Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Will the New Team Help Trump?
With one more change in the Trump administration team, I’ve started to wonder how the changes will play out. I’m not so much concerned with the number of changes Trump has made, because every administration makes changes, but with the nature of the group members.
When Trump first brought his team together, many of us were relieved that he brought in such experienced players in government, as well as highly respected individuals in their given fields. I wasn’t the only one who felt that this group would provide not only government experience, but some of the subtleties of getting things done in an unfamiliar environment. In addition, many of these people were known as stable and reliable forces that might temper Trump’s overbearing and unpredictable style. Although he continues to act in ways that others criticize (such as tweets, insulting his team and making sudden decisions), he’s accomplished a great deal in his year and three months on the job.
Now there are not only several new players, but we don’t know whether they will have a steadying influence on the President. In fact, some people suggest that instead of Trump’s saying he encourages conflict and the sharing of different ideas, he may be choosing to work with people who agree with him. Trump and Rex Tillerson, the former Secretary of State, didn’t get along; we hear that McMaster was not close to the President. In contrast, Mike Pompeo, the new Secretary of State, and John Bolton, the new National Security Advisor, get along well with Trump. Both men are known for favoring a more aggressive foreign policy. The President also likes the newly nominated CIA director, Gina Haspel.
Let’s not forget Joe diGenova either, the new attorney he has brought in to join his legal team. Mr. diGenova will definitely shake things up in a positive way.
Do you foresee any major impacts on domestic or foreign policy based on this newly configured team? How do you think the team will get along? Are there possible downsides to these changes? Do you anticipate other changes in personnel?
Published in Politics
I think he is firming up a team around the agenda he ran on. I think that is all to the good. And now if he could just get Ryan/McConnell to do the same I would be more pleased.
I love Bolton!
McMaster out, Bolton in.
Yes, Iran is in a world of hurt.
I can’t wait for the bombing to begin! It’s like that Christmas Eve feeling.
Bolton is OK, but McMaster is probably better; McMaster is a true star, and hopefully will become chief of staff before long. The other changes (Pompoeo, diGenova) are fine.
Trump was an outsider, and I think this turnover of his staff is a result of that fact. I expected this level of turnover.
He didn’t know what he wanted to do when he first took office, and if you don’t have goals, it’s impossible to make good long-term staffing decisions.
I am relieved that he is shrugging off the press’s negative interpretation of his changes. He seems to be committed to doing the best job he can, and that means taking a flexible view of filling his key staff positions.
I’m also pretty sure that if I predicted this, then the people taking these jobs predicted it also. I’d think they were pretty dumb if they didn’t.
That said, he must have clear goals by now for the next three years. We should see more stability. The competency and expertise of the people who accept his administration’s appointments will depend largely on how clear his goals are and how stable the job seems.
A story in today’s WSJ about the “chaos” at Whole Foods caused by the Bezos|Amazon take-over and the cultural disruption it caused, made me think of this “ratio”: Bezos:Whole Foods = Trump:D.C.
The “go-along get along” types NEVER cotton to disrupters. The DeepState’s aversion to “the other” is a classic example–that and the old Mafia saw about “nice little business ya got there; be a shame if anything should happen to it.”
All else is prelim to the main event: DeepState v Trump. It is billed as an 8 round event (rounds measure in WH years). And only one will remain standing. There simply is no TKO in the offing.
I am bewildered and disappointed by Ryan and McConnell, @rodin. I was a big Ryan fan, but I’m beginning to think that they are both either crippled by their lack of imagination, have caved in to the Left agenda, or just want to get anything passed, no matter how outrageous it is. Whichever may be true, it’s sad.
I would love to see some substantive action against, Iran, wouldn’t you? It’s way, way overdue!
Did you notice, @bloodthirstyneocon, that Israel just admitted bombing the Syrian nuclear facility? I suspect they are going to work with us in some way to deal with Iran, although that makes me nervous with their vulnerability.
I applaud Israel’s efforts. They’ve done excellent work over the decades against Iran. However, for me the ultimate plan is well summarized by this clip
and this one
@bloodthirstyneocon, the second clip is meant to be ironic, right?
Who best serves this President?
Simple.
An executive who takes charge, enacts the President’s policies and avoids controversy.
True for any administration. More so for the Trump Administration.
No, we defeat our enemies, and we stay, just like we stayed in Korea, Japan, and Germany. We didn’t follow the plan. We didn’t stay. That’s when it all went wrong. See ISIS circa 2011-2017. We won that war; Obama bailed; and then things went really wrong. What am I missing?
Bolton and DiGenova are capable of a more direct even confrontational approach in media interviews and neither is likely to leak embarrassing anecdotes to the MSM unlike some others in the White House. However, no staffing changes will matter unless Trump reforms his operational style.
I think Trump really needs a show biz/media/PR guy who can command his attention. The MSM/Democratic Party have successfully made our politics a horribly personal, issue-free death struggle with Trump. As President and as a Republican, Trump gets 95% of the blame for the ugly atmosphere instead of the 35% that is his fault. It is killing the GOP which has alway been filled with easily frightened types.
