“a former staffer said”
“said a former staffer”
“according to one former staffer”
“a former staffer said”
“a former staffer said”
“a former staffer said”
“the former staffer predicted”
This article is useless. The meat of the article that the headline is based on is from a couple of anonymous former staffers. This has no value and really makes we wonder about Newsmax nowadays. Doesn’t mean these statements were not made but an anonymous pair (or more) of former staffers does not a credible article make.
Campaigns almost always go through growing pains. Thompson started later so those growing pains are more obvious in this stage of the game. Yet it is better to accept your miscues (or the former staffers miscues) and get the team best suited for you profesionally and collegially (they spend ALOT of time together) than to try to keep up appearances.
I moved past wondering and started discounting Newsmax a long time ago. Newsmax has become a tabloid.
Reagan fired his entire campaign staff at one point....and went on to victory.
The Dunderheads here on FR are smelling the increasing stench of despair and desperation with each passing day, so they lash out at the candiate they perceive as taking votes away from the poor performer they are backing.
But some say that what a former staffer said is what defines the character of a presidency!
Seriously though, has anyone ever talked to a recently fired individual who did not characterize his firing as unjust?