231

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.

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 62 points 3 weeks ago

Donald Trump’s second-term cabinet is criticized as a disjointed team unified only by loyalty to him, rather than qualifications or ideology.

Exactly as expected. 🎉

[-] uberdroog@lemmy.world 46 points 3 weeks ago

Our only hope is that they are truly as dumb as they seem.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world 32 points 3 weeks ago

Extremely stupid people are capable of massive damage. Especially with a congress so willing to enable them. They will Overlook legality and morality, bending over backwards to please him and his appointees.

[-] twistypencil@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Might be he did that on purpose... Either to cause them to fail, or do he can martial law shit when period revolt because it's all fucked or...

[-] Infynis@midwest.social 9 points 3 weeks ago

He's not the one making the plans

[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 28 points 3 weeks ago

Former President Trump said the “biggest mistake” of his presidency was picking “bad, disloyal people” to join his administration.

(source)

[-] makyo@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Yup. This time his biggest mistake will be picking incompetent people. But I'm sure neither he nor his braindead cronies will understand that.

[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

As far as Trump is personally concerned, his only true mistake in his last term was picking competent people who wouldn't bow to his every command when it came time to coup himself into staying in power. He doesn't give a shit about running the country. He only needs to protect himself and his own.

[-] Atom@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe a bright side; filling the executive with inept sycophants might slow down project 2025. The reason he struggled to achieve a lot of his bullshit the last time was they didn't have skilled people to navigate the legal system.

Of course, that legal system also made him a king so...all they have to do is make him say whatever they want to do. But maybe, hopefully, they'll spend a lot of time fighting amongst themselves.

Someone noticed in a different thread that the people directly under Trump's cabinet picks appear to be competent institutional people.

Which unfortunately is probably the perfect structure to break things efficiently - the people at the top with the most authority are those who will never question Trump's will, and the person directly under is competent but can be easily replaced anytime they grow a spine.

Stephen Miller and Trump's other ghoulish advisors aren't letting this opportunity go to waste and I think we're in for a rough ride.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

and the person directly under is competent but can be easily replaced anytime they grow a spine

It's the opposite really

Heads serve at the pleasure of the president, they can be fired on a whim for zero reason.

Everyone else though, well, it's really fucking hard to fire a federal employee after the first year or two.

Even to just lateral them to a different position is a pain. Getting rid of a number isn't just saying "you're fired" like with an agency head.

And also:

anytime they grow a spine

If they're in the federal government and don't agree with trump they already have a backbone. The ones who didn't are the ones getting out now and letting maga concentrate.

For fucks sake, why does everyone act like beurcrats can't slow shit down intentionally?

[-] Infynis@midwest.social 10 points 3 weeks ago

That's why one of the big parts of Project 2025 is reclassifying a ton of government employees so that they also are just appointed by the president

[-] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Hats... Why they are called beurocrats.

But the ones who are leaving are largely close to retirement and would rather not deal with bullshit to their own job, and I respect that. The ones who aren't leaving probably see this as a great stepping stone for their career, as they get to enforce rules most previous position holders were unaware of.

Federal government is just like corporate jobs in that there is a game to play - the game is fundamentally different in that it's based on law and office mission, rather than profit and deceit.

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago

Calling RFK's position "an environmental role" is total bullshit. It's to head the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees everything in government related to healthcare.

That's right, we're likely getting a true believer in such classics as vaccines cause autism and HIV doesn't lead to AIDS, as the Healthcare Boss.

[-] tehWrapper@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago

cause its about keeping power, and not so much about keeping the lights on for the rest of the people.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago

Honest question......what if someone PRETENDED to be loyal? Then passed a bunch of bills, like help for homeless, easier immigration, gun control laws, legalized abortion, and then convinced trump they were HIS ideas, so he loves them.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 6 points 3 weeks ago

It would be easier the believe one of them actually earned the position.

[-] Infynis@midwest.social 6 points 3 weeks ago
[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

No, they could like movies.

[-] ATDA@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Dude clearly ran around with his scalp scar on fire during COVID expecting nothing major would pop up during his presidency.

It was chaos then it'll be fucking chaos now.

[-] fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 weeks ago

surprisedpikachu.jpg

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago

They're nothing more then yes men, I hope they mess up so hard that he resigns in four years

this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2024
231 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19241 readers
1811 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS