# Which hand-offs by incumbent Presidents were acrimonious? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 15, 2016, 9:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047 "2016-11-15T09:58:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2016, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/21 "2016-11-15T22:28:56Z")
> [@Duckster](#): > > Is someone able to clarify a statement attributed to Trump? Apparently Trump asked about the White House staff who will remain after the transition. The answer to Trump was “no one,” meaning the Trump team needs to find and hire an entire White House staff to operate the building. Otherwise, he would return from taking the oath to an empty building (not really but close). > > Did this exchange actually occur, and if so, what was actually said? > [@running\_coach](#): > > [Business Insider](http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-obama-meeting-2016-11) > > I’ll assume it’s true since the Tweeter-In-Chief hasn’t denied it yet. That would be just part of the White House. There are several agencies who have a part in the day-to-day operations. ---
**Author:** ![voltaire](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voltaire/32/313_2.png) [@voltaire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/voltaire)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2016, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/22 "2016-11-15T22:35:08Z")
> [@Duckster](#): > > Is someone able to clarify a statement attributed to Trump? Apparently Trump asked about the White House staff who will remain after the transition. The answer to Trump was “no one,” meaning the Trump team needs to find and hire an entire White House staff to operate the building. Otherwise, he would return from taking the oath to an empty building (not really but close). > > Did this exchange actually occur, and if so, what was actually said? Way I heard it, it wasn’t Trump who wasn’t aware that they needed to supply the staff, it was Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, who asked how many people would be staying on. What’s alarming about that at this late date is that he was on the transition team and should not only know that, but should already at least have a list of people. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/23 "2016-11-15T22:39:51Z")
> [@voltaire](#): > > Way I heard it, it wasn’t Trump who wasn’t aware that they needed to supply the staff, it was Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, who asked how many people would be staying on. What’s alarming about that at this late date is that he was on the transition team and should not only know that, but should already at least have a list of people. He’s got a little list. Of those who never would be missed. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/24 "2016-11-16T00:05:38Z")
I would be surprised too. I figured some of them were career government employees like those who run most of Washington regardless of who is president. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/25 "2016-11-16T00:13:47Z")
> [@](#): > > Trump’s aides were also apparently unaware that **the entire staff of the president working in the White House’s West Wing** would need to be replaced, according to The Journal. There’s a difference between that specific subset of people who work at the White House and all the people who work at the White House… The president will need to appoint his own personal staff. That’s why they’re, you know, personal. It’s not like he needs to start interviewing gardeners… ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/26 "2016-11-16T00:51:33Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I would be surprised too. I figured some of them were career government employees like those who run most of Washington regardless of who is president. There are a few civil service positions on the staff, but why would a Republican president keep advisers from the previous Democratic president? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/27 "2016-11-16T03:56:34Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > There are a few civil service positions on the staff, but why would a Republican president keep advisers from the previous Democratic president? Maybe because Republicans don’t make good policy for shit… ---
**Author:** ![davidmich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@davidmich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidmich)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/28 "2016-11-16T05:02:33Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > You altered my words. > > The Salon article you quoted was written and posted May of 2001. The GAO report was issued June 2002 in response to a request from Congress which was made in June 2001. That June request was a follow up on a January 2001 request. Thus the Salon article could not have possibly debunked the GAO report of June 2002. Sorry. Thanks for the clarification. ---
**Author:** ![davidmich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@davidmich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidmich)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2016, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/29 "2016-11-16T05:06:54Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > **Moderator Note** > > **davidmich** accidentally typed a sentence inside the quote that was meant to go after the quote. Since it was rather obvious and clearly unintentional, I moved the sentence to where it was intended to go. > > Please be careful with quote boxes, as we have strict rules here regarding quotes. Noted. Thank you engineer\_comp\_geek. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/30 "2016-11-17T04:28:56Z")
**Moderator Note** > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Maybe because Republicans don’t make good policy for shit… Let’s keep political pot-shots and opinions out of GQ, please. ---
**Author:** ![gkster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gkster/32/14107_2.png) [@gkster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gkster)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/31 "2016-11-17T05:11:45Z")
> [@muttrox](#): > > You might enjoy [this book](https://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Club-Inside-Exclusive-Fraternity/dp/1439127727)about how presidents and ex-presidents related to each other. Thank you @muttrox! Or maybe I shouldn’t thank you since I started reading the book late last night using the “look inside” feature on [amazon.com](http://amazon.com) and it kept me absorbed until 2 AM. I’m ordering my own copy and one as a Christmas gift as well. ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/32 "2016-11-17T12:56:12Z")
> [@Duckster](#): > > Is someone able to clarify a statement attributed to Trump? Apparently Trump asked about the White House staff who will remain after the transition. The answer to Trump was “no one,” meaning the Trump team needs to find and hire an entire White House staff to operate the building. Otherwise, he would return from taking the oath to an empty building (not really but close). > > Did this exchange actually occur, and if so, what was actually said? Nobody should believe a story planted by the Obama administration ---
**Author:** ![muttrox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a8b319/32.png) [@muttrox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muttrox)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/33 "2016-11-17T14:03:45Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Nobody should believe a story planted by the Obama administration And what is your evidence that is was a story planted by the Obama administration? ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/34 "2016-11-17T15:34:21Z")
> [@muttrox](#): > > And what is your evidence that is was a story planted by the Obama administration? Assuming that the story was properly sourced, two groups of people were at the meeting, Trump people and Obama people. Since the story is not flattering to Trump there would be no reason for his people to leak it. Therefore it must have been the Obama people. ---
