We DEFEATED him by MILLIONs of Votes ~ Moreover, with OUR Population of 40 MILLION Americans, we should have 250 ELECTORs, not 55 ~ Trump FAILs the "Electoral COLLEGE Test"

      replyreport
3. 77

   alancaster149posted 8 years ago

   It's a funny sort of reverse psychology or aversion 'therapy': give somebody a job they can't stand and they'll treat it as a challenge. A shrink might be able to explain it better but from a layman's standpoint here goes.
   A hates anything to do with tea, B hates coffee. Give A the job of monitoring the consumption of tea by B, and vice versa. Under normal circumstances they'd either end up strangling one another or become firm friends and do their job so well they'd hate to be moved off it. As they're in public office and under observation all the time, they can't very well fight out their differences so there's some sort of check there.
   The idea might be clear as mud to some, but think about it. DT might end up either with a.very efficient cabinet - or a shambles. As he's hired and fired more people than you could wave a stick at, give him some credibility of knowing what he's at.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      Kathleen Cochranposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Today's Washington Post on Russian interference with the election: "The president-elect  has said flatly that he doesn’t believe Russia interfered with the election, despite receiving intelligence briefings to the contrary.."  Efficient?

      replyreport
   2. 75

      Shyron E Shenkoposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      When trump was firing people on TV, that was not real, that was a reality show, play acting, the actors expected to get fired.  trump can hurt people and our country, Russia helped him get elected.

      replyreport
4. 10

   Cleancloverposted 8 years ago

   Appointing military generals because Russia and China together are superior to USA militarily.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Alternative Primeposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      We R Deadly Close 2 a "Nuclear Exchange" with CHINA due 2  "Delusional Donald's" RECKLESS Big Mouth ~ Remember he was SCREAMING like a Little GIRL about "Goldman SACHs"?? , well now he's EXPANDED his "SWAMP" by hiring 2 former GS Swindlers

      replyreport