# How difficult would it be for a Democratic POTUS to replace Trump's executive branch employees? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 9, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293 "2019-04-09T18:10:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2019, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/21 "2019-04-10T11:22:51Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No, I meant exactly what I said: “… the Democrats have voted in virtual lockstep against many of President Trump’s nominees, I hope to see the Republicans reciprocate the next time a Dem wins the presidency.” In other words, I hope, and believe, it will be extremely difficult for a Democratic POTUS to replace President Trump’s executive branch employees, at least so long as Republicans control the Senate. It is true that the Democrats have acted in virtual lockstep against many of President Trump’s nominees. It is also true that they have done so not for partisan reasons as implied, but rather because many of President Trump’s nominees have been grossly unqualified for the roles for which they were nominated (Betsy DeVos being the most egregious example) and thus opposing them was less “acting like drunken toddlers” and more “doing their actual job”. Of course, it’s also worth noting at the same time that Republicans voted in lockstep to approve these grossly unqualified candidates, often following receipt of substantial donations to the relevant committee members’ campaign funds, which seems less kosher to me. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2019, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/22 "2019-04-10T15:03:36Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > When the Dems are behaving like drunken toddlers, playing by Marquess of Queensberry Rules does not seem like a wise move. What you seem to be proposing is that you guys get to vote in virtual lockstep against Republican nominees but that we shouldn’t do the same to you. Seems dumb. Real dumb. You still haven’t explained why you hope Republicans behave in a spiteful, petty fashion rather than like adults. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2019, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/23 "2019-04-10T15:24:58Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > You still haven’t explained why you hope Republicans behave in a spiteful, petty fashion rather than like adults. He did. He said it was the Democrats’ fault. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2019, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/24 "2019-04-10T16:34:17Z")
I’m sure Mitch McConnell would love it if the Democrats governed based on terror of what future Republican governments might do. It wouldn’t change anything McConnell would do in the future, but it would surely make his present job of doing everything possible to aid the hateful and harmful policies of Trump much easier. It would be profoundly foolish if the Democrats to govern based on terror of future Republicans. Far better and wiser to try and actually provide oversight of this president and challenge his nominees when they are obviously professionally or ethically/morally unqualified. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/25 "2019-04-11T14:14:38Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No, I meant exactly what I said: “… the Democrats have voted in virtual lockstep against many of President Trump’s nominees, I hope to see the Republicans reciprocate the next time a Dem wins the presidency.” So your response to the fact that Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees is to hope that that sort of nonsense continues into the far future. The overwhelming number of Trump appointees have been unqualified, incompetent, and/or corrupt (as demonstrated by the huge number that have resigned in disgrace) and the tragedy is not that the Democrats have opposed them, but that so few Republicans have. One hopes that McConnell has long since departed after the next election and that bi-partisan consideration of appointees can return to the Senate. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/26 "2019-04-11T16:10:56Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > So your response to the fact that Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees is to hope that that sort of nonsense continues into the far future. … I don’t believe they did. For example, just taking Secretary of State: Obama nominated Hillary Clinton. She was confirmed by the Senate 94-2. Obama nominated John Kerry. He was confirmed by the Senate 94-3. President Trump nominated Rex Tillerson. He was confirmed 56-43. President Trump nominated Mike Pompeo. He was confirmed 57-42. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/27 "2019-04-11T16:20:02Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > President Trump nominated Rex Tillerson. He was confirmed 56-43. Considering how he ended up being perhaps the worst Secretary of State ever, you should be questioning the 56. > [@](#): > > President Trump nominated Mike Pompeo. He was confirmed 57-42. Considering he is probably the most nakedly partisan Secretary of State in many years, that seems about right. I’m happy to show quotes of Republicans who have said Clinton worked with them well, especially while she was in the Senate. Pompeo’s sole occupation while serving in the House was to attack Democrats, often in stupid ways. ETA: I would also ask you to explain why Trump appointee Mattis was confirmed 99-1, but Obama appointee Hagel was confirmed 58-41. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/28 "2019-04-11T16:22:30Z")
