URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID62
Thread Number: 1864
[ Go back to previous page ]
Original Message
"Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 12:59 PM
Many people are guessing that DT is planning on making Randel and Rebecca joint apprentices. Some are saying that Rebecca did not earn her way into the Final 2 and if DT hires them both, it will prove that he is a dyed-in-the-wool racist. Some feel Rebecca's performance on the challenges were clearly superior to Randel's and she should be made the sole Apprentice. Others are theorizing that DT has such a crush on Rebecca that he will trash all the rules he established on the previous 3 seasons of this show - a winning PM record, corporate exec interviews, etc. - to ensure that she wins. Still others feel Rebecca's and Randel's performances on the challenges were equal, and since neither is clearly better than the other, it would be a shame if they were not both hired.


Are Joint Apprenticeships the way Trump should go? What do you think?

Table of contents
Messages in this discussion
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by MizJazmine on 12-10-05 at 01:55 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-10-05 AT 02:18 PM (EST)

LAST EDITED ON 12-10-05 AT 02:11 PM (EST)

Okaaaaay here I go...lol...It's all my opinion....

My position has always been that Rebecca has no business being in the final 2. I feel that her being in the final 2 is pure favoritism and white priviledge. If Rebecca were related to Trump bloodline wise somewhere it would be nepotism.

When I hold all things constant concerning Randel & Rebecca (performance, character, etc.) and change one variable that being skin color, Rebecca doesn't hold up for me. What do I mean? If Rebecca were a black woman she wouldn't be in that position right now, plain and simple. Randel on the other hand if he were a white man holds up for me. So I think people can like Rebecca all they want to and think she "deserves" to be there, but I truly think if those same people put Rebecca in Hershey bar colored(so folks aren't confused)African American skin then looked at her performance and character, I think those same people would have a whole different take. There is just no way I could see people saying if Rebecca were a black woman that she "deserves" anything period! I don't think people would be equalizing her either. Ohhhh I think there would whole different response altogether...believe it!

I already think it's an insult to Randel that she's even in the final 2! There were far better competitors than Rebecca. I think the possibility exist that Trump might NOT hire either of them. Trump might continue on his mantra with Randel of his so called disappointment with him. Then turn around and tell Rebecca, I didn't like Toral you knew that your both fired.

I for one do not think there should be a tie. So I'll say it again. I think Rebecca being in the final 2 is nothing more than favoritism and white priviledge and nothing less. Before people call themselves jumping me, put Rebecca in black skin then look over the season at her performance, character, etc and don't forget about the Toral debacle and the boardroom scene when she (Rebecca) insulted ALL the women, then talk to me. Could Rebecca have gotten to the final 2 in black skin going up against a Randel in white skin?

Whew!...glad I got that out my system!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by justcallmemom on 12-10-05 at 02:12 PM
I don't think the Rebecca choice has a thing to do with race. In my more jaded view, the producers brainstormed for a new twist for an unexpected ending and came up with first, firing two at a time, and second hiring two at a time. If I was a producer under these circumstances, I would hold focus groups to determine the most controversial pair, giving rise to the most buzz. More buzz means a larger audience for advertisers. The Trump organization is big enough to find slots for any new hire, regardless of ability. The job needn't be responsible. This is a TV show like any other, and drama equals ratings. It has been a long time since I believe this was a job interview to search for the most qualified. And look at the final two: one black and one white; one male and one female; one older and one younger...They even look good together in matching outfits. It is not an accident.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by MizJazmine on 12-10-05 at 02:25 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-10-05 AT 02:27 PM (EST)

