One quibble… They weren’t singing the national anthem, they were singing America the Beautiful.
Elizabeth had problems. She showed her ignorance in not understanding LL Cool J’s commercial appeal, despite Mike Piazza (sp?) being a fabulous choice in the end. And remember, they budgeted $10,000 for the celebrity and she bumped it up to $20,000. That’s not 10% overbudget, that’s 100%. And she did it out of some fangirl squealy motivation for a baseball player. Why didn’t the printing snafu people point that out?
Apex said 10K, Mike said 20K. I’d have said 15K. Game won.
So far my favorite woman is Pamela, and I’m sorry the guys aren’t very into her.
Actually, I thought she was demonstrating her knowledge of the client. She used to work at P&G, and felt that the company was conservative enough not to want a “rap star” associated with their product.
Because they all agreed that it was worth it. I think they decided that they would do the celebrity first and then budget around the celebrity costs. Which makes sense.
Isn’t Pamela the one who laughed at and made fun of the kids she was supposed to be selling to? The one who was too good to sell ice cream? The one who didn’t want anybody to actually, you know, touch her?
Can’t say she’s my favorite.
I can’t believe that I’m the only person to have a different viewpoint on the Stacie J. firing. It seemed obvious to me that we didn’t see the most extreme part of the footage of her meltdown during Task 1. It also seems obvious that Trump did, or that he at least had been briefed by the producers on her serious problems. I think he knew that there were liability issues there that he just didn’t want to have to deal with. He probably realized that she was going to have to go after Task 1, but since Apex won the task, he couldn’t fire her. He had an opportunity last week, but then Bradford threw himself back into the mix and sealed his fate. When Apex lost this week, Stacie J. had to go, but realizing that her performance on the task wasn’t enough to justify a firing, Trump had all the women come in and talk about the first week meltdown to provide an explanation. In the past we’ve seen that Trump fires people based on performance, so there must have been an extraordinary reason to fire someone based on personality/behavior, and he used the full team Boardroom to drive that point home.
Or maybe the rest of you are right, and the women are just manipulative witches who ganged up on poor Stacie.
And then she got sneezed on by someone on the street while trying to ineffectively sell ice cream. That was one of my favorite moments of that episode.
There was an opportunity for a bold applicant to stand out in that board room. If one of them (particularly after they had run through a few of the other women with the extreme responses) had said something along the lines of, “Mr. Trump, while I cannot defend Stacey’s unprofessional behavior during the first task I also cannot sit here while they lie to you.” It would be a big gamble and definitely piss off the rest of the team, but I get the impression that the rest of the team had already pissed Trump off anyway. At that point you’d have nothing to lose by distancing yourself from them. But then that’s why I don’t expect any of those women to get hired.
I thought Stacie J. was a flake based on what we saw in the first episode, but her ditzy behavior (not what I’d call “flipping out”) could probably have been cured with a “Calm down, Stacie, you’re making us nervous”.
In the second week, when the team met and decided that Stacie had to go, I started to feel sorry for her – especially after it appeared that she was being set up. (Was she or was she not given the task of hiring temps?)
In week three, she was one of two people who misjudged the delivery task, but we didn’t see that it caused any difficulties. The toothpaste was on site when it needed to be.
Trump was right to fire her, not because of anything she did or didn’t do, but because it was obvious that she was worthless to her team, that she’d be a distraction every week, and that it would be more difficult to assess the others. At week 16 they’d still be harking back to the 8-ball in week 1.
Well, you’re not quite the only one. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it’s “obvious” that we didn’t see the most extreme part of her meltdown, but as I said, I do think it’s quite likely. I find it hard to come up with any other explanation for the extreme yet unanimous antipathy of the entire group–a large assemblage of complete strangers–toward Stacie, so early in the game. Remember, this was long before they needed a scapegoat to take the fall on their behalf.
