Trump Cabinet/Appointments

[UNI88]

What will the worm that ate rfk jr's brain and is running his body do as Secretary of HHS?

[UNI88]

[UNI88]

Nothing to see here. No conflicts of interest or anything like a conflict of interest. Please move along and blindly believe what trump and musk tell you.

[BDKJMU]

[BDKJMU]

[UNI88]

What if we're criticizing the worm that ate rfk jr's brain and is controlling his body.

Have you been waiting to post the rfk jr news to cover up posts mocking trump's appointments?

[Bobcat]

Nothing to see here. No conflicts of interest or anything like a conflict of interest. Please move along and blindly believe what trump and musk tell you.

This is just a nothing burger EXACTLY like the Ukraine money laundering the Bidens were doing. Nothing to see here except a mainstream media lying about Musk.

All they have is "Nazi", "constitutional crisis" and the coming soon to a theater near you But Trump has a "weaponized DOJ" The same way is wasnt weaponized when Biden came after Trump

Nothing to see here

[Bobcat]

Knock Knock

[BDKJMU]

Actually I know nothing about her other than she looks like kind of a MILF for 52.

[BDKJMU]

Tracker
Confirmed:
1. Sec of State: Marco Rubio, confirmed 99-0 on 1/20.
2. Dir of CIA: John Ratcliffe, confirmed 74-25 on 1/23.
3. Sec of Defense: Pete Hegseth, confirmed 51-50 on 1/24.
4. Sec of DHS: Kristi Noem, confirmed 59-34 on 1/25.
5. Sec of Treasury: Scott Bessent, confirmed 68-29 on 1/27.
6. Sec of Transportation: Sean Duffy, confirmed 77-22 1/28.
7. Head of EPA: Lee Zeldin, confirmed 56-42 on 1/29.
8. Sec of Interior: Doug Burghum, confirmed 79-18 on 1/30.
9. Sec of Energy: Chris Wright, confirmed 59-38 on 2/3.
10. Attny Gen: Pam Bondi, confirmed 54-46 on 2/4.
11. Doug Collins, Sec of Vet Affairs, confirmed 77-23 on 2/4
12. Sec of HUD: Scott Turner, confirmed 55-44 on 2/5.
13. Dir of OMB: Russell Vought, confirmed 53-47 on 2/6.
14. Dir of Nat Intel: Tulsi Gabbard confirmed 52-48 on 2/13.
15. Sec of HHS: RFK Jr confirmed 52-48 on 2/13.
16. Sec of Agricult: Brooke Rollins, confirmed 72-28 on 2/13

Still to be confirmed:
1. Sec of Commerce: Howard Lutnick
2. Sec of Labor: Lori Chavez DeRemer
3. Sec of Education: Linda McMahon
4. US Trade Rep: Jamieson Greer
5. US Ambassador to UN: Elise Stefanik
6. Kelly Loefflet: Administrator of Small Business Association
*7. FBI Director Kash Patel

Failed to confirm
NONE
https://ballotpedia.org/How_senators_vo ... nees,_2025

Bump.

[BDKJMU]

Cocaine Mitch:
-One of only 3 conk senators to vote against Hegseth
-ONLY conk senator to vote against Tulsi
-ONLY conk senator to vote against RFK Jr
-Might be the only conk to vote against Kash.

Collins voted against Hegseth. She voted for Tulsi & RFK Jr. If she hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been that upset- she’s in a blue state (Trump lost by 7), but clearly has a lot of indies & even some donks voting for her. She would have been representing the interest of the majority of her voting constituents.

But as the 82 yr old McConnell, it is a RED state. Trump won the following states by:
1.WY 44.8
2.WV 41.9
3.ND 36.5
4.OK 34.3
5.AR: 30.7
6.KY: 30.6
7.AL: 30.5
8.SD: 29.2

You should vote the will of your constituents. McConnell wouldn’t be giving the majority of his constituents the middle finger if he wasn’t retiring (FINALLY) in 2027 (if he doesn’t die 1st). Hope he falls out of his wheelchair again. Maybe we can get a real conk in there.

[UNI88]

Cocaine Mitch:
-One of only 3 conk senators to vote against Hegseth
-ONLY conk senator to vote against Tulsi
-ONLY conk senator to vote against RFK Jr
-Might be the only conk to vote against Kash.

Collins voted against Hegseth. She voted for Tulsi & RFK Jr. If she hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been that upset- she’s in a blue state (Trump lost by 7), but clearly has a lot of indies & even some donks voting for her. She would have been representing the interest of the majority of her voting constituents.

But as the 82 yr old McConnell, it is a RED state. Trump won the following states by:
1.WY 44.8
2.WV 41.9
3.ND 36.5
4.OK 34.3
5.AR: 30.7
6.KY: 30.6
7.AL: 30.5
8.SD: 29.2

You should vote the will of your constituents. McConnell wouldn’t be giving the majority of his constituents the middle finger if he wasn’t retiring (FINALLY) in 2027 (if he doesn’t die 1st). Hope he falls out of his wheelchair again. Maybe we can get a real conk in there.