While I understand the "ratings game", IMO race is a factor here or one person wouldn't be a person of color. Does that make sense? In having said that my post has more to do with the response that people have to Rebecca in her "deserving" or them equalizing her to Randel. If she were a black woman I don't think that would be the case. I really don't. Not to mention the fact that there are some people that always wanna harp "they're playing the black card" but when the term "white priviledge" comes up thos same people go deaf, dumb, and blind.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by justcallmemom on 12-10-05 at 02:40 PM
MizJasmine, I couldn't agree more. I also agree with Melody that Trump has more information than we do; there may be more to Rebecca than has made it to the airwaves. Still, I fear the decision may be completely orchestrated by the writers and producers.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 08:56 PM
>MizJasmine, I couldn't agree more. I
>also agree with Melody that
>Trump has more information than
>we do; there may be
>more to Rebecca than has
>made it to the airwaves.
Like what?! That she's really the Lindburgh baby? Why this 'grasping at straws' to make of a medicore talent, a star?

P.S. How do you or Melody know that Trump has 'more information than we do'? He has claimed all along that he does not. Just what is being defended here?

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 03:43 PM
I could go along with the joint apprentice in any season but this one. Bill and Kwame; Kelly and Jen; even Kendra and Tana. But Randal and Rebecca? No way. The 3 preceding seasons the Final 2 were close in PM wins, in having the respect of their teammates and of the opposing teams, in not only leadership abilities and aptitude, but in supporting their PMs (think of Alla supporting Felisha, then think of Randal pulling Rebecca quietly, unobtrusively to the side when she continues to beat a dead horse and tells the hired actor to do another take on the scene. A dynamite leader, Alla couldn't put her ego aside and support Felisha. She knew only how to grab hold of the reins and do it her way. Randal saved Rebecca's skin, yet Rebecca never seemed to feel threatened he was trying to take over the task, never seemed uncomfortable with having to take his advice, indeed, seemed quite at ease not only in taking, but in implementing his advice). It is for these reasons that IMO it would be a travesty to equate Rebecca's OVERALL record and attributes to Randal's. Not so for previous seasons. Ludicrously true for this one.

P.S. Although I had not thought about it, but I agree - put black skin on Rebecca and we would not even be having this conversation.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by JoshInSGV on 12-12-05 at 05:55 PM
I agree with you that the track record of a PM is important, but that is not always the deciding factor for Trump. Let's look at the first season. Amy had the most impressive winning record than any other contestant on that season, yet she was let go to make room for Bill and Kwame. Kwame, in particular, had lost two tasks as a project manager. He was only able to redeem himself as project manager when he secured a win for Protege on the Taj Mahal project, and this was in part thanks to Bill's idea of focusing on the VIP's. So, does that mean that Kwame didn't deserve to be on the final 2? Well...that's up to debate. Perhaps Trump knew or saw something in Kwame that was not obvious to the audience thanks to the editing. Same could be said about Rebecca. It's possible that Rebecca's presence in the final 2 is a result of favoritism or it could also be that there's more to Rebecca than meets the eye. We will never know either way because the show is edited and there's a lot of information about the contestants (good and bad) that never makes the show.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-12-05 at 08:16 PM
>I agree with you that the
>track record of a PM
>is important, but that is
>not always the deciding factor
>for Trump.


Not true. It has ALWAYS been the deciding factor of who makes it into the Final 4. ALWAYS.


Let's look at
>the first season. Amy had
>the most impressive winning record
>than any other contestant on
>that season, yet she was
>let go to make room
>for Bill and Kwame.


That is not true. Amy blew the Executives Interview, remember? She even said so when she came back sheepishly into the suite.


Kwame,
>in particular, had lost two
>tasks as a project manager.
>He was only able to
>redeem himself as project manager
>when he secured a win
>for Protege on the Taj
>Mahal project, and this was
>in part thanks to Bill's
>idea of focusing on the
>VIP's.


I'm glad you remember this, because I sure don't (Bill directing Kwame what to do). I do not even remember Bill until the last challenge.


So, does that mean
>that Kwame didn't deserve to
>be on the final 2?


