As President Donald Trump's administration moves forward, the selection of his cabinet members has drawn significant attention. These appointments are critical in shaping U.S. policy and the direction of key government agencies. While some of Trump's nominees come with impressive credentials, others face criticism for lacking the necessary expertise or experience in the fields they are tasked to oversee. In this post, we’ll take a closer look at Trump's cabinet nominees, examining which individuals may struggle to meet the expectations of their roles and analyzing whether they would be considered for these positions if applying through traditional, merit-based channels.
1. IS PETE HEGSETH QUALIFIED FOR DEFENSE SECRETARY?
BACKGROUND: Fox News Host, Former U.S. Army National Guard Officer.
STRENGTHS: Military background, leadership in media, public advocacy for veterans and national defense issues.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience in high-level defense strategy, diplomacy, and military administration.
VERDICT: Strong in military experience and media, but lacks the traditional qualifications for the role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
2. IS DOUG COLLINS QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS?
BACKGROUND: Former U.S. Congressman, Military Veteran.
STRENGTHS: Advocacy for veterans' rights, legislative experience, understanding of government processes.
WEAKNESSES: Limited direct experience in veterans' administration or healthcare management.
VERDICT: Strong legislative background but lacks direct expertise in managing VA services.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
3. IS MICHAEL WALTZ QUALIFIED FOR NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER?
BACKGROUND: U.S. Congressman, Former Green Beret Officer, National Security Expert.
STRENGTHS: Expertise in military operations, foreign relations, and national security policy.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience in high-level advisory or diplomatic positions outside of military service.
VERDICT: Highly qualified in military security but could benefit from more diplomatic and advisory experience.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
4. IS DOUG BURGUM QUALIFIED FOR INTERIOR SECRETARY?
BACKGROUND: Governor of North Dakota, Businessman.
STRENGTHS: Strong leadership in state government, business acumen, experience in resource management.
WEAKNESSES: Limited direct experience in managing national land policies, conservation, or wildlife.
VERDICT: Strong leadership and management experience but lacks direct experience in environmental and natural resource issues.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
5. IS CHRIS WRIGHT QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF ENERGY?
BACKGROUND: CEO of Liberty Energy, Energy Industry Executive.
STRENGTHS: Expertise in the energy sector, leadership in oil and gas, focus on energy innovation.
WEAKNESSES: Limited government experience or focus on national energy policy beyond the private sector.
VERDICT: Strong industry background, but lacks public sector experience.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
6. IS SEAN DUFFY QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION?
BACKGROUND: Former U.S. Congressman, Former TV Personality.
STRENGTHS: Political experience, leadership in public service, understanding of infrastructure issues.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience in transportation planning, policy, or logistics management.
VERDICT: Strong in politics, but lacks direct transportation expertise.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
7. IS HOWARD LUTNICK QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF COMMERCE?
BACKGROUND: CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, Financial Industry Leader.
STRENGTHS: Expertise in business, finance, and market strategies.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience in trade, commerce, or economic policy at the national level.
VERDICT: Strong in business leadership but lacks specific qualifications in national economic policy.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
8. IS LINDA MCMAHON QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF EDUCATION?
BACKGROUND: Co-founder of WWE, Former SBA Administrator.
STRENGTHS: Leadership in business and management.
WEAKNESSES: No experience in education policy, teaching, or administration.
VERDICT: Strong in business but lacks key education qualifications.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
9. IS WILLIAM MCGINLEY QUALIFIED FOR WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL?
BACKGROUND: Former Labor Department Attorney, Lawyer.
STRENGTHS: Legal expertise, experience in government legal affairs.
WEAKNESSES: Limited direct experience in advising the White House on high-level legal matters.
VERDICT: Strong legal background, but less experience in White House legal advisory.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
10. IS MATTHEW WHITAKER QUALIFIED FOR U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO?
BACKGROUND: Former Acting U.S. Attorney General.
STRENGTHS: Government experience, legal expertise, understanding of foreign relations.
WEAKNESSES: Limited diplomatic experience, particularly with NATO or international relations.
VERDICT: Strong legal and government experience but lacks diplomacy expertise.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
IS KRISTI NOEM QUALIFIED FOR SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY?
BACKGROUND: Governor of South Dakota.
STRENGTHS: Leadership in state government, experience in managing crises (COVID-19).
WEAKNESSES: Limited direct experience in national security, border security, or emergency management.
VERDICT: Strong in governance but lacks experience in homeland security specifics.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
11. IS JOHN RATCLIFFE QUALIFIED FOR CIA DIRECTOR?
BACKGROUND: Former U.S. Congressman, Former Director of National Intelligence.
STRENGTHS: Experience in intelligence and national security.
WEAKNESSES: Limited operational intelligence experience, mainly political background.
VERDICT: Solid national security background, but lacks deep CIA operational experience.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
12. IS TULSI GABBARD QUALIFIED FOR DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE?
BACKGROUND: Former U.S. Congresswoman, Military Veteran.
STRENGTHS: Extensive military experience, knowledge of national security issues.
WEAKNESSES: Limited intelligence community experience, not an intelligence expert.
VERDICT: Strong in military affairs but lacks direct intelligence management experience.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
13. IS LEE ZELDIN QUALIFIED FOR EPA ADMINISTRATOR?
BACKGROUND: U.S. Congressman, Military Veteran.
STRENGTHS: Strong in legislative affairs, political leadership.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience in environmental policy, EPA regulations, or climate science.
VERDICT: Strong political experience, but lacks environmental policy expertise.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not.
14. IS DEAN JOHN SAUER QUALIFIED FOR SOLICITOR GENERAL?
BACKGROUND: Law Professor, Attorney, Legal Scholar.
STRENGTHS: Expertise in law, legal analysis, and constitutional matters.
WEAKNESSES: Limited high-level government or litigation experience.
VERDICT: Strong in legal theory but lacks practical government legal experience.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Possibly.
15. IS BRENDAN CARR QUALIFIED FOR FCC CHAIRMAN?
BACKGROUND: FCC Commissioner.
STRENGTHS: Extensive experience with communications law and policy.
WEAKNESSES: Limited experience with leadership in a broader governmental context.
VERDICT: Highly qualified for the role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Yes.
16. William McGinley - White House Counsel
BACKGROUND: McGinley is an experienced attorney with a background in private practice and government service, having worked as the general counsel to the Trump administration’s transition team.
STRENGTHS: McGinley has extensive legal experience, particularly in regulatory issues and government affairs. He’s also familiar with White House operations, which is crucial for the role of White House Counsel.
WEAKNESSES: While McGinley’s experience in government and regulatory law is valuable, he lacks a background in broader constitutional law and the complex ethical issues that White House Counsel often navigates.
VERDICT: McGinley has a strong legal background and understanding of governmental structures, but may not be the ideal candidate for handling the more intricate legal and constitutional issues faced by the White House.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The White House Counsel requires specific expertise in constitutional law and ethics that McGinley may not fully possess.
17. Matthew Whitaker - U.S. Ambassador to NATO
BACKGROUND: Whitaker served as Acting Attorney General and has a background in law and politics, but has no experience in international diplomacy or defense matters.
STRENGTHS: His political experience and leadership in the Department of Justice demonstrate strong organizational and leadership skills.
WEAKNESSES: Whitaker has little to no experience in international relations, diplomacy, or defense policy, which are critical for an ambassador to NATO.
VERDICT: Despite his political experience, Whitaker lacks the specific diplomatic and defense expertise necessary for the U.S. Ambassador to NATO role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The position requires extensive knowledge of international diplomacy and defense, areas in which Whitaker has no direct experience.
18. Kristi Noem - Secretary of Homeland Security
BACKGROUND: Noem has served as governor of South Dakota, where she gained crisis management experience, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.
STRENGTHS: Noem has political leadership experience and crisis management skills, particularly in public health and safety, which could be valuable for managing national security threats and emergency responses.
WEAKNESSES: Noem lacks specific expertise in national security, immigration policy, cyber threats, and disaster response on a large scale—key areas of responsibility for the Secretary of Homeland Security.
VERDICT: Noem’s political leadership is an asset, but her lack of experience in national security and homeland defense makes her a weak fit for this highly specialized position.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The position demands deep expertise in national security, law enforcement, and disaster management, which Noem does not have.
19. John Ratcliffe - CIA Director
BACKGROUND: Ratcliffe served as a U.S. Representative and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI). He has some experience with intelligence matters but not in the operational side of intelligence work.
STRENGTHS: Ratcliffe has experience in national security and intelligence oversight, especially during his time as DNI. He also has strong political and leadership skills.
WEAKNESSES: Ratcliffe has no direct experience with CIA operations, covert activities, or the intelligence community’s day-to-day functions, which are central to the CIA Director’s role.
VERDICT: Ratcliffe’s experience in intelligence oversight and national security positions him well in some aspects but does not provide the deep operational experience necessary to lead the CIA effectively.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The CIA Director role requires direct intelligence experience and operational leadership, which Ratcliffe lacks.