**Author:** ![muttrox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a8b319/32.png) [@muttrox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/muttrox)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/35 "2016-11-17T15:48:52Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Assuming that the story was properly sourced, two groups of people were at the meeting, Trump people and Obama people. Since the story is not flattering to Trump there would be no reason for his people to leak it. Therefore it must have been the Obama people. If that is what is meant by ‘planting’ and ‘leaking’, then there is no reason not to believe it. Unless there’s more to it, Jim’s post was a cheap shot based on nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/36 "2016-11-17T16:01:57Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Nobody should believe a story planted by the Obama administration **Moderator Note** Let’s refrain from political potshots in GQ. Unless you have definite evidence it was planted, this is a potshot. Colibri General Questions Moderator ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/37 "2016-11-17T22:33:04Z")
Not sureif it was really acrimonious but in late 1992 “American Heritage” magazine (can’t find it on their website) that in a briefing John Kennedy did not pay attention to what Dwight Eisenhower said. Eisenhower didn’t admonish him. Several months later after the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy asked Eisenhower for advice. Eisenhower said he said nothing about Kennedy’s behavior the first time since he won the election. But this time since he was asking for help, he better make sure he listened. When people propose something, find out what information it is based on, how reliable is it, what could go wrong, what the plan is if it goes wrong, etc. JFK listened and a couple years later rejected proposals about Laos since they couldn’t answer Ike’s questions. The magazine noted that President-elect Clinton requested reprints to hand out to his staff. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/38 "2016-11-18T07:00:51Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > John Adams feared a Jefferson administration and wouldn’t stay in Washington for his inauguration… The election of 1800 was acrimonious, with partisan newspapers slinging mud from both sides. It was the last election in which the candidate with the most votes became President & #2 became his VP. A feud between John Adams & Alexander Hamilton split the Federalists; the top two remaining candidates were Thomas Jefferson & Aaron Burr. > [@](#): > > Over the course of seven days, from February 11 to 17, the House cast a total of 35 ballots, with Jefferson receiving the votes of eight state delegations each time—one short of the necessary majority of nine. During the contest, Hamilton recommended to Federalists that they support Jefferson because he was “by far not so dangerous a man” as Burr; in short, he would much rather have someone with wrong principles than someone devoid of any. Hamilton embarked on a frenzied letter-writing campaign to get delegates to switch votes. From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1800)–which seems pretty accurate in this case. John Adams left for Massachusetts in a snit & did not attend TJ’s inauguration. The election of 1824 also ended up in the House. Andrew Jackson led in the voting but Henry Clay threw his votes to John Quincy Adams, who became President. The younger Adams had a brilliant diplomatic history but was not accustomed to the hurly burly of politics in the impending Age of Jackson. [Again from Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quincy_Adams#1824_presidential_election) (hey, I just listened to a fine JQA biography–but it’s hard to cut & paste the spoken word and _this_ part of the entry looks OK to me.) > [@](#): > > John Quincy Adams left office on March 4, 1829, after losing the election of 1828 to Andrew Jackson. Adams did not attend the inauguration of his successor, Andrew Jackson, who had openly snubbed him by refusing to pay the traditional “courtesy call” to the outgoing president during the weeks before his own inauguration. He was one of only four presidents who chose not to attend their respective successor’s inauguration; the others were his father, Andrew Johnson, and Richard Nixon. JQA went on to serve nine terms in the House of Representatives. He \*did \*learn the political game quite well. ([The biography](https://www.amazon.com/Quincy-Adams-Harlow-Giles-Unger/dp/0306822652/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479452413&sr=8-2&keywords=john+quincy+adams) made me quite fond of the prickly fellow–who makes the incoming regime look even worse.) ---
**Author:** ![davidmich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@davidmich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidmich)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 7:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/39 "2016-11-18T07:15:47Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > The election of 1800 was acrimonious, with partisan newspapers slinging mud from both sides. It was the last election in which the candidate with the most votes became President & #2 became his VP. A feud between John Adams & Alexander Hamilton split the Federalists; the top two remaining candidates were Thomas Jefferson & Aaron Burr. > > From [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1800)–which seems pretty accurate in this case. John Adams left for Massachusetts in a snit & did not attend TJ’s inauguration. > > The election of 1824 also ended up in the House. Andrew Jackson led in the voting but Henry Clay threw his votes to John Quincy Adams, who became President. The younger Adams had a brilliant diplomatic history but was not accustomed to the hurly burly of politics in the impending Age of Jackson. [Again from Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Quincy_Adams#1824_presidential_election) (hey, I just listened to a fine JQA biography–but it’s hard to cut & paste the spoken word and _this_ part of the entry looks OK to me.) > > JQA went on to serve nine terms in the House of Representatives. He \*did \*learn the political game quite well. ([The biography](https://www.amazon.com/Quincy-Adams-Harlow-Giles-Unger/dp/0306822652/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479452413&sr=8-2&keywords=john+quincy+adams) made me quite fond of the prickly fellow–who makes the incoming regime look even worse.) Thanks for that Bridget Burke. I’m interested also in the Hoover/Roosevelt transition. I know they were cool towards each other. I don’t know of any problems in the hand-over. Were there? ---
**Author:** ![rbroome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/838e76/32.png) [@rbroome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rbroome)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047/40 "2016-11-18T13:16:51Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Assuming that the story was properly sourced, two groups of people were at the meeting, Trump people and Obama people. Since the story is not flattering to Trump there would be no reason for his people to leak it. Therefore it must have been the Obama people. That logic is unassailable. Since any positive stories would only be leaked by the beneficiary and should not be believed for that reason, and any negative stories would only be leaked by the other side and should not be believed for that reason, your logic proves one should never believe anything. Makes sense to me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/which-hand-offs-by-incumbent-presidents-were-acrimonious/772047.md?page=1)