Trump: " I like conflict" .... Apparently, he likes timidity and sycophancy better

[usmbguest5318]

Just last week Trump remarked, "I like conflict, I like having two people with different points of view – and I certainly have that – and then I make a decision. But I like watching it, I like seeing it, and I think it’s the best way to go."

Apparently, judging by the fact that he fired Rex Tillerson, Trump doesn't at all like conflict or different points of view. He had plenty of both coming from Tillerson, a man who is clearly Trump's better as a analytical and strategic thinker and as a leader.

To boot, it's rumored that Trump is moving to rid his Administration of the remaining cabinet level appointees who don't agree with him. So much for valuing different points of view....

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, we've already seen what happens when he demands loyalty and doesn't get it from people working with him.

He fires them.

 

[Tijn Von Ingersleben]

I completely agree with Trump on this one. Stewing a certain level of conflict definitely works. Especially when you are surrounded by 'alphas' who do not like to lose. It really tends to get the best out of people.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Tillerson now gone and replaced by Pompeo and Haspel now probable torture-in-chieftainess at CIA, I image the conflict will continue.

 

[koshergrl]

Just last week Trump remarked, "I like conflict, I like having two people with different points of view – and I certainly have that – and then I make a decision. But I like watching it, I like seeing it, and I think it’s the best way to go."

Apparently, judging by the fact that he fired Rex Tillerson, Trump doesn't at all like conflict or different points of view. He had plenty of both coming from Tillerson, a man who is clearly Trump's better as a analytical and strategic thinker and as a leader.

To boot, it's rumored that Trump is moving to rid his Administration of the remaining cabinet level appointees who don't agree with him. So much for valuing different points of view....

So how is this in the Clean Debate Zone? Is the Clean Debate Zone a zone where you can post inflammatory OPs and be guaranteed that nobody will dare to oppose in like fashion? The OP is in violation of the forum rules.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Tillerson now gone and replaced by Pompeo and Haspel now probable torture-in-chieftainess at CIA, I image the conflict will continue.

Oh, I don't know Pompeo, so I can't say. I know enough about Fortune 500 CEOs and their ilk to have a pretty good idea of what was going on between Tillerson and Trump.

To put it one way, they basically don't fly by the seat of their pants. They take risks -- they have to -- but only calculated risks that have been thoroughly considered; they don't just go with their gut. Yet by the seat of his pants is how Trump rolls, as one might say, with everything, even things for which he doesn't have to and things for which no rational person working on behalf of millions of others would.

In a manner of speaking, it comes down to taking seriously one's fiduciary duty. As Exxon CEO, Tillerson had to deal with that, be it the duty to "Millie Main Street" or "Willy Wall Street." Trump, having only ever been beholden to himself, has no experience with that, knowing only how to pay lip service to the interests of others but serving ultimately essentially only himself. Imprudently, Trump thinks of governing, public policy making the same way he thinks of running his company: what's good for Trump is good for Trump Organization and vice versa.

With public governance, however, one's own best interests only rarely are lockstep with the broader citizenry's, mainly because politicians mostly come from a rarefied socioeconomic segment of the citizenry. Thus when one is running a county, state or country, one has to do what's good for the overwhelming majority of people, not merely or necessarily what's good for oneself. Indeed, the fiduciary responsibility of governing implores one to make choices that may not be good for oneself. The whole reason one is there is that the electorate is trusting one to do just that.

It's quite clear that Tillerson tried to impress upon Trump the value of considered thought and analysis. He was that opposing voice telling Trump, "Dude, slow down. Take the time to review all the analysis and carefully consider the situation before making a decision." He was that philosophical voice of a different point of view and different approach, and Trump canned him and others in his Administration who, with regard to their areas, were delivering that same message.