No, it does not. According even to your own recollection, Kwame won a challenge BEFORE the Final 3 (if I recall right, it was Kwame, Bill, and Troy in the Final 3). REbecca did not win one challenge until she was paired up with Randal and would NOT have won had he not intervened. Even if what you say (and I'm not saying it was because I don't remember it) is true, how do we know that Kwame was not going to focus on the VP and Bill simply said it before he could act? We DO know that Rebecca was beating a dead horse with that actor. We DID see Randal pull her to the side, etc.


>Well...that's up to debate.


Yes, it is.


Perhaps
>Trump knew or saw something
>in Kwame that was not
>obvious to the audience thanks
>to the editing.


Ah! The infamous Secret Knowledge absolutely no one on this board is privy to! But what amazes me about this Secret Knowledge is that it is ALWAYS Rebecca is really gold BEHIND the scenes. It's just on camera that she's mediocre. And she gets such good editing! Go figure.


Same could
>be said about Rebecca. It's
>possible that Rebecca's presence in
>the final 2 is a
>result of favoritism or it
>could also be that there's
>more to Rebecca than meets
>the eye. We will never
>know either way because the
>show is edited and there's
>a lot of information about
>the contestants (good and bad)
>that never makes the show.
>
See above entitled that infamous Secret Knowledge. No matter. I know what I saw -- along with the world --
and that is what I base my opinion on. I have no problem with someone saying they just 'like' Rebecca more than Randal, and merit be d**ned, want her to be chosen The Apprentice. We are all entitled to our opinions and our preferences. Just be honest about it, I say! JMHO

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by halfpintlemon on 12-12-05 at 08:14 PM
OK, wait a second, Kendra and Tana had the same respective records as Randal and Rebecca. Kendra was 3-0, Randal was 3-0, and Tana and Rebecca were both 1-2. Also, the previews have been hinting at a doubling hiring, saying that these two are the brightest final two yet.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-12-05 at 08:32 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-12-05 AT 08:50 PM (EST)

LAST EDITED ON 12-12-05 AT 08:37 PM (EST)

>OK, wait a second, Kendra and
>Tana had the same respective
>records as Randal and Rebecca.
>Kendra was 3-0, Randal was
>3-0, and Tana and Rebecca
>were both 1-2. Also, the
>previews have been hinting at
>a doubling hiring, saying that
>these two are the brightest
>final two yet.


First, how you can say Kendra's name in the same breath as Randal's in beyond me! There is NO comparison between Book Dummy Kendra and Randal IMHO. Same for Street Dummy Tana and Rebecca. We are talking not just winning PMs here. We're talking leadership acumen, ability to get along with other PROFESSIONALS, to support INTELLIGENT PMs, mental agility and acuity, etc.

Since I'm not sure of the win/loss record (I thought Tana had at least as many wins as Kendra), I will only say that if your facts are true, Tana went into the Final 4 with at least one win, whereas Rebecca went into the Final 4 with zero wins, and received her first win only when paired with Randal.


That said, Kendra and Tana were pretty much equal to each other in terms of performance, ability, etc. I have yet to see a post say Rebecca is equal to Randal in ANY category. In my book, that is the ONLY justification for a co-apprenticeship. When one candidate is so clearly superior to another, there is NO legitimate AMERICAN justification for them to receive a prize they have not earned. JMHO

P.S. As for the 'brightest' they've ever had, I disagree. Put Jen W's(?) record, awesome persuasive/oratorial skills, compassion for others (she was the ONLY woman to take up for Stacy J, and unlike Rebecca and Toral, she and Stacy J were not even friends!) up against Rebecca's mediocre showing. Jen W, IMHO, wins hands down.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 08:48 PM
It has been a
>long time since I believe
>this was a job interview
>to search for the most
>qualified.

Maybe not to the viewer, but I'll bet you a dollar it is to the contestants. Ratings or no, these are human beings and while working for Trump might be no great shakes, the contacts the new apprentice will invaluable. For them, it IS a once in a lifetime opportunity.


And look at the
>final two: one black and
>one white; one male and
>one female; one older and
>one younger...They even look good
>together in matching outfits. It
>is not an accident.


I've been saying all along 'it is not an accident' that Rebecca with the worst PM record in Apprentice history - zero wins - made it to the Final 4, and now with the help of Randal is a finalist. It is also not an accident that the executive conferences were ommitted this year. Imagine highly qualified, 3X winner, smooth-talking Randal being interviewed. Do you seriously think Rebecca with her one win (thanks to Randal) and two losses, and mediocre presentation skills would have a chance? Even with the iron smile DT loves so well, in place? No. No accident that we get a heavily edited version in Rebecca's favor as the final hurdle, rather than seasoned execs grilling her.

And yes, they do look well together (although I doubt Randal is that much older than Rebecca). Still, the reason they look well together is that they are 2 clean-cut young people. DT would not have cared if Randal was a grizzly bear; he just got lucky with smooth-shaven Randal.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Melody on 12-10-05 at 02:02 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-10-05 AT 02:05 PM (EST)

lrlr1 --- I truly believe Randel is getting the bad edit right now because Burnett and Trump want us to be having these conversations. Word of mouth is the biggest tune-in motivator, and we are obviously being manipulated.

Having said that, I also think --- just like in a trial --- that Trump is receiving much more information than we are about all the candidates and likes Rebecca based on more substantial reasons/attributes than just "he likes her". If there is a double hire, then it is probably because Trump really does like both candidates.

However, if Randel is not hired ---- and there is not some colossal catastrophe ---- then I am inclined to believe that Trump chooses not to go beyond his comfort zone, has an unexamined preference for people like himself, and is prejudiced against ANYONE who is from a different country, has a different lifestyle, has a different religion (or perhaps I should say holds strongly to religious values), or has a different ethnicity.

A double hire I could accept because I know we don't see the entire picture. A lone "Rebecca" hire, barring some unforseen firing event for Randel, will cause me to boycott the Apprentice with my clicker next season.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by realityshowgeek on 12-10-05 at 02:52 PM
As I posted in a different thread, I think a double hire would be an insult to Randal. It's clear this episode was edited to favor Rebecca and would justify a win for her. Randal has received such positive feedback from the fans of this show, they may now feel they have to hire him too or be labeled racist. If it is a double hire, Randal is clearly the second choice. That in and of itself is beyond reasoning. Rebecca, while not a total idiot, hasn't exactly been dazzling anyone with her brilliance. She's been lucky. Lucky to be on winning teams and lucky Trump decided he likes certain qualities in her he might otherwise despise in someone else. He's so inconsistent.

I think Trump feels a minority is a minority and if he hires a woman, no one would scream about not hiring a racial minority. He was probably thinking, "Look at how great I am, I hired two women in a row!!" That's just how out of touch he is with the real world. Most people realize there's a bias against women, but that bias goes out the window when it's a white woman versus a person of a different race or religion. If both are offered a position, I hope Randal put all that learin' to good use and tell Trump to shove it. Could you imagine how much press he would get for telling Trump, "Thanks, but No Thanks". He'd definately make the cover of US Weekly!!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 10:14 PM
If both are
>offered a position, I hope
>Randal put all that learin'
>to good use and tell
>Trump to shove it. Could
>you imagine how much press
>he would get for telling
>Trump, "Thanks, but No Thanks".
>He'd definately make the cover
>of US Weekly!!


...as not too bright. I understand where you're coming from, and I'm feeling you, but with Trump, Randal can get contacts in the business world he might never have the opportunity to score. That's why he came on the show to begin with. So he should just flash that million dollar smile at the injustice (this IS America, ok?), learn all he can learn, make all the contacts he can make, then step out and get his own!

P.S. Besides, everybody can't be a Kwame and go out and become a billionaire the first year after his stint on the show airs!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-10-05 at 09:57 PM
>LAST EDITED ON 12-10-05
>AT 02:05 PM (EST)
>
>lrlr1 --- I truly believe Randel
>is getting the bad edit
>right now because Burnett and
>Trump want us to be
>having these conversations. Word
>of mouth is the biggest
>tune-in motivator, and we are
>obviously being manipulated.


