What accounts for the unprecedented turnover rate in the White House?

I read an article about this that said that the second year of a presidency has more turnover than the first year. It was suggested that the first year may have covered for the first two years. We will have to wait to see what happens.

A bunch of incompetent people who thought they could play-act in their jobs and bullshit their way through.

And the incompetence goes all the way to the top, so why would anyone expect better results from the underlings?

Exactly @elbanditoroso.

I think we’d have to look at each individual case. Were they fired, or did they quit? If they quit that says something serious. If they were fired, were they fired on a whim?

And, just because I have this bit of trivia on hand, Obama’s turnover rate for his first year was 9%. Trump’s was 35%.

@Dutchess_III wonder if that sad for the republican party, that they can’t seem to find someone that can do the job.
Or that Trump is a total idiot that always picks someone that can’t do the job to his liking?

Trump knows all the best people.

I’ve got a thread on another forum called love you , love you not, where I’ve been doing a compare and contrast on people as they go through the WH revolving door. #45 loves them, til he hates them.

It’s like The Apprentice went to the White House.

Oh ! I see what you did there. @YARNLADY

Can you say: Incompetence?

High turnover rates, in most cases, point to poor management.

I’m thinking that the quality of the replacements should decay with each turnover. What qualified person would be interested in risking their professional reputation for such jobs? The more that resign, or quit. The worse the pool of potential candidates.

It’s really just more evidence that Trump is unsuitable for the job. And that’s putting it nicely…

The answer is pretty obvious. The buck stops there.

Everytime Trump thinks he’s in trouble for something he says someone else is responsible and he fires them to show what a decisive decision maker he is.