I thought my post would bring you out of the woodwork.

To me the issue with Trump is not "management experience" per se, but the way he has dealt with those that disagree with him, i.e. by denigrating, suing or "getting his own" back some way. That isn't going to work so well in a political environment and indicates a character that is unsuitable to him being president.

Because Obama was previously a Senator and had at least a good understanding of the accountabilities and responsibilities of the various functions of government. Trump hasn't figured out that a large number of decisions can't be delegated to others, and have them assume the accountability. If an error in policy costs people's lives or livelihoods, telling the person who made the decision 'You're Fired' doesn't mean the end of an episode of his reality show.

Today, one of Trump's advisors told the media that you can't take Trump literally - you have to take him symbolically

Trump adviser: Don't take Trump literally, 'take him symbolically' - POLITICO

If, as President, he says China can keep a piece of US government property, they will

If, as President, he says that a foreign politician is corrupt, and should be jailed, then that statement would likely launch investigations into that politician.

If only some of what the POTUS says can be taken seriously, either because it's outright lie, or it's a 'symbolic' statement, it quickly erodes the trust in the country, both by its citizens, and foreign nations, which will diminish the credibility and role of the US in international circles, and further restrict the ability of President Snowflake to MAGA.

So no answer? It's a pretty simple question.

I didn't mention a president. Nice try.

You didn't. But given that the comment you quoted was about access to a president, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you were staying on-topic.

No...you were playing your usual cat and mouse game. Run along...I'm not playing.

I would suggest that the person playing "cat and mouse" was the person who didn't name the person they were insinuating did the same thing...

Everything Trump promised --- he's now backing out on those things.

Everything that Trump vilified Hillary for doing --- he's now doing those same things on steroids.

If it was so HORRIBLE that Hillary did all of these things, why is she constantly used as the justification for when Trump does it? Not just on this thread but also in the media, albeit mostly by Trump shills. If she lost the election because it was all so unacceptable ... *ahem*

Quote ironic as Trump seems to be the biggest snowflake out there

hey Donny, you lost the popular vote
hey TrumpADump, watched SNL live recently?
Hey Von Turdster, read any good reviews of your restaurant recently?
Hey Orange Man, HAPPY HOLIDAYS

Well if I recall Obama's opponents did bring that up, and his supporters didn't think it important that he had no executive experience in government or private sector. One trend I see in political conversations is to deflect/pivot on issues. If someone says Clinton corrupt, then answer is Trump more corrupt, or vice versa.

Obama organised a whole community, even the Republicans seemed to like this since they went on and on about him being a community organiser.

But the hypocrisy of Trump is astounding for an elected official, since every single thing he denounced Clinton for is represented in his "cabinet", I can't believe that Patreus even made the shortlist. Most politicians are clever enough with words to skirt around the truth, he just plain lies to entertain his supporters.

Bill Maher Rips Donald Trump’s ‘Opposite Land’ Cabinet Picks | The Huffington Post