Go get him at his tweet coz nobody is holding anyone back

Except they block anyone who is too critical.

GrahamS – Member
This CEO comparison is bizarre chewkw.

It is absolutely appropriate in President Trump’s case. Nothing bizarre at all in his style of leadership. Leadership is leadership.

I get the “shaking things up” metaphor but if a controversial new CEO was appointed to a major international company, and they hired a whole new team of senior management, who they said were the best people, and they then fired those same people while dragging the company through a series of scandals and PR disasters, then what would happen?

If the shareholders are happy with that actions then all will be well regardless of things happening …

They would get a vote of no confidence from the board.

If everything goes according to the shareholders wishes then confidence vote will remain.

No one would be congratulating them on a job well done.

As long as the people are happy that is good enough. He has done his job. Congratulation or seeking approval is not important because deep down people know who have done them right. 🙂

If the shareholders are happy

And how do we know that? Wait another 3.5 years to find out? Or maybe conduct a poll in the meantime?

If only there was an indicator of the president’s popularity….. hmmmmm. Some sort of rating of approval from the population/shareholders

GrahamS – Member

Go get him at his tweet coz nobody is holding anyone back

Except they block anyone who is too critical. [/quote] So President Trump uses the legitimate blocking rules to block people? 😆 Is President Trump breaching the tweeting rules? 😛

batfink – Member
No mate….. CEO answers to the board. If Trump was behaving like this as a CEO – he would have been booted out long ago.

I specifically equated shareholders and board of directors as the same in this case. You have not read what I said have you?

Okay, let’s try your way of board of directors … who do you think have more power? Board of directors or shareholders? 😆

Who do you think would be fired if they go against the wishes of shareholders?

Anyway, the CEO analogy was yours. I think Graham was arguing that it wasn’t valid.

Of course it is valid because President Trump was the leader of Trump Organisation. It is leadership. 🙄

batfink – Member
And how do we know that? Wait another 3.5 years to find out? Or maybe conduct a poll in the meantime?

Whenever that is … 😆

If only there was an indicator of the president’s popularity….. hmmmmm. Some sort of rating of approval from the population/shareholders

Shareholders do not care for popularity. Shareholders care for their own investment. 😆

I specifically equated shareholders and board of directors as the same in this case. You have not read what I said have you?

no you didn’t? Unless the word specific means something different to you?

So your CEO analogy only works if the board doesn’t exit?

Of course it is valid because President Trump was the leader of Trump Organisation. It is leadership

yeah ok:

“The Trump Organization is an American privately owned international conglomerate”

I think this is why most of us don’t regard Trump’s business experience as particularly relevant – Trump is used to leading with absolute power.

The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn’t know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn’t make it law.

batfink – Member
So your CEO analogy only works if the board doesn’t exit?

It works on both.

The bottom line is that the shareholders/stakeholders call the shots to retain or to fire the CEO or board of directors. 😛

I think this is why most of us don’t regard Trump’s business experience as particularly relevant – Trump is used to leading with absolute power.

Regardless of whether it is publicly or privately own organisation, the shareholders call the shots.

President Trump being the majority shareholders in his previous appointment as the leader of Trump organisation knows that. He knows how to please the “shareholders” as he was once majority shareholder.

The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn’t know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn’t make it law.

It is all about leadership style, sophisticated or not, and President Trump is still the leader of a nation. If President Trump gets things done according to the people voted for him then it does not matter how he leads.

Ok…. so how do the voters “fire” a sitting president?

This is your analogy

The How to guide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/politics/how-the-impeachment-process-works-trump-clinton.html?_r=0
Most likely charge – obstruction of justice with respect to the firing of Comey, bonus points if he fires the special prosecuter or interferes too much in that one.
Why would the Repulicans (share holders in this case) vote for it? Save their skins from a deeply unpopular and toxic president who could see them wiped out in mid terms.

Regardless of whether it is publicly or privately own organisation, the shareholders call the shots.

Hahahaha – no. A private company doesn’t have shareholders.

I’ll just post this again, in case you missed it:

The Trump Organization is an American privately owned international conglomerate

I think this is why most of us don’t regard Trump’s business experience as particularly relevant – Trump is used to leading with absolute power.

The reality of being president is that you need to be able to draw on more sophisticated leadership behaviors, than perhaps Mr Trump has in his arsenal. He simply doesn’t know how to get things done in an environment where just saying something doesn’t make it law.

batfink – Member
Ok…. so how do the voters “fire” a sitting president?