20. Tulsi Gabbard - Director of National Intelligence
BACKGROUND: Gabbard is a former U.S. Representative and Army Reserve officer with significant foreign relations and military experience, including work on defense and intelligence issues.
STRENGTHS: Gabbard has strong foreign policy and military experience, and her understanding of international security issues is beneficial in intelligence matters.
WEAKNESSES: Gabbard does not have direct experience leading the intelligence community or managing the 18 intelligence agencies, which is crucial for the Director of National Intelligence role.
VERDICT: While Gabbard brings important knowledge of defense and foreign policy, she lacks the necessary expertise in intelligence operations and leadership of the intelligence community.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The position requires specific expertise in intelligence management, something Gabbard does not possess.
21. Lee Zeldin - EPA Administrator
BACKGROUND: Zeldin is a former U.S. Representative with a background in law and policy, but has little experience in environmental policy or administration.
STRENGTHS: Zeldin’s legislative experience could bring leadership skills and an understanding of government operations.
WEAKNESSES: Zeldin lacks expertise in environmental science, regulation, or the complexities of environmental protection and climate policy, which are central to the EPA Administrator's duties.
VERDICT: Zeldin’s political experience is beneficial but does not align with the specialized knowledge required to lead the EPA, especially in the areas of environmental protection and climate change.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The EPA Administrator role requires deep environmental policy knowledge and scientific expertise, which Zeldin does not have.
22. Dean John Sauer - Solicitor General
BACKGROUND: Sauer is a law professor and litigator with expertise in constitutional law, but has not held a high-level legal position in the government.
STRENGTHS: Sauer’s academic and legal expertise, particularly in constitutional law, is valuable for this role. His experience as a litigator would also be an asset in arguing cases before the Supreme Court.
WEAKNESSES: Sauer lacks experience in representing the U.S. government in high-profile cases, particularly at the appellate level. He may not have the necessary practical experience in managing government litigation.
VERDICT: Sauer has strong legal knowledge but lacks the hands-on litigation experience necessary for the Solicitor General’s role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The Solicitor General requires specific experience in government litigation and Supreme Court cases, areas where Sauer’s background is limited.
23. Chris Wright - Secretary of Energy
BACKGROUND: Wright is the CEO of a large oil and gas company and has significant experience in the energy sector, particularly in the private oil and gas industry.
STRENGTHS: Wright has leadership experience in energy and has an in-depth understanding of the oil and gas industry.
WEAKNESSES: Wright’s experience is heavily focused on the private sector and does not extend to energy policy, renewable energy, or the public sector regulation and oversight that the Secretary of Energy position requires.
VERDICT: While Wright has solid industry knowledge, he lacks the broader experience in energy policy, national energy infrastructure, and renewables that are critical for the Secretary of Energy.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The role requires experience with both energy policy and government regulation, areas where Wright’s experience is not sufficient.
24. Howard Lutnick - Secretary of Commerce
BACKGROUND: Lutnick is the CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald and has extensive experience in finance and business leadership.
STRENGTHS: Lutnick’s expertise in business, financial markets, and economic policy could be beneficial for overseeing the U.S. economy and trade.
WEAKNESSES: Lutnick lacks direct experience in commerce, trade policy, and managing the diverse areas under the Commerce Department, such as technology, manufacturing, and communications.
VERDICT: Lutnick’s business experience could be useful, but his lack of specific knowledge in areas like trade policy and economic regulation makes him less suited for this role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The Secretary of Commerce requires more direct experience in managing commerce and trade, areas where Lutnick lacks expertise.
25. Brendan Carr - FCC Chairman
BACKGROUND: Carr is a current Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and has a background in telecommunications law.
STRENGTHS: Carr has experience with telecommunications policy, including broadband expansion and regulatory issues, making him well-versed in the responsibilities of the FCC Chairman.
WEAKNESSES: While Carr’s technical expertise in telecommunications is strong, his broader understanding of other media issues and public communications may not be as comprehensive.
VERDICT: Carr is highly qualified for the role of FCC Chairman given his experience within the agency and his focus on important telecommunications issues.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Yes. His extensive experience in telecommunications law and regulatory practice makes him a good fit for the position.
26. Dr. Mehmet Oz - Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator
BACKGROUND: Dr. Oz is a well-known television personality and cardiothoracic surgeon, with limited experience in health administration or policy.
STRENGTHS: Dr. Oz is a medical doctor with a public health background, which could bring a practical, clinical perspective to health-related issues.
WEAKNESSES: Dr. Oz lacks administrative experience in managing large public health programs or working with Medicare and Medicaid, which are highly complex government systems.