Hi Melody. I wouldn't say we are being manipulated. Having chosen to watch the show, it is only human nature to want to talk about it. I wouldn't put any greater value on it than that.

>
>Having said that, I also think
>--- just like in a
>trial --- that Trump is
>receiving much more information than
>we are about all the
>candidates and likes Rebecca based
>on more substantial reasons/attributes than
>just "he likes her".


How do you know this? Trump says just the opposite. He didn't know Adam was a virgin. He didn't know Clay was gay. What could he possibly know about Rebecca that goes beyond "he likes her"? Or are you saying he's lying about having no more substantial reasons/attributes than just "he likes her"? If so, what proof do you have that he is lying?


>If there is a double
>hire, then it is probably
>because Trump really does like
>both candidates.
>

The contest is supposed to hinge on merit, not favoritism.


>However, if Randel is not hired
>---- and there is not
>some colossal catastrophe ---- then
>I am inclined to believe
>that Trump chooses not to
>go beyond his comfort zone,
>has an unexamined preference for
>people like himself, and is
>prejudiced against ANYONE who is
>from a different country, has
>a different lifestyle, has a
>different religion (or perhaps I
>should say holds strongly to
>religious values), or has a
>different ethnicity.
>
>A double hire I could accept
>because I know we don't
>see the entire picture.

I say this in all seriousness: If the contest is decided by information that we, the viewing audience, are not privy to, why bother with a Message Board? I could just as easily say Kwame should have been co-apprentice with Bill, or that Jen should have been co-apprentice with Kelly "because I know we don't see the entire picture." End of debate. Why? Because, according to your theory, we don't know what we're talking about because there's info out there that we are not privy to!


>A lone "Rebecca" hire, barring
>some unforseen firing event for
>Randel, will cause me to
>boycott the Apprentice with my
>clicker next season.


What about a lone "Randal" hiring? Would you boycott the show next year in that case? If so, are you saying that Rebecca's OVERALL win/loss record, respect of her teammates (including the blond bimbos) and the men's team, and ability to lead and support a PM, are equal to Randle's OVERALL win/loss record, respect of his teammates and the women's team (including the blond bimbos) and ability to lead and to support a PM? (By support a PM, think of Alla supporting Felisha by trying to wrest the reins of control from her to do it ALLA'S way. Then think of Randal quietly, unobtrusively, and wisely pulling Rebecca to the side when he sees her wasting take after take and telling her to scrap the pro actor and they do it themselves. At no point did Rebecca seem threatened by Randal's suggestion; at no point did she seem to feel he was trying to take over her PM role; indeed, she appeared to be as attentive to his ideas as she was at ease with him making them, then went on to her first win by implementing them).

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Melody on 12-11-05 at 04:29 AM
Hi lrlr1. You raise some interesting points that I would be happy to clarify. I said "I think" not "I know" regarding my view of "Trump's analysis of Rebecca as a potiential hire" specifically because I am speculating. Because I am primarily thinking of Trump as an employer, when I say he is receiving more information then we have access to, I am talking about the candidates performances on the actual tasks --- not the individual candidate's personal life. We do know that Trump is personally involved in the board room, privy to hours of information given by Caroline, George, Bill, and the other candidates --- we only see minutes. It is implied that Trump discusses with the corporate sponsors how each candidate handled him/herself during the task --- information we rarely receive. This leads me to "think" that Trump would be basing his "Rebecca" decisions on reasons/attributes other than just "he likes her".

My comment that if Trump hires both candidates it is "probably because Trump really does like both of them" was inclusive of all their attributes: merit, ability to work well with others, leadership qualities, group communication, etc. --- as well as whom Trump would just like to work with. I am still focusing on Trump as the employer.

