Given his track record of appointments?

GAC06 said:

---

Given his track record of appointments?

---

He did better with SCOTUS appointments than anyone else in the last 30 years. Plus I sure don't expect a 100% success rate on selections. But the man was elected by the people as the leader of the executive branch. He should get to pick those working for him. And be allowed to fire the ones that were bad picks.

Would you take the nominations from any other recent POTUS over those of Trump?

What's "recent"? W was 16 years ago. HW was 24, Reagan 28.

Trump's Supreme Court nominees seem good so far, but didn't he pick from a list? His administration was a disaster.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What makes this guy worth voting for?

---

Do some research and educate yourself.

I don't have any 'sources' but I don't find the lies about Hegseth to be real compelling, fwiw.

Sources with direct knowledge tell me this story is nonsense and indicate they’ve had enough with games being played on Hegseth’s Defense nomination by Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

One source said Graham, who has never found a war he didn’t… pic.twitter.com/yPyNf5gMvt

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) December 4, 2024

Graham's boyfriend (supposedly a defense contractor/broker) must really not like what Pete has been talking about, imho.

atmtws said:

---

---

I just saw a news report talking about how Trump's people with be talking to DeSantis.

Now this would be a great pick.

Thune!? Mother ****er! This is exactly why we didn't want him and McConnell engineered that.

He was a terrible selection.

GAC06 said:

---

What's "recent"? W was 16 years ago. HW was 24, Reagan 28.

Trump's Supreme Court nominees seem good so far, but didn't he pick from a list? His administration was a disaster.

---

You can just say "Yes he did exceptional picking Supreme Court justices" without being a massive Trump supporter. It's totally okay.

Recent is any selected is the past 30 years, if you want me to be super specific, then any from 1988 onward. Who did better overall selecting for SCOTUS?

BMX Bandit said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What makes this guy worth voting for?

---

The incoming POTUS who was elected with what can only be called a "mandate" wants him in the position.

---

If Trump nominated Hillary for SecDef, wouid that make her worth voting for?


I have no problem with Hegseth getting confirmed. But this "because Trump said so" didn't really sufficient.

---

He should get to pick his own people, and then live with the fallout. He was elected to lead the Executive branch, and he should be allowed to do just that.

Yeah, probably. I just think a GOP president should get his people, just as all Dem presidents do, unless the nominee is truly a criminal (so maybe Hillary would be the theoretical exception, as with Hunter).

Again, these folks get huge support staffs in office, there's no real requirement to 'knowing' all about the various pentagon layers of bs that is 'so helpful.' Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney knew all about it, and I think are historically the worst DoD secretaries I can recall (going way beyond my memory I'd put McNamara in the 'Biden' class of all time worst).

I have learned not to trust personal allegations if they are coming from the direction of the left of the accused. Most are either fabricated or exaggerated or distorted.

I also agree you can get many good managerial hatchet men to go into DOD and clean house. It isn't worth necessarily expending too much politicsl capital on a particular nominee if there are others like them out there that might do just as well.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Trump voter here, but I also believe in the constitution and the Senate's role to advise and consent. If Hegseth gets confirmed, great. Fantastic.

If not, then next man or woman on deck. If he can't get 50 votes from his own party, then that's a red flag. Blame it on RINO's if you want, but there's no world in which Pete Hegseth is the only qualified nominee.

I fully support Trump's agenda to clean house and rid the DOD of its DEI infestation. But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.

The most important thing is that he gets appointees confirmed quickly so they can execute the agenda. Banging your head against the wall for nominees who can't get confirmed is a waste of time. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially when we're trying to clean house while he's got both chambers of Congress.

Time is of the essence. Get it done.

---

My worry is that these RINOs are holding out so that Trump will be forced to nominate a candidate with latent/hidden swamp tendencies. They will be confirmed quickly, but they will sabotage his agenda from the inside.

I don't trust many of the sitting GOP senators, that's why I want Trump to clean house with cabinet members of his choosing. I don't want him to compromise, I want him to shine a spotlight on those who oppose him and his agenda and then use the full weight of Elon Musk to primary them in the next election.