This is your analogy

Not before the shareholders(voters) see their “investment return” or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.

Therefore, the success or failure of the CEO depends entirely on what is presented to the shareholders and their persuading power. 😛

Most likely charge – obstruction of justice with respect to the firing of Comey, bonus points if he fires the special prosecuter or interferes too much in that one.

I have to believe that his failure to divest his business interests will amount to something – I’d love to see him prosecuted for corruption, rather than just impeached.

Prosecution is a high bar for a president (sitting or former) but he’s so clearly lining his own pockets (via the Trump organisation) that the evidence must be plentiful.

Not before the shareholders(voters) see their “investment return” or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.

well it’s like dancing with an elephant here but…
The Shareholders in this elaborate case are either the public or their representatives in Congress and the Senate.
The first test will be the mid term elections or the run up to them. A deeply unpopular president who is unable to do anything despite having control of both houses looks like a waste of time. The fix is remove one of the problems so either the president or the houses.
The Congressmen and Senators then can decide as the “Shareholders” that one of the many allergations is worth a go, line up a replacement and go for impeachment. Once that happens he is finished (they won’t vote unless they know the outcome) other option is let the people decide in the mid term elections and see how much red turns blue.

I have to believe that his failure to divest his business interests will amount to something – I’d love to see him prosecuted for corruption, rather than just impeached.

I’d say impeachment is the gateway to the rest – hence his desire to look up the rules on pardoning people – is House of Cards really that accurate??

Not before the shareholders(voters) see their “investment return” or outcome after a period of time. Annual account for organisation so for Presidency that will be the next election term.

Graham’s original point was that if (in YOUR analogy) Trump was a CEO acting as erratically as he is, delivering as little as he has, hiring people blatantly not able to fulfill their duties and then firing them shortly afterwards….. he would be removed by the board, or by the shareholders.

As you’ve just pointed out, with the US presidency, there is no opportunity to do that until his re-election – unless he does something impeachable.

Therefore….. your CEO analogy is bullsh*t.

batfink – Member
Hahahaha – no. A private company doesn’t have shareholders.

Crikey … knock yourself out with Wiki. 😆

uh huh..

A privately held company or close corporation is a business company owned either by non-governmental organizations or by a relatively small number of shareholders or company members which does not offer or trade its company stock (shares) to the general public on the stock market exchanges, but rather the company’s stock is offered, owned and traded or exchanged privately

care to tell me who the Trump organisation’s “shareholders” are?

batfink – Member
Graham’s original point was that if (in YOUR analogy) Trump was a CEO acting as erratically as he is, delivering as little as he has, hiring people blatantly not able to fulfill their duties and then firing them shortly afterwards….. he would be removed by the board, or by the shareholders.

Like I said previously the shareholders deliberately elected the candidate they want regardless of his leadership style. The shareholders are also the one elected the board of directors. So if the board of directors are seen as conflicting with the shareholders choice they will not survive their career.

Although the board of directors may be seen as having the power to remove the CEO, they still need to get the approval of the shareholders or they can bite the dust with their career.

As you’ve just pointed out, with the US presidency, there is no opportunity to do that until his re-election – unless he does something impeachable.

Nobody is forcing anyone beyond the rules of laws so do whatever you can within the law.

Therefore….. your CEO analogy is bullsh*t.

The leadership or CEO analogy is not difficult to understand … 😯

batfink – Member
… care to tell me who the Trump organisation’s “shareholders” are?

I don’t work for Trump organisation so perhaps you might want to investigate that yourself? However, who are the shareholders is not important. The important bit is shareholder(s) call the shot. 🙄

whats that you have no idea what you are going on about… how unusual

As explained in your convoluted example the shareholders are the elected representatives and they have a mechanism for removing Trump – he just fired the link to the party in RP so it’s a risky time and he doesn’t have many allies over on the hill.

What was I thinking? Forgot the “no engagement” rule. Sorry you all had to sit through that.

meanwhile:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-dictated-sons-misleading-statement-on-meeting-with-russian-lawyer

Turns out that Jnr’s initial statement to the press about the infamous Russia meeting (the one that was later found to be lie)…. was “personally dictated” to him from airforce 1 by Donald senior.

fake news I’m sure

So it’s taken just 10 days for the White House Director of Communications to get sacked. As he wasn’t due to start until August 15th, is this the only politician in history to get booted out by his boss before officially starting his job?