I am biased for Randel based on his background, his incredible attitude, and his performance on the tasks we have seen (i.e. we did not see much of him in the Zenthura debacle, etc.). I am biased towards Randel because I like him. I want him to win, and based on the editing up until the final task, he deserves to win. Therefore, for me, if Randel does not win, I will feel overly manipulated (I expect some manipulation, but not Randel as "Mr. Wonderful" for the entire season to "Mr. Incompetent" based on one task). Rebecca, on the other hand, has been shown as very competent for the entire season ---- but if she shines in the final task, I could accept that she has grown during this interview process (she is young) and has exhibited attributes that Trump wants to encourage (like he did with Caroline). Therefore, as a surprise, she would be a "second" hire (Randel absolutely being the first). This is why I personally say that, for me, if Randel is hired and Rebecca is hired, I could accept this conclusion. But, if Randel is not hired, I would feel cheated (Rebecca would always be the "second" hire for me).

As an aside, although I always speculate about the worst that can dwell in the motives of others (Trump), I try to first give the benefit of the doubt to the person I am analyzing.

(I'm too weak for New York!)

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-11-05 at 02:35 PM
Hi Melody. You say your 'speculation' of DT's secret knowledge of Rebecca's fine qualities/superior performance behind the scenes are based on your 'speculation' about DT as an employer. This is what I mean by End of Discussion. We are supposed to be discussing on this board PUBLIC Knowledge that we all can see through our own eyes. Speculation about knowledge that none of us, not even YOU are privy to, is pointless.

I was being facetious when I wrote "What?! That she's (Rebecca) is the Lindburgh baby?" However, if 'speculation' based on knowledge none of are privy to is permissible, do I not have the right to 'speculate' that DT wants Rebecca in the finals so that he can pull a shocker, say Rebecca is the Lindburgh baby!, then announce that he's opening a frnchise of Psychics? If you have the right to 'speculate' scret knowledge about Rebecca's stellar performance being edited OUT (!) from the viewing audience, thus known ONLY by DT & Co., I have the same right to say: Not true. The secret knowledge is that Rebecca is the Lindburgh baby. Kind of defeats the purpose of an open, Honest discussion of the show, doesn't it? There is a place for this sort of speculation, only not in this portion of the board. Such speculation (of secret knowledge) belongs in the Spoiler section.

As to Randal and Rebecca's 'merits, ability to work well with others, etc.' I will ask you again - based on PUBLIC knowledge, do you believe that Rebecca's win/loss record, respect by the women's and men's team and ability and willingness to support a PM, are EQUAL to Randal's? No explanations needed. A simple 'yes' or 'no' will suffice to tell us where your head is at. I won't even ask you - AGAIN - if Randal wins and Rebecca loses, will it turn you off from the Apprentice next season?

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by DooWahDitty on 12-10-05 at 02:29 PM
I do not watch this show and do not plan to watch the finale, but hey - a black man and a white woman? Perfect solution to having hired two white-bread males the first and second time around.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by mysticwolf on 12-10-05 at 04:52 PM
I don't know about the wisdom of hiring two... But I'm goin to go out on a limb here (no pun intended) and posit that Rebecca may just still be in it because she's done this whole thing on a broken ankle. An ankle that wouldn't have been broken if she hadn't had to participate in that ridiculous hockey reward.

Not only does that show pluck and perseverance (even DT remarked on it in the last BR). Keeping her in contention to the end may also stave off an injury lawsuit.


Bad Wolf! by PM

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by justcallmemom on 12-10-05 at 05:56 PM
Mystic wolf, I hadn't considered the possibility of law suit...you're right. I think that explains Rebecca.
BTW, it's not that I think the whole show is scripted, or staffed with actors (well, Amarosa maybe.) It's just that editing can manipulate viewers in any chosen direction. Some may feel betrayed by this idea and refuse to watch anymore. I think the show is fascinating anyway. I love putting myself in the place of contestants and dreaming up strategies. I love seeing what worked and what didn't. It has been a great teaching tool for my kids. Perhaps my expectations of TV are a little lower than the rest of you.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by singer on 12-10-05 at 06:10 PM
Mysticwolf, now THAT's an interesting take on things. I wouldn't mind what The Donald has done so much if he and Burnett were not doing a slag-job on Randal and hinting that he is lazy and stupid.