Indeed, we have circumstantial evidence which indicates that we haven’t seen all of what had gone on. In the boardroom, Maria said that Elizabeth had to constantly fight fires caused by Stacie’s erratic behavior. Admittedly, we don’t know if that was truly the case; however, if this wasn’t a complete fabrication, then it does suggest that there was more to Stacie’s behavior than what the cameras showed us.
That’s how I felt too, but I really want to see if some of those women will learn anything from this.
In the real world, if you have an employee or a co-worker who might be unstable, it’s rare that you can just fire them.
I think Trump is off the hook for his treatment of Stacie J., because (despite the wording) he wasn’t ** firing** her so much as he was not hiring her. We used to weed out a lot of people who came off as flakey in the interview process, but once they were on board, we had abide by the ADA and FMLA.
I have to respectfully disagree with this.
It is human nature to unite against a common enemy. If group/person A and group/person B dislike each other, but find that one thing they have in common is an even greater dislike for group/person C, they will band together against C, if only to guarantee that they won’t be the ones at the bottom of the food chain.
As noted with Stacie’s departure, it’s when C is out of the picture that A and B really have to watch their backs.
My point is that they were banding together against her very early on, even before it was clear that they needed someone to take the fall. I don’t see this happening if she was merely an annoyance with her Magic Eight-Ball antics.
Sure, people can band together against a common enemy – if they have enough antipathy toward the enemy in question. The women developed an intense and extremely united coalition against Stacie, very early in the game. This suggests that there was more going on that what were privileged to see.
I just think that it was in all their best interests to unite and gang up on Stacie J. and have her fired, because if they could come together as a group and achieve that goal, it assured each of them another week on the show. Whether or not Stacie is unbalanced doesn’t matter, this is a game show and it is survival of the fittest. And you know what it worked, they are all on the show next week and Stacie is not. Can’t believe Donald fell for that tactic though, Maria was the one that deserved to be fired.
P&G still executive produces at least one daytime soap opera. I can’t see the corporate sensibility being so delicate that they couldn’t handle a well-respected, Grammy winning, children’s book writing rapper and actor, especially when they’re selling toothpaste and said rapper/actor is well known for his gleaming white smile. And remember, it was an on-street promotion in New York City. Now, I know Mike Piazza on sight because I live in the NYC area and I’m a nominal Mets fan. But tourists from all over the country come to New York City, and I’d bet more of them would recognize LL (if not by name, as least as someone famous, or as “that guy who was in the movie with the sharks”) than Piazza. Piazza wasn’t even wearing a Mets cap, he looked like any one of a thousand scruffy Italian dudes from Queens.
DING DING DING! We have a winner! She was given the task of hiring temps, but then the PM (Ivana?) tried to play that off as busywork given to her to keep her occupied. But remember the situation? Stacie was underneath the table making the phone calls. The rest of the women – who apparently didn’t know about the temp agency call assignment (and, inexplicably couldn’t, even in hindsight, figure out why temps might have been advantageous in a street-marketing situation) were being so loud and chaotic and boisterous that Stacie had to get down on the floor in order to hear the people on the other end of the phone. When the women mentioned the phone calling in their “let’s get Stacie” meeting, Ivana kept entirely schtum about assigning that task, then in the boardroom, she made out that even though Stacie was actually performing the task that she was assigned and did it well and professionally, she was still wrong and a weirdo and a screwup. Uh huh. Try again, Ivana, you daft bint.
It’s going to be a pleasure to watch as each of these women get fired week after week. None of them are fit to fetch coffee for Trump, let alone run a division for him.
Isn’t the quality of candidates far more pathetic than in the first series?
I saw the latest episode today and when confronted with her accounting incompetence, Maria started chanting the “Stacey is crazy” mantra. She is all set to be a successful politician.
I think it is by far. Far less professional, far less disciplined, and far less savvy. It’s almost ridiculous the amateurish and clumsy way most of these people are behaving. It’s boosted my already relatively high impression of the first season’s candidates (Omarossa notwithstanding) by quite a bit. I really didn’t appreciate them fully prior to this bunch.