I have been saying he was a terrible selection since Day 1.

I was accosted by many of you the"TRUMP!!!!!"

Now perhaps Trump is coming around to my way of thinking.

AtticusMatlock said:

---

Halperin and Spicer were talking about this on their show this morning. A lot of GOP Senators have been telling people behind the scenes they are not comfortable with the pick. It is likely way more than the people listed here. It's not because of his ideas about Department of Defense reform. It's about managerial experience in general combined with a lot of the personal issues.

There was an article in the New Yorker published this week that talked about financial mismanagement within the veterans organization he was running. When you have difficulty managing the finances of a relatively small organization it's not going to translate well to an 800 billion dollar budget. This is at a Department that constantly fails audits.

Halperin thinks he will pull out before the nomination process even gets going.

---

You talking about the same Department of Defense that has failed seven audits in a row and cant account for billions of dollars in spending? Sounds like Hegseth would fit right in. Can't be any worse. He should get a shot just like Biden's nominee did.

One thing the dems do will is stand fast behind their leadership. Always division with republicans.

Lots of people calling Hegseth drinking on or before going on air a lie. Seems orchestrated like everything else.

Getting Trump is 10% of the battle, now its getting the people in place to get his agenda moved along

jwhaby said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Trump voter here, but I also believe in the constitution and the Senate's role to advise and consent. If Hegseth gets confirmed, great. Fantastic.

If not, then next man or woman on deck. If he can't get 50 votes from his own party, then that's a red flag. Blame it on RINO's if you want, but there's no world in which Pete Hegseth is the only qualified nominee.

I fully support Trump's agenda to clean house and rid the DOD of its DEI infestation. But there are literally hundreds of qualified candidates who would be loyal to Trump and get the job done.

The most important thing is that he gets appointees confirmed quickly so they can execute the agenda. Banging your head against the wall for nominees who can't get confirmed is a waste of time. Ain't nobody got time for that, especially when we're trying to clean house while he's got both chambers of Congress.

Time is of the essence. Get it done.

---

My worry is that these RINOs are holding out so that Trump will be forced to nominate a candidate with latent/hidden swamp tendencies. They will be confirmed quickly, but they will sabotage his agenda from the inside.

I don't trust many of the sitting GOP senators, that's why I want Trump to clean house with cabinet members of his choosing. I don't want him to compromise, I want him to shine a spotlight on those who oppose him and his agenda and then use the full weight of Elon Musk to primary them in the next election.

---

They're saying on Fox right now that DeSantis might be the next man up. If Pete withdraws and Ron gets it, that's an upgrade IMO. DeSantis has skins on the wall from fighting woke and has been an exceptionally skillful governor at commanding large response events (hurricanes, etc). Even if it's not Ron, there are plenty of well qualified leaders who can get confirmed and clean house at DOD. Plenty of former generals and colonels who were swept out by the woke crowd and would love to return and clean house. Pete's not the only guy, but I'm also at peace if he get's confirmed.

Speed is critical here, not a single nominee. We've got work to do.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

What's "recent"? W was 16 years ago. HW was 24, Reagan 28.

Trump's Supreme Court nominees seem good so far, but didn't he pick from a list? His administration was a disaster.

---

You can just say "Yes he did exceptional picking Supreme Court justices" without being a massive Trump supporter. It's totally okay.

---

He didn't do exceptional. He didn't nominate a single Thomas, Alito, or Scalia-esque justice. Yes, they voted to overturn Roe. No, his picks are not the merry band of Marxist misfits that the Dem picks on the Court are, but that's setting the bar pretty low.

I liked Hegseth because of what he said and because he was not a flag officer. We need somebody who will destroy DEI in the military and will turn the military into a meritocracy again, rather than just a political shell game.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I want the best candidate for the job, not the most popular. I believe that Trump picked Hegseth for a reason, and that's because he is the best person to implement his agenda. Desantis may not be bad, but he is clearly a step down or he would have been the initial nominee.

jwhaby said:

---

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I want the best candidate for the job, not the most popular. I believe that Trump picked Hegseth for a reason, and that's because he is the best person to implement his agenda. Desantis may not be bad, but he is clearly a step down or he would have been the initial nominee.

