11-17-2016, 02:34 AM
(11-16-2016, 05:19 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Career staffers don't have a vote, but smart people value their expertise to make an informed judgement. If those staffers are good at their job and influential, people are going to defer to that expertise.
So much fail, so hard, in so few words.
The career staffers who you claim would control foreign policy don't vote on foreign policy, either. And who would be the expert, a one and done politician with no experience or the career staffer with the experience who the one and done politician defers to their expertise, as per your foreign policy career staffer example? Unless you think one and done politicians are going to pick career staffers who aren't good at their job and aren't influential and don't have the necessary expertise to help smart people make informed decisions. And if that is the case, why are they career staffers if they suck at their job? And why would the one and done politician pick them for their expertise if they don't have any god damn expertise? Are they going to pick career staffers without the necessary expertise to be career staffers just so they can ignore their input?