The Orange Donkey was responsible for hiring the totally useless Scaramucci in the first place, yet says this is a “great day for the White House”.

Beyond farce.

Great effort last night with miss direction and obfuscation. You could almost call it an exercise in maskirovka.

Not that it’s really takes anything away from the absurdity of Drumps being really very bad at his job.

Why are you all feeding the chewkw troll? His responses are so badly thought out and worded it’s not even entertaining to read – please stop…

Chewkw – please try and be a bit more entertaining if you’re going to take the effort to troll a thread. As it stands some actually worthwhile things to read (such as the VF article) could get lost among the bollocks you’re giving yourself a pat on the back for (you do deserve our pity though).

Donald Trump dictated ‘misleading statement on son’s meeting with Russian lawyer’

He knowingly lied to the American people and there’s evidence, this Trump fellow doesn’t sound like one of the good guys! More like a bag filled with baws if you ask me.

STOP ENGAGING WITH THE RESIDENT TROLL. YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS.

Chewkw – member
Like I said previously the shareholders deliberately elected the candidate they want regardless of his leadership style.

Indeed.

I worked for a company which had an OK, but unexciting CEO. The shareholders voted for the company to be bought by another one, replacing the old CEO with the shiny new one.

They hoped the new one would be dynamic and exciting, make lots of changes and get a great return on equity.

But sadly it turned out he was an idiot. He also hired idiots (so they wouldn’t show him up). He couldn’t make decisions, didn’t get anything done, and just let everything slide, while enjoying lots of nice expensive perks of being the CEO.

Eventually the company was sold for a lot less than the original price to another competitor. Their CEO turned out to be equally useless. After a while my job was shipped out to India and I was paid (quite well) to work for someone else. Last I heard, the remains of the company had been sold for next to nothing to Infineon.

Chewkw, if you’ve read this far, just remember that Trump may have been elected to do lots of worthwhile things, but that doesn’t mean that he can live up to it.

I’m not sure democracy works very well iat the moment.
If your going to have equal voting rights, you need equal access to information and education.
Sure it’ll workout in the end but not before some pain.

So what you’re saying here is that Trump likes to self-pleasure? 😆

Though you’re getting seriously close to falling out of character here chewy – more of the incomprehensible rambling or people will start to see through your “character”.

As for everybody else – what’s the point of engaging?

STOP ENGAGING WITH THE RESIDENT TROLL. YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS.

Yes, but it’s keeping it away from the rest of the forum

Why are you all feeding the chewkw troll?

Because otherwise this place is just an echo chamber of people agreeing that Trump is terrible.

chewkw is the only one left here that is prepared to defend Trump no matter what he does.

His responses are so badly thought out and worded

Could be worse, I read this wonderfully eloquent response this morning…

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=154085725168178&id=100017002535261

Read is a strong term, I got there were words, perhaps in the wrong order? Perhaps punctuation might help.

In reality, he’s intentionally taking a fake contrary position purely to get a rise out of everyone that bites

He can’t see posts unless you mention his name so he’s easy to avoid.

Someone has to present the other side of the argument. Even now, 39% of voters approve of Trump.

If chewkw gave up, I would feel duty bound to pick up the baton, and honestly I just don’t have the time or inclination to do it properly.

oldnpastit – Member
Someone has to present the other side of the argument. Even now, 39% of voters approve of Trump.

The most Trump supporting and optimistic poll has him at 39,he hasn’t hit that high on most for a long while.

Having said that, it would be nice if chewkw could post facts about how Trump is making America great again, specifically. Not just half baked analogies and assertions.

Judge a tree by its fruit.

GrahamS – Member

Counter question chewkw: do you still stand by your analysis that Trump will serve at least eight years, possibly more?

Yes. Eight years.[/quote]
yet you wouldn’t take a bet on him surviving one term. |

Having said that, it would be nice astonishing if chewkw could post facts about how Trump is making America great again, specifically. Not just half baked analogies and assertions.

Mooch will be missed, so much comedy potential

[video src="https://thumbs.gfycat.com/DamagedShowyEeve-mobile.mp4" /]

Mooch will be missed, so much comedy potential

Yep, he was so new and different.. 😉

.. he had a blue tie.