---

I prefer Hegseth because it's clear that he has been thinking about how to fix the military his whole career. Hell, if I was DeSantis and was appointed, then I'd still hire Hegseth as a deputy and let him run wild.

GAC06 said:

---

Don't need a flag rank for nominee, just someone with relevant experience running an organization of that size and complexity

---

Interesting comment and probably valid, but does anyone remember McNamara (sp?).

Vietnam vets certainly do. He was probably picked based on the same rationale after managing Ford. Between him and Lyndon Johnson, they micro-managed the war from Washington, lost a ton of lives for absolutely zero gain for the US and world.

Maybe instead of a manager, we would be better off with a warrior, hatchet man. And I'm not saying Pete is that guy.

As soon as Hegseth is removed from consideration they'll turn their attention to getting Kash Patel withdrawn as the FBI director nominee through some personal histiry anllegations and Rinos will go along with that too.

Again, Trump and Elon should spend the next four years and boatloads of money targeting those Rino senators and supporting challengers. Campaign against them on the trail like he is still running for President.

Then the next Republican President will get his people, just like a dem would.

This issue that only seems to plague Republicans has to stamped out with ruthless efficiency.

"Won't commit"
And "voting against" are two different things

aTmAg said:

---

I liked Hegseth because of what he said and because he was not a flag officer. We need somebody who will destroy DEI in the military and will turn the military into a meritocracy again, rather than just a political shell game.

---

This!

That is the number one priority, which will also boost recruiting, especially among white males! Stocking the military full of liberal, woke transgenders is not the way.

China is going to be a major threat going forward:

Quote:

---

The latest iteration of the Pentagon's annual report to Congress on the Chinese military has stated that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is evolving its capabilities and concepts to strengthen their ability to "fight and win wars" against the United States. House China Committee Chairman Rep. John Moolenaar (R-MI) has said that China "has enough weapons to overwhelm our air and missile defenses" that protect U.S. bases in the Pacific.

China now fields the largest army, navy and ground-based rocket force in the world. Beijing has also been hard at work to build a sophisticated hypersonic missile arsenal and to triple its nuclear arsenal by 2030.

---

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/china-has-built-the-strongest-military-in-the-indo-pacific/

nortex97 said:

---

Yeah, probably. I just think a GOP president should get his people, just as all Dem presidents do, unless the nominee is truly a criminal (so maybe Hillary would be the theoretical exception, as with Hunter).

Again, these folks get huge support staffs in office, there's no real requirement to 'knowing' all about the various pentagon layers of bs that is 'so helpful.' Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney knew all about it, and I think are historically the worst DoD secretaries I can recall (going way beyond my memory I'd put McNamara in the 'Biden' class of all time worst).

---

The role of the Senate is "Advise and Consent" not advise and reject. Many in Washington are unable to read due to their love of power. If the senators cannot convince Trump he has selected a bad nominee, they should confirm him.

And as opposed to Hegseth who is not qualified, Patel is very qualified to run the FBI. Lots of large organization managerial experience.

Stressboy said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What makes this guy worth voting for?

---

You don't like him for one!

---

Please explain what I don't like about him?

A handful of Republican senators publicly said that Hegseth needed to answer questions about his alleged conduct and possible alternatives for secretary of defense were being floated by sources close to Trump. Among them is Florida governor and one-time Trump primary adversary Ron DeSantis, who is interested in the position if he is formally offered the job, two sources close to the governor told CNN's Steve Contorno.

Logos Stick said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

What makes this guy worth voting for?

---

Do some research and educate yourself.

---

Ah yes, the dodge.

So why do they have the power to reject the nominee?

fc2112 said:

---

And as opposed to Hegseth who is not qualified, Patel is very qualified to run the FBI. Lots of large organization managerial experience.

---

You will see "concerns" appear about Patel too.

I have no problem with people believing that the Senate should give great difference to the president on his nominees. I believe that also. But the idea they cannot reject someone is ridiculous.


The constitution says " buy and with the advice and consent"


It does not say the sentence role is to consent