Barring a repeal of the 19th Amendment to compel more dispassionate focus on bottom-line issues as opposed to style and personality, Trump needs to be re-packaged. It is somewhat ironic that Ronald Reagan, the most likeable and most genuine president in living memory was also the best packaged by professional ad men and media guys. Reagan was smart enough to make use of that resource.
Trump the bad boy needs to be confessional with respect to marriage and family. Trump the Twitter warrior needs to eschew the petty negatives and replace that with silence or affable jokes. (I mean if a team of WH writers can’t find a joke in anything and everything that idiot Joe Biden says…) As Rob Long has pointed out, it is surprising that TV star and marketing whiz Trump did not easily fake a presidential demeanor, instead of his unexpectedly sound policy-level actions.
The White chief of staff (whoever that is this week) needs to convene a panel of script writers for soap operas, ad men and comedy writers to plan out the Presidential script for the day.
The will of the American people. We aren’t who we once were. Without terrible exigent circumstances we will not again be those people we once were.
It is no more complicated than this:
I think the clip described something different. It referred to an American global empire so we could control the world. I agree with your points on those individual countries. But we’re not welcome in Iran; I’m not sure we have enough support by the people there. And you can be sure that the Middle Eastern countries don’t want us to try to control them.
Both of these men are going to have an important impact. They really know the ins and outs of how things work and they’re no-nonsense types. I hope Trump listens to them.
I don’t see this happening @oldbathos. Trump desperately needs someone like this, but I think on balance he believes what he is doing is working. Can you imagine someone out there that could have that sort of influence?
I could not disagree more. Trump has already packaged himself over decades. And if you believe Scott Adams (see Win Bigly) this is largely by design and true intention. Does that mean Trump will be successful (assuming “success” is something you want to occur)? No, but the best road to failure is to depart from the brand he has created, for good or ill. Instead, if the Republican and their political operatives share the general direction Trump wants to take (an open question) then they have to line up to help rather than try to manage Trump. Even if you think it is a problem, it is (1) time limited, and (2) better than the likely real alternatives. We talk about progressives “magical thinking” but conservatives engage in their own brand when they fail to utilize power when the people give it to them.
I agree, @rodin. Even if someone could convince him to follow a “script,” which is extremely unlikely, he’d probably flub it up terribly, like a fish out of water or pure annoyance at having agreed to it. Let’s hope it can’t get much worse (?)
I can dream, can’t I? 9/11 was worth 100 Iraq’s in my book.
How long did the “resolve” of We the People last post-9/11? [I mean “us” not D.C.] Iraq was a ‘terrible exigent circumstance” for Iraqis. Too few Americans felt one way or the other once the images of “Falling Man” were no longer etched in most frontal lobes. How many Americans even know someone in the serving military let alone a veteran of Iraq? Or Afghanistan?
We aren’t who we once were.
We likely never were “who we once were”. But that doesn’t make the loss of the shared vision of ourselves that evolved from the media in the 1940’s and 1950’s and early 1960’s any less sad. Reagan articulated that version and did what he could to implement it. So even as our society drifted away from the vision in the 1980’s we can imagine that we had made some progress back to it.
Key to that vision was the Founders’, Lincoln’s, Frederick Douglass’ and MLK’s pre-1965 dream. Individuals with unalienable rights working in cooperation to govern ourselves in responsible and accountable ways. From the town hall to the county seat, from the statehouse to the white house, from the grassroots to the nation our philosophy and policies should be effected.
But sadly our politics has been more Stephen Douglas than Abraham Lincoln, more post-1965 MLK than pre-1965 MLK, more Woodrow Wilson than Calvin Coolidge. And so we find ourselves in debt, divided, and living in a democracy focused on spoils.
Presidents don’t lead Congress, they influence Congress. Presidents influence Congress by mobilizing public opinion. Or, in some cases, distilling existing but latent public sentiment.
It took six years under Ford and Carter to ripen the public for Reagan’s message. I’m 90% certain if Reagan had defeated Ford in 1976, he would have lost to Carter and been much less likely to win the nomination in 1980.
Trump needs to find the sweet spot, the furthest right program, that is acceptable to the 20% of voters in the middle. I think he’s grappling with that publicly. You can hear it in his off the cuff statements.
You’re right. Can they impeach for obnoxious behavior? Seriously, I think it will definitely will affect some voters if he runs for a second term as he says he will.
It is a drag on the mid-terms for the GOP. I have no idea what the Dems will do. I have no idea what Mueller will concoct. The new Dem majority will embitter and inflame both sides, cripple the Presidency and try to undo the obvious positives of the Trump administration. The future of the nation and democracy itself may well depend on the mood of upscale suburban wome in what will be an emotional political period.
So true, @oldbathos. There is so much uncertainty right now. The only thing we know for sure, as you state, is that the Dems will disrupt and harangue as much as possible.