That’s nice, but has nothing to do with **tomndebb** ’s assertion that “Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees” ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/29 "2019-04-11T16:46:35Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > That’s nice, but has nothing to do with **tomndebb** ’s assertion that “Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees” Let me remind you of your own first post in this thread: > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > **Given that the Democrats have voted in virtual lockstep against many of President Trump’s nominees** , I hope to see the Republicans reciprocate the next time a Dem wins the presidency. If the Republicans still control the Senate, that might mean a lot of vacancies. Are you really engaging in this bullshit nitpicking of **tomndebb** ’s statement because he didn’t include the word “virtual” in front of “lockstep?” ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/30 "2019-04-11T16:51:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Let me remind you of your own first post in this thread: > Are you really engaging in this bullshit nitpicking of **tomndebb** ’s statement because he didn’t include the word “virtual” in front of “lockstep?” I certainly don’t see it as “bullshit nitpicking”. He claimed that “Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees”. That’s not true, as I demonstrated by citing the broad Republican support that Clinton and Kerry received. If he had included the word “virtual” in there, I wouldn’t have changed my post much, except perhaps to include a few more examples of significant portions of the Republican caucus supporting additional Obama executive-branch appointees. If you want to argue that the Dems were justified in their widespread opposition to President Trump’s nominees, as **tomndebb** did in the second sentence of his post, you can certainly do that, but that’s quite a different tack than **tomndebb** ’s approach in his first sentence of arguing that the Republicans did it first. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/31 "2019-04-11T18:01:24Z")
Would you say that Republican senators are actually open-minded about Democratic appointments, and cast their votes based on the merits of the nominee? ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/32 "2019-04-11T18:37:50Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Would you say that Republican senators are actually open-minded about Democratic appointments, and cast their votes based on the merits of the nominee? I suppose that’s one plausible explanation. Personally, I suspect it is more closely related to a historical deference to the president to have his choice of cabinet personnel, which the Republicans seem to have adhered to more than the Dems. It’s also possibly tied to a generally-more-acrimonious nature of our politics that seems to get worse with every passing year. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/33 "2019-04-11T19:08:37Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I suppose that’s one plausible explanation. This must be an example of conservative humor – statements intended for humorous effect that just aren’t funny. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2019, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/34 "2019-04-11T19:57:23Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Given that the Democrats have voted in virtual lockstep against many of President Trump’s nominees, I hope to see the Republicans reciprocate the next time a Dem wins the presidency. If the Republicans still control the Senate, that might mean a lot of vacancies. To be fair even republicans are not keen on Trump’s nominees: > [@](#): > > In addition to confronting Trump on his purge at the Department of Homeland Security and his threat to deploy auto tariffs and keep existing levies, GOP senators hope they can persuade the president to avoid nominating Cuccinelli or Kris Kobach, another immigration hard-liner, to lead DHS. They also want Trump to drop plans to nominate Herman Cain to the Federal Reserve and are considering whether to challenge Stephen Moore’s nomination to the Fed. > > “We’re trying to do everything we can to send the message before they send these people up here,” said a Republican senator who 20 seconds later lamented a separate problem: Trump’s “trade nightmare.” > > SOURCE: [https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/11/president-trump-senate-republicans-1267012](https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/11/president-trump-senate-republicans-1267012) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2019, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/35 "2019-04-12T02:33:15Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > That’s nice, but has nothing to do with **tomndebb** ’s assertion that “Republicans voted in lockstep to oppose Obama appointees” OK. The basic point still stands, even if I did accidentally delete “virtual.” Trump has consistently appointed crooks, incompetents, and people with anti-science agendas. There seems to be no valid reason for anyone (especially Republicans) to vote to approve people who will destroy this country while feathering their own nests. ---
**Author:** ![wguy123](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wguy123/32/3161_2.png) [@wguy123](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wguy123)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2019, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293/36 "2019-04-12T16:59:53Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > To be fair even republicans are not keen on Trump’s nominees: And now those meanie Republicans look like they aren’t happy about a potential nominee to the Federal Reserve board, Herman Cain. Why are the R’s so mean to Trump? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-difficult-would-it-be-for-a-democratic-potus-to-replace-trumps-executive-branch-employees/832293.md?page=1)