McConnell's personal experience more than justified his vote against rfk jr:

I'm a survivor of childhood polio. In my lifetime, I've watched vaccines save millions of lives from devastating diseases across America and around the world. I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures, and neither will millions of Americans who credit their survival and quality of life to scientific miracles.

Individuals, parents, and families have a right to push for a healthier nation and demand the best possible scientific guidance on preventing and treating illness. But a record of trafficking in dangerous conspiracy theories and eroding trust in public health institutions does not entitle Mr. Kennedy to lead these important efforts.

If you should vote the will of your constituents, trump shouldn't should sign any single bill/executive order or implement any policy that isn't supported by more than 50% of US voteers.

[BDKJMU]

Cocaine Mitch:
-One of only 3 conk senators to vote against Hegseth
-ONLY conk senator to vote against Tulsi
-ONLY conk senator to vote against RFK Jr
-Might be the only conk to vote against Kash.

Collins voted against Hegseth. She voted for Tulsi & RFK Jr. If she hadn’t, I wouldn’t have been that upset- she’s in a blue state (Trump lost by 7), but clearly has a lot of indies & even some donks voting for her. She would have been representing the interest of the majority of her voting constituents.

But as the 82 yr old McConnell, it is a RED state. Trump won the following states by:
1.WY 44.8
2.WV 41.9
3.ND 36.5
4.OK 34.3
5.AR: 30.7
6.KY: 30.6
7.AL: 30.5
8.SD: 29.2

You should vote the will of your constituents. McConnell wouldn’t be giving the majority of his constituents the middle finger if he wasn’t retiring (FINALLY) in 2027 (if he doesn’t die 1st). Hope he falls out of his wheelchair again. Maybe we can get a real conk in there.

McConnell's personal experience more than justified his vote against rfk jr:

I'm a survivor of childhood polio. In my lifetime, I've watched vaccines save millions of lives from devastating diseases across America and around the world. I will not condone the re-litigation of proven cures, and neither will millions of Americans who credit their survival and quality of life to scientific miracles.

Individuals, parents, and families have a right to push for a healthier nation and demand the best possible scientific guidance on preventing and treating illness. But a record of trafficking in dangerous conspiracy theories and eroding trust in public health institutions does not entitle Mr. Kennedy to lead these important efforts.

If you should vote the will of your constituents, trump shouldn't should sign any single bill/executive order or implement any policy that isn't supported by more than 50% of US citizens.

Irrelevant. Only matters who votes.

[UNI88]

McConnell's personal experience more than justified his vote against rfk jr:

If you should vote the will of your constituents, trump shouldn't should sign any single bill/executive order or implement any policy that isn't supported by more than 50% of US voters.

Irrelevant. Only matters who votes.

You're the one who said "constituents". You don't have to vote to be a constituent. But I changed it for you anyway because it's a nitpicky point and irrelevant to the point.

trump didn't get 50% of the votes. And while some of the things he's doing are currently popular not all of them are. Using your logic, he should stop all activities that don't enjoy more than 50% approval from voters.

[SeattleGriz]

Nothing to see here. No conflicts of interest or anything like a conflict of interest. Please move along and blindly believe what trump and musk tell you.

Wow. You've turned into a real grift buster since Trump became President. Amazing turnaround for a guy who didn't give two shits about all the existing conflicts that had been happening right under your nose. Go get 'em tiger!

[BDKJMU]

Irrelevant. Only matters who votes.

You're the one who said "constituents". You don't have to vote to be a constituent. But I changed it for you anyway because it's a nitpicky point and irrelevant to the point.

trump didn't get 50% of the votes. And while some of the things he's doing are currently popular not all of them are. Using your logic, he should stop all activities that don't enjoy more than 50% approval from voters.

Wrong. Apples to steak comparison. With activities of a POTUS you often don‘t have accurate, concrete #s on what % of voters are for and against every issue via polls.
*You might not have polls on an issue.
*You might not have recent polls on an issue
*You might only have 1 poll on an issue.
*You might have polls that vary wildly based on:
-how large the poll is.
-how the question(s) is asked.
-whether one party or another or indies are over/under sampled.
-whether it includes random adults, random registered voters, or random likely voters.

As far as:

he should stop all activities that don't enjoy more than 50% approval from voters.

There are cases where multiple polls show more than 50% of voters DON’T APPROVE , but also more than 50% DON’T DISAPPROVE. Ex say 45% approve, 40% disapprove, 15% unsure/no opinion. So as a counter to that can say
‘he should continue all activities that don't have more than 50% DISapproval from voters.

An election is completely different from poll(s) which can be WAY off (ex see Iowa poll 2024 16 points off). The #s of an election are concrete- they are what they are. A senator failing to back the POTUS nominees from his own party when the voters from his state backed said POTUS 64.5% to 34% clearly is giving the middle finger to the overwhelming majority of ‘voters’ in his state.

[UNI88]

You're the one who said "constituents". You don't have to vote to be a constituent. But I changed it for you anyway because it's a nitpicky point and irrelevant to the point.

trump didn't get 50% of the votes. And while some of the things he's doing are currently popular not all of them are. Using your logic, he should stop all activities that don't enjoy more than 50% approval from voters.