I like Rebecca, and I think that she has way more on the ball than other people that got to the finals in earlier seasons, but she really did not earn this based on her win-loss record.

I remain concerned about what The Donald is quoted as having said about the work habits of blacks and Jews in the book "Trumped." I also remain concerned about what The Donald has not done in terms of hiring blacks and women in the upper reaches of his organisation.

But that being said, these concerns have more to do with him than with Rebecca.

The injury-lawsuit thing is very interesting and even plausible to me. Thanks for bringing this up.

--Singer

"Rebecca I like alot"
Posted by Reality432423 on 12-11-05 at 03:20 AM
I disagree, First of all Rebecca is great, her track record isn't great, but Kwame was pretty lousy also. This whole race thing is a joke. DT likes both candidates, he shows no racial bias at all. Rebecca has done well, and I like her loyalty to Toral. I like the way she stands up to all those girls ganging up on her.

I hated Jennifer M in Season 2, yet people seem to love her. I love Rebecca, and I hope she does win. I like Randall also for the record.

I don't mind who wins. Both people deserve it.

I use to agree to most of the fans on this board. However Amazing Race and Apprentice has me in a minority.

"RE: Rebecca I like alot"
Posted by mysticwolf on 12-11-05 at 03:35 PM
Unless you've accidently placed your response incorrectly, I'm not sure what you disagree with. The poster you are responding to explicitly says that they like Rebecca. And, I never said I didn't like her. I do.

I was merely suggesting an alternate theory for why she might still be in it, for the consideration of those who can think of no reason other than DT's supposed attraction to her, and her race.


Bad Wolf! by PM
Now, on TAR, we will need to agree to disagree.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Estee on 12-11-05 at 03:03 PM
I doubt we'll see a double hiring just because Donald's always been so definite on the idea of winners vs. losers. You're one or the other. It doesn't matter how narrow the minicorp win -- and we've had some really small margins of victory -- the winners get the reward and the losers go to the Boardroom. There's no prize for second place in Donald's world -- and in this case, I don't think he'd allow himself to consider the idea of 'a tie for first', either. Not impossible for it to happen -- but at the very least, really, really unlikely.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-11-05 at 07:16 PM
Estee, I sure hope you're right. To go from Mr. Capitalist where "Winner Takes All" to the "We're All Equal" delusion of Comrade Communism would be a disgrace. And it would speak of something really ugly as there have been black/white Final 2 contestants before (each of whom were not only 'liked' by DT, but by being winning PMs, actually earned their final 2 spots) and never was there a co-apprenticeship considered - not by the Donald, this board, any board, or anyone on this board. Never. But then, never was the front-runner by a wide margin, the black half of the pair, either. So the question becomes: Is Trump the big-time, 'winner takes all' Capitalist he says he is, or will he be uncovered as nothing more than a provincial, backwater comrade in thousand dollar shoes? Considering that negative, scene-splicing editing Randal got that most all agree upon, I'll have to just wait and see.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by GrEeNdAyFaN42 on 12-12-05 at 09:14 PM
Go Linz
XGo PaoloX
XGo GaghanX
If trump wanted to do that, he would have let Rebecca pick her teammates out first and randal to get the rest instead of the debate
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Juni on 12-12-05 at 10:21 PM
Randal will be chosen the winner of Apprentice, Season 4. He deserves it. He is intelligent, eloquent, diplomatic, socially and culturally aware, ambitious, and yet, down-to-earth, proud without being arrogant, carries no chip on his shoulder, possesses upstanding work ethics, and is a loving, family man...Randal is a true winner.

On the other hand, I like Rebecca too. She perseveres in the face of struggles and disability...Obviously the show has been edited so that we have a sympathy factor for both Rebecca and Randal. At the start of the season's episodes Rebecca injured her ankle and Randal's grandma passed away...