VERDICT: Dr. Oz’s medical expertise is valuable, but he lacks the necessary experience in managing large-scale healthcare programs and policy, making him a weak fit for this role.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The role requires extensive experience in health administration, policy, and the intricacies of public healthcare systems.
27. Mike Huckabee - U.S. Ambassador to Israel
BACKGROUND: Huckabee is a former governor of Arkansas and a political commentator with significant involvement in evangelical Christian communities.
STRENGTHS: Huckabee has strong political and diplomatic experience, as well as ties to Israel through his evangelical support, which may help with relationship-building.
WEAKNESSES: Huckabee lacks experience in international diplomacy or the specific responsibilities of an ambassador, particularly in handling complex international relations.
VERDICT: Huckabee’s political experience and ties to Israel are assets, but his lack of diplomatic experience makes him an unconventional choice for the position.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The role requires extensive diplomatic experience, which Huckabee lacks despite his political ties.
28. Pete Hoekstra - U.S. Ambassador to Canada
BACKGROUND: Hoekstra is a former U.S. Representative with experience in foreign relations and security policy, having served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Netherlands.
STRENGTHS: Hoekstra’s experience as an ambassador and in international relations positions him well for a diplomatic role with Canada, one of the U.S.’s most important allies.
WEAKNESSES: Although Hoekstra has experience in diplomacy, his tenure as Ambassador to the Netherlands was controversial, and his approach may not align with Canada’s political priorities.
VERDICT: Hoekstra has relevant diplomatic experience but has faced controversies that could undermine his effectiveness in fostering strong U.S.-Canada relations.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. Despite his diplomatic experience, his previous controversies could be seen as a significant drawback for this high-level diplomatic post.
29. Jay Clayton - U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
BACKGROUND: Clayton is a former SEC Chairman with a background in securities law and financial regulation.
STRENGTHS: Clayton’s expertise in securities law and his leadership at the SEC are strong credentials for handling the regulatory and legal challenges in the Southern District of New York, a prominent legal jurisdiction.
WEAKNESSES: Clayton’s background is more focused on financial regulation and securities rather than criminal law or prosecuting complex criminal cases, which could be important in this role.
VERDICT: Clayton is well-qualified in financial regulation but lacks direct experience in criminal prosecution, which is central to the role of U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The role requires experience in criminal law and prosecution, areas where Clayton lacks significant experience.
30. Elon Musk & Vivek Ramaswamy - Department of Government Efficiency
BACKGROUND: Musk is a tech entrepreneur and CEO of multiple companies like Tesla and SpaceX. Ramaswamy is a biotech entrepreneur and political figure known for his advocacy of free-market solutions.
STRENGTHS: Musk and Ramaswamy bring a wealth of experience in innovation, technology, and market-driven approaches to problem-solving, which could help streamline government operations.
WEAKNESSES: Neither Musk nor Ramaswamy have experience in public administration or managing government efficiency programs. Their backgrounds are more in the private sector, and this may limit their effectiveness in navigating complex governmental structures.
VERDICT: While both are highly successful in their respective fields, they lack experience in government operations, policymaking, and efficiency programs, making them unconventional choices.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? No. The role requires specific experience in government operations and management, areas where they are not equipped.
31. Dan Scavino - Deputy Chief of Staff
BACKGROUND: Scavino has served as a social media strategist and deputy chief of staff in the Trump administration, overseeing communications and outreach.
STRENGTHS: Scavino has a strong background in political communication and social media, playing a key role in the Trump campaign’s digital strategy.
WEAKNESSES: Scavino lacks broader experience in government administration and policy management, which could limit his effectiveness in a more traditional Deputy Chief of Staff role.
VERDICT: Scavino is strong in communications and digital strategy but may not have the comprehensive administrative experience needed for this senior position.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. While effective in communications, the Deputy Chief of Staff role requires experience across a broader range of government functions.
32. Stephen Miller - Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Homeland Security Adviser
BACKGROUND: Miller is a former senior advisor to President Trump with a focus on immigration policy and national security.
STRENGTHS: Miller is deeply knowledgeable about immigration policy and national security, making him a strong candidate for advising on policy and homeland security.
WEAKNESSES: His controversial policies, particularly on immigration, have generated significant criticism, which could hinder his ability to build bipartisan support for national security policies.
VERDICT: Miller is experienced in policy and national security but his controversial stance on immigration could be a significant drawback in achieving broad political support.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. His polarizing policies and approach could make it difficult for him to navigate the complexities of a national security advisory role.
