Under those conditions, it is harder than you can imagine to build a good, reliable political team. Like a mid-season head coach hire, you tend to get stuck doing the best that you can with the people already there.
“willing to live and work long hours in Washington D.C. for salaries that usually cover little more than immediate living expenses.”
Good point.
How about moving the operation to a friendly low cost of living state?
this is one of the most dangerous and self-destructive shiboleths of all time. It destroys businesses and government agencies. Sure competence acquired through experience is needed in lots of professions, music, physics, surgery. But an awful lot of the time, a smart, enthusiastic young person who is not locked into "that's how it's done around here" can walk in and do a far better job than the featherbedder holding the position.
There is no future in keeping around a traitor bent on sabotaging your goals because said traitor is "experienced" and knows exactly how to gum up the works to keep you from doing what you really need to do.
I understand your point, but that’s the same argument that keeps everyone in place to our detriment and should be planned for by the same people who are taking over. The Trump team had two choices with the RNC: keep Chairman Lardbutt Maximus in place or replace her. Once they decided to replace her, their next step should have been to work on how they were going to replace her underlings. I’m not saying it’s easy, but they know the disaster of trying to implement their agenda with everyone except the top of the food chain in an organization pissing into the tent.
I understand the “get rid of them all” sentiment, but the distinguishing issues in assessing political party staff are competence, loyalty, and do you have a replacement ready.