Washington Post has a solid overview:
Do you know the difference between an editorial and an opinion piece?
Seems pretty accurate to me:
There are still facts in that article. It’s fact that most, if not nearly all of trump’s nominees are hostile to the mission of the agency they’re being appointed to lead.
It’s opinion whether that’s good or bad.
An editorial is also an opinion piece. The only difference being is it’s a consensus opinion, not an individual.
No, I disagree that this is a fact. Either it’s not “most,” or your notion of hostility is not mine.
Yeah, it’s not most.
EPA and Labor. I would say Education, but I guess that’s arguable. Perry both wanted Energy gone and simultaneously didn’t know what the function of the agency was, but has since flip-flopped after someone introduced him to Wikipedia. So that’s a maybe, depending on how sincerely you think his change of heart is.
Agreed on EPA and Labor, and I’m not sanguine about Education or Energy. But that’s four.
Agreed. To claim that Trump’s cabinet is the worst ever, before they’ve even done a day’s worth of work, seems a bit much, even before getting into the nuances of what makes a ‘good’ cabinet.
May I propose ‘least likely to inspire confidence’ instead?
I can’t get up enough energy to dispute this.
But part of it is that a few nominees are dragging down the average. Rick Perry *in my opinion) hurts the batting average for the team quite a bit. De Vos does too. And both of these appointments arise (again in my opinion) from a President that himself has no depth of knowledge in these policy areas.
But it’s important to recognize that this is my opinion; I won’t try to bluster and cloak it with the imprimatur of ‘fact.’ These are not objectively measurable assessments.
Wow, Bricker, that was well put.
Does Trump have an FDA head yet?
Nitpick: “DeVos,” no space.
In terms of “probability of success of a Cabinet pick” DeVos is probably the worst Cabinet pick of your lifetime. I would strongly argue she is MUCH worse than Perry, and Perry is a terrible choice.
If one goes by “probability of success” there are a lot of low batting averages in that lineup. Tillerson is a potential catastrophe.
I think McNamera was worse for the country. Earl Butz was abysmal. And surely John Mitchell deserves some censure as well? I don’t see the probability that DeVos will run the ship further aground than any of those worthies actually did.
Relative to the importance of her department, she matches anyone. Earl Butz was an world class asshole, but I don’t think you can clearly say he was a terrible Secretary of Agriculture. John Mitchell, well, you have me there.
DeVos’s department can’t start a war, so one could look at it that way. Not all Cabinet positions are equal in impact.
So now Rick Perry isn’t a human or just not a human I could have a beer with?
Yeah, that was sort of my point snowflake.
Your insistence on ideological purity and partisanship seems much more Republican to me than concluding that Rick Perry might be a decent guy, just not one you want in charge of anything.
Sessions as Attorney General is IMHO worse than DeVos at Education. The federal Attorney General has a lot more to do with enforcing civil rights laws than the federal Education Department has to do with the overall operation of public schools in the 50 States and thousands of school districts across the country. He can [pauses to check we’re in the Pit] fuck up civil rights more than she can fuck up the schools.
Well, if she succeeds at getting guns into schools, I bet the incidence of grizzly bear attacks on students will be low. So that’ll count as a success.
Don’t worry. He’ll replace them with something really special.
Only a good guy with a gun can stop a guy in a grizzly mascot suit.
Maybe this?