Thursday, December 08, 2016

Overwhelming his opposition with shit appointees

Has Trump named any non-disastrous nominees for his cabinet and non-cabinet advisers? If any other president-elect had named only one of these people, the Democrats would be working their ass off to find some GOP defectors and use the public's pressure to avoid confirmation. Maybe the battle wouldn't be won, but at least there would be a battle. And the battle itself would have some value, allowing the Democrats to stake out their territory in the new Trump era. By having every appointee he names an out of the mainstream steaming pile of shit, how can the opposition focus its attention on any single dreadful appointee during the confirmation fight?

This overwhelm the opposition with too much stuff to react to seems to be Trump's M.O. Many noted during the election campaign that while Trump had more scandals that you could count (the Trump U. fraud suit, his campaign's ties to Putin, his abuse of his charitable foundation, his refusal to disclose any significant medical or financial information about himself, all of the allegations of sexual assault, etc. etc. etc.), Clinton had only a handful of (largely bullshit IMHO) scandals. Because it was easier to just focus on THE EMAILS, Clinton got a lot more negative scandal-related coverage that Trump even though Trump objectively had a lot more scandals.

I don't know if it is intentional, but Trump's decision to name fringe and rightwing radicals for almost every position in his cabinet and as his advisers means that the opposition is not likely to be able to mount concentrated resistance to any of them.