• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kamala Harris’ national security adviser is latest VP staffer to resign

People give notice with resignations all the time. It's not clear if this is related to the environment in the VP office or not.... but it's certainly another added to the tally.
Yep, but that's what the NY Post is implying. I could be wrong, but I don't recall this newspaper making the same assumptions at the high turnover rate during the previous administration. I am curious as to what we'll learn about the environment in the Harris camp though; no politicians are immune from creating toxic work environments. My point was that resigning without giving your employer notice is a far better indicator of someone leaving because they are adamant about exiting a bad environment.
 
Yep, but that's what the NY Post is implying. I could be wrong, but I don't recall this newspaper making the same assumptions at the high turnover rate during the previous administration. I am curious as to what we'll learn about the environment in the Harris camp though; no politicians are immune from creating toxic work environments. My point was that resigning without giving your employer notice is a far better indicator of someone leaving because they are adamant about exiting a bad environment.
Maybe. While leaving without notice can certainly indicate a bad work environment, it can also indicate a bad employee. Giving notice doesn't mean the environment is good. Turnover is a much better indicator. In this case, it's the VP of the united states! Washington staffer types should be beating down the door to get in and at least staying a couple of years to pad the resume up and leave at a more natural break - like closer to midterms.
 
Maybe. While leaving without notice can certainly indicate a bad work environment, it can also indicate a bad employee. Giving notice doesn't mean the environment is good. Turnover is a much better indicator. In this case, it's the VP of the united states! Washington staffer types should be beating down the door to get in and at least staying a couple of years to pad the resume up and leave at a more natural break - like closer to midterms.
Sure, which is why the turnover rate during the last administration seemed like a real sign of a bad environment. If the Harris team experiences that level of turnover, then I would be inclined to think it was due to a toxic environment.
 
Sure, which is why the turnover rate during the last administration seemed like a real sign of a bad environment. If the Harris team experiences that level of turnover, then I would be inclined to think it was due to a toxic environment.
They really have had a high level of turnover among the senior staff in the VP's office. It's concerning. If you want to compare it to the last presidential administration (again, not a good comparison) - remember that the President's team is MUCH, MUCH bigger. Note that you don't see that level of turnover with the present president.

Noting again - other breaking news today - a book released that also highlights issues in the VP's office.
 
You forgot to add this other caveat on "A" team turnovers - "“A Team” positions is only counted once toward the turnover rate, thus, this chart only includes the first person to hold/depart a given position)." Many of Trump's "A Team" positions turned over multiple times. Including 4 Chief of Staffs, 5 Deputy Chief of Staffs, 3 VP Chief of Staffs, 3 First Lady Chief of Staffs, 6 Communications Directors, 4 Press Secretaries, 4 National Security Advisers, 6 Deputy National Security Advisers, 4 APs for Homeland Security and Terrorism, 3 Senior Directors of Intelligence, NSC, 6 Senior Directors for Europe and Russia, NSC, and 4 White House Directors of Legislative Affairs.

"SUMMARY: 27/60 (45%) “A Team” departures have turned over twice or more."
Damn! That's what happens when you only pick the best people.
 
Maybe. While leaving without notice can certainly indicate a bad work environment, it can also indicate a bad employee. Giving notice doesn't mean the How is good. Turnover is a much better indicator. In this case, it's the VP of the united states! Washington staffer types should be beating down the door to get in and at least staying a couple of years to pad the resume up and leave at a more natural break - like closer to midterms.
Can you fill us in on the interview/hiring demand?
 
They really have had a high level of turnover among the senior staff in the VP's office. It's concerning. If you want to compare it to the last presidential administration (again, not a good comparison) - remember that the President's team is MUCH, MUCH bigger. Note that you don't see that level of turnover with the present president.

Noting again - other breaking news today - a book released that also highlights issues in the VP's office.
To you? I doubt it. It's right up there with your concern for Jackson's tenure in the appellate court.
 
To you? I doubt it. It's right up there with your concern for Jackson's tenure in the appellate court.
Concerning to many - and it should be to you. Harris has done a bad job in an administration that's floundering. She's not helping, and is certainly not setting herself up as a potential future candidate for the top spot, leaving a big question mark for the 2024 election.

And yes, just like with the other thread, you try to deflect because you really can't address the points.
 
Concerning to many - and it should be to you. Harris has done a bad job in an administration that's floundering. She's not helping, and is certainly not setting herself up as a potential future candidate for the top spot, leaving a big question mark for the 2024 election.

And yes, just like with the other thread, you try to deflect because you really can't address the points.
Homeboy, you have no points.
 
Back
Top Bottom