Wrong. Apples to steak comparison. With activities of a POTUS you often don‘t have accurate, concrete #s on what % of voters are for and against every issue via polls.
*You might not have polls on an issue.
*You might not have recent polls on an issue
*You might only have 1 poll on an issue.
*You might have polls that vary wildly based on:
-how large the poll is.
-how the question(s) is asked.
-whether one party or another or indies are over/under sampled.
-whether it includes random adults, random registered voters, or random likely voters.

As far as:

he should stop all activities that don't enjoy more than 50% approval from voters.

There are cases where multiple polls show more than 50% of voters DON’T APPROVE , but also more than 50% DON’T DISAPPROVE. Ex say 45% approve, 40% disapprove, 15% unsure/no opinion. So as a counter to that can say
‘he should continue all activities that don't have more than 50% DISapproval from voters.

An election is completely different from poll(s) which can be WAY off (ex see Iowa poll 2024 16 points off). The #s of an election are concrete- they are what they are. A senator failing to back the POTUS nominees from his own party when the voters from his state backed said POTUS 64.5% to 34% clearly is giving the middle finger to the overwhelming majority of ‘voters’ in his state.

BDK attempting to justify stating that Senator mcconnell's actions but not trump's should only be based on what his constituents want.

[BDKJMU]

Wrong. Apples to steak comparison. With activities of a POTUS you often don‘t have accurate, concrete #s on what % of voters are for and against every issue via polls.
*You might not have polls on an issue.
*You might not have recent polls on an issue
*You might only have 1 poll on an issue.
*You might have polls that vary wildly based on:
-how large the poll is.
-how the question(s) is asked.
-whether one party or another or indies are over/under sampled.
-whether it includes random adults, random registered voters, or random likely voters.

As far as:

There are cases where multiple polls show more than 50% of voters DON’T APPROVE , but also more than 50% DON’T DISAPPROVE. Ex say 45% approve, 40% disapprove, 15% unsure/no opinion. So as a counter to that can say
‘he should continue all activities that don't have more than 50% DISapproval from voters.

An election is completely different from poll(s) which can be WAY off (ex see Iowa poll 2024 16 points off). The #s of an election are concrete- they are what they are. A senator failing to back the POTUS nominees from his own party when the voters from his state backed said POTUS 64.5% to 34% clearly is giving the middle finger to the overwhelming majority of ‘voters’ in his state.

BDK attempting to justify stating that Senator mcconnell's actions but not trump's should only be based on what his constituents want.

Like I thought, you have nothing.

[UNI88]

BDK attempting to justify stating that Senator mcconnell's actions but not trump's should only be based on what his constituents want.

Like I thought, you have nothing.

You're the one who stated "you should vote the will of your constituents" and then proceeded to twist yourself into knots trying to justify why that should apply to mcconnell but not trump.

[BDKJMU]

Like I thought, you have nothing.

You're the one who stated "you should vote the will of your constituents" and then proceeded to twist yourself into knots trying to justify why that should apply to mcconnell but not trump.

Lol you’re the one who can’t see there’s zero comparison between the 2.

[UNI88]

You're the one who stated "you should vote the will of your constituents" and then proceeded to twist yourself into knots trying to justify why that should apply to mcconnell but not trump.

Lol you’re the one who can’t see there’s zero comparison between the 2.

The biggest difference being that you support trump and anything he says/does and don't like mcconnell and and will look for ways to limit/criticize him.

You have the typical MAQA yahoo double standard when it comes to all things trump.

[BDKJMU]

Lol you’re the one who can’t see there’s zero comparison between the 2.

The biggest difference being that you support trump and anything he says/does and don't like mcconnell and and will look for ways to limit/criticize him.

You have the typical MAQA yahoo double standard when it comes to all things trump.

Nope. Is no double standard when the 2 situations aren’t comparable.

[UNI88]

The biggest difference being that you support trump and anything he says/does and don't like mcconnell and and will look for ways to limit/criticize him.

You have the typical MAQA yahoo double standard when it comes to all things trump.

Nope. Is no double standard when the 2 situations aren’t comparable.

Wrong.

trump should not have pardoned the January 6 criminals. He shouldn't have renamed the Gulf of Mexico. He should shut his mouth about the Panama Canal.

[BDKJMU]

Nope. Is no double standard when the 2 situations aren’t comparable.

Wrong.

trump should not have pardoned the January 6 criminals. He shouldn't have renamed the Gulf of Mexico. He should shut his mouth about the Panama Canal.

Wrong, because again, you can’t see there’s no comparison between the 2 situations.

[UNI88]

Wrong.

trump should not have pardoned the January 6 criminals. He shouldn't have renamed the Gulf of Mexico. He should shut his mouth about the Panama Canal.

Wrong, because again, you can’t see there’s no comparison between the 2 situations.

You're the one who stated that "you should vote the will of your constituents". trump's constituents didn't want him to pardon the January 6 criminals and they didn't want him to rename the Gulf of Mexico.

Everything else is you twisting yourself into logical pretzels to attempt to explain why your statement applies to mcconnell but not trump. We could call it the but trump exemption.