I would love to see both become Trump's apprentice. However, I would be delighted if either one of them wins. Kudos to the 2 R's!!!!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-13-05 at 02:08 AM
Great recitation of Randal's qualities, Juni! (Although I would add that Randal, too, perseveres in the face of struggles and emotional disabilities - nothing more disabling to giving a good performance than the recent death of a beloved). Since your descriptive powers are rather awesome, could you please give us some of Rebecca's good qualities (other than coming to work with a broken ankle)?

One thing bothers me about a joint apprenticeship for R&R, however. Isn't the Apprentice billed as a show based on merit? Or am I mistaken, and it is in actuality, a popularity contest?

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Juni on 12-13-05 at 02:07 PM
I did not get a chance to watch many of the episodes, but the ones that I did, I saw how honorable and generous both Randal and Rebecca were in their assessments of other contestants and themselves. E.g., they did not complain about their personal problems. Randal did not iterate to others his grief over his grandma's death and Rebecca did not whine about her painful ankle. From my personal experience with an injured ankle, I can only imagine how difficult it was for her to maneuver in crutches around mobs of people in NYC, climbing up and down stairs, getting into and out of revolving doors...

R&R's exceptional moral traits cannot be extended to other contestants. Undoubtedly, many candidates in the past would have used their physical/emotional challenges as diversions to blame for their failures in their roles as project manager or simply as team members in executing orders. There were so many occasions for R&R to take advantage of office politics and sabotage other candidates, but they didn't. That type of chivalry from R&R is oftentimes untouted these days, but to me, they exemplify what it is to "lead by example" rather than simply by word alone.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by singer on 12-13-05 at 03:06 PM
Well said, Juni.

--Singer

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-13-05 at 04:18 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-13-05 AT 04:28 PM (EST)

Hi Juni. While your post is beautifully written, unfortunately, it is not only misleading, but inaccurate. Rebecca EQUALS Randal in nothing, certainly not graciousness toward her teammates. In one boardroom, Rebecca showed her willingness to 'bloodlet' by attacking Randal when no attack was necessary, labeling him 'not creative'. It was unprovoked, unnecessary, and not asked for by DT. And considering her demonstrated lack of creativity, egregious.
Randal could have easily turned the tables and accused her of the same thing - it was her choice of Jude(?) the singer and the song's lyrics that lost the challenge - but he didn't. He took responsibility for the poster's mistake and let it go.

In another instance, Rebecca bad-mouthed the women's team, saying something surly about their 'lack of intelligence'. The only person she has been consistently 'gracious' toward is her friend, the utterly and unfoundedly arrogant, and incompetent Toral.

This assessment is from one who has seen EVERY episode of the show.

PS IMO, you could stand Attila the Hun next to Randal and if Attila pasted an Iron Smile on his face, he would look good, too. But that's JMO.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Juni on 12-13-05 at 04:48 PM
I can see you're very pro-Randal and I too am more positively biased towards Randal than Rebecca. However, perhaps I overstated the graciousness part on both R's, but I also believe that there is a lot of editing done by the Apprentice behind-the-scene staff to elicit exactly the type of reactions that the audience (including you and I) have. Having said that, and based on my own gender-based observations and experiences, I think that while a gentleman can compartmentalize their feelings and be thusly more rational in matters of business, I still find Rebecca's demeanor to be much more professional than other female candidates in this season's show and the previous ones as well.

Apart from the one female candidate in either Apprentice I or II whom I thought would have made a brilliant Apprentice to Trump, (I don't recall her name but she had blond hair and was often the only female in all male groups) and I think most viewers thought she was "masculine" and even a "b----", I can't name a single other female who was able to articulate flaws of other people based on actual task-related behavior (e.g., s/he didn't come up with creative ideas during brainstorming), rather than simply insulting other people's personalities (e.g., a female at the beginning of this season said that the other women in her group were "intimidated" by her because of her "looks", and gave no solid, foundation-based reason).