Would be great if we could submit and vote on people we deem a threat, or incompetent, so that even if they aren’t selected here, they don’t get accidentally selected in other ways.
47 Likes
I’m pretty sure this is just a suggestion website, not an actual vote or official selection process of cabinet members. We’re making a long list of suggestions, that Tulsi and RFK Jr. and Trump’s teams will make an official short list out of, plus their own personal picks we might not mention on this website here. We’re just getting the historic chance to contribute more directly to the conversation.
Making a public blacklist of other nominators or nominees on this website feels like too much of a witch hunt. Let the best nominees get the most votes, and Tulsi and RFK Jr. will use their own wits to determine which popular suggestions are good ideas, and which ones aren’t. They’re not dumb people, I’m sure they understand the assignment.
12 Likes
You say you are sure they understand the assignment.
Love this website and the idea, however I think if they truly want to know how people feel, you should consider the idea proposed.
Let’s talk about Mike Pompeo, for example. Yesterday it was trending that people were trying to let Trump/Vance and team know that we the people do not support Mike Pompeo in the administration. I think Donald Trump and Jd Vance care what the people think. If this website is, anyhow, related to that, please consider allowing for candidates that we do not want them to consider. Mike Pompeo would be first on my list.
21 Likes
I’m not sure I understand… You want people to propose Mike Pompeo for a cabinet position? That’s a terrible idea. Unless I misread what you said.
5 Likes
You misread. The whole point is to BLACKLIST snakes like Mike Pompeo so he will not be considered for ANY POSITION near Trump.
20 Likes
Ok I hope that’s what he meant, because I’d agree to that. Mike Pompeo was definitely a snake.
Thanks for clarifying!
7 Likes
Oh by “allowing candidates we do not want them to consider” you mean a blacklist, you didn’t mean allowing us to nominate them. 
Yeah, I’ve stated before on this site that I have mixed feelings about a black list. I’ve already seen some people on this site try to say they want to blacklist nominees who are not well known who simply used to be Democrat (which goes for Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr. too), even when the nominees have good intentions and good credentials.
I worry a blacklist section would just devolve into being used to shame and witch hunt and “cancel” regular people who want to nominate themselves, and make potential nominees scared to come forward and make a submission if they worry they’ll be targeted for a witch hunt if they’re not a purist Republican.
As it stands right now, submissions that get “ratio’d” (more comments than likes, and mostly critical comments) already serve a basic function of saying what nominees we don’t like.
I don’t think we need to take it further than that.
2 Likes
Far from “not allowing us to nominate them”, it would hold no binding power whatsoever.
It would be exactly as it is now, except an anti-recommendation.
We currently have the ability to say who we think would be a good fit, it seemed a good idea to me to be able to note who we think would be a bad choice.
It’s an area for site feedback, that’s just my feedback. I’m still tickled this site exists, either way.
3 Likes
That is what the comments are for 
1 Like
All fair points. And agreed, I love that Kennedy’s team chose to include us in the cabinet selection process like this. I know this doesn’t mean we get a final say on cabinet positions, but it’s really nice to see that they take democracy seriously and want to know what their voters think about who to hire for cabinet positions.
4 Likes
I edited my reply to better reflect what I meant. I read “allow us to nominate Pompeo” in your first comment 
When I realized what you actually meant, I was trying to say “oh you mean blacklisting people like Pompeo, not “allow us to nominate Pompeo please””
Hope that makes more sense
We both read each other wrong because of awkward phrasing, that’s funny
1 Like
Heck yes! That’s my President! That’s what I’m talking about!
1 Like
Agree. That’s why I wanted a blacklist!
2 Likes
Exactly. Thank you for reading it correctly and appreciate your support on that idea. I absolutely think that if they want to know what the people think, not only would they want to know who we approve of but I think they would want to know who we absolutely do not approve of. Incredible that they are, asking us what we want!
1 Like
I love the idea of this site, but with no identity requirements, it seems very easy (and likely) that bad actors will skew the votes. It makes me question how seriously these public opinions wiill be taken in the first place.
The ability to “blacklist” people would go a long way to counter the problem. Great idea (and I agree with you on Pompeo)
2 Likes
Yes, a down vote is absolutely essential. Only allowing an up vote just says some people saw it and liked it. Some people may have not seen it at all making an assumption that it’s all good. A down vote signifies that others have seen it and do not approve. This gives a voice to all.
1 Like
Not sure I like the “blacklist” verbiage considering the unity aspect this administration wants to project.
It appears the site is set up to accommodate user votes and views of nominees, let’s not get off to a less than cordial first step.
Just a thought.
After attending Tucker Carlson where RFKJ was the guest in Milwaukee on 9/16, RFK talked about what Trump did the last time that he did not like, and one of them was not releasing the JFK assassination files - and Trump told him that it was Pompeo who called him and told he could NOT under any circumstances release them, so he did. He said he would not make the same mistake again. He said his mistake last time was that he started putting his team together in January and relying on the wrong people, which is why he is doing it now. This site allows the PEOPLE to have a voice. I think it is beyond fabulous!
2 Likes