33. James Blair - Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative, Political, and Public Affairs
BACKGROUND: Blair is a political strategist with experience in communications and legislative affairs.
STRENGTHS: Blair brings strong political experience, having worked in legislative and public affairs, making him well-suited to handle the coordination between the White House and Congress.
WEAKNESSES: Blair lacks significant experience in high-level government administration, which may limit his effectiveness in navigating complex legislative and political issues.
VERDICT: Blair has strong political experience but lacks the broader government administrative experience that the role demands.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The Deputy Chief of Staff role requires a broader set of skills, including governmental operations, that Blair may not fully possess.
34. Taylor Budowich - Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications and Personnel
BACKGROUND: Budowich has experience in political communications and served as a spokesperson for the Trump administration.
STRENGTHS: Budowich has strong communications experience, particularly in managing high-profile media relations and messaging.
WEAKNESSES: Budowich lacks experience in personnel management and broader government administration, which are crucial for this role.
VERDICT: Budowich excels in communications but lacks the personnel management and government operations experience necessary for the position.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably not. The Deputy Chief of Staff role requires more than just communications skills, particularly in managing personnel and operations.
35. Sergio Gor - Presidential Personnel Office Head
BACKGROUND: Gor is a political strategist with experience in personnel management and organizing government positions.
STRENGTHS: Gor has a strong background in personnel and staffing, making him well-suited to manage appointments and staffing decisions for the administration.
WEAKNESSES: Gor may lack the broader governmental or policy experience needed to effectively manage personnel at high levels of government.
VERDICT: Gor is likely well-qualified for managing personnel appointments, but may lack the broader political and governmental experience that the role could demand.
Would they get the job if applying traditionally? Probably yes. His expertise in personnel management aligns well with the responsibilities of the Presidential Personnel Office.
36. Steven Cheung - White House Communications Director
BACKGROUND: Cheung is a political communications expert with experience in the Trump administration as a spokesperson and strategic advisor.
STRENGTHS: Cheung’s experience in high-stakes communications, particularly in political environments, positions him well to manage the White House’s messaging and media relations.
WEAKNESSES: Cheung lacks broader media industry experience outside of politics, which could limit his effectiveness in managing communication strategies beyond
Most Problematic Nominees:
Among the Trump administration's cabinet nominees, several stand out as particularly problematic due to their lack of relevant experience and qualifications for their proposed roles. For example, Dr. Mehmet Oz as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator is highly concerning given his background in entertainment and medicine, rather than health policy or public administration. Similarly, Mike Huckabee as U.S. Ambassador to Israel raises eyebrows, as his expertise lies more in politics and media than in international diplomacy or Middle Eastern affairs. Other troubling picks include Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy for the Department of Government Efficiency, given their unconventional career paths and lack of public service experience. These nominees' limited backgrounds in government and their respective departments suggest they may struggle to meet the demands of their roles and the complex issues they would face.
Most Suitable Nominees:
On the other hand, some of Trump's cabinet nominees bring strong leadership qualities and relevant experience to their proposed roles. For instance, Michael Waltz as National Security Adviser has a background in the military and national security policy, making him a strong contender for overseeing U.S. security matters. Doug Burgum, the Governor of North Dakota, has solid administrative experience and a history of successful leadership, positioning him well for the role of Interior Secretary. John Ratcliffe, a former Congressman with experience in intelligence and national security, also appears well-suited for the role of CIA Director. Additionally, Kristi Noem, Governor of South Dakota, has shown effective leadership in managing state affairs and could bring valuable experience to the Department of Homeland Security. These nominees are more likely to succeed due to their direct experience in public service and expertise in their respective fields.
The selection of cabinet members is an essential part of a President’s legacy, and the success of Trump's administration depends heavily on the individuals chosen to lead key departments. While many of his nominees possess leadership qualities, others may fall short in the areas of experience and qualifications critical to managing complex government functions. As we’ve explored, 10 out of 32 nominees, or approximately 31%, would probably not or not get the job based on the criteria of experience, qualifications, and suitability for the position. In total, 56% of the nominees were assessed as qualified for the role, 31% would probably not or not get the job, and 13% fall somewhere in between—raising serious questions about their readiness. Ultimately, the American people deserve leaders who are not only loyal but also fully equipped to handle the weight of their positions.
It’s that time of year again—my birthday! As I approach another year of life, I find myself reflecting not just on age (which, let’s be real, is creeping up way too quickly) but also on my journey in the world of media services. So, pour yourself a cup of coffee (or something stronger), and let’s dive into some of the most entertaining and enlightening lessons I’ve learned while navigating this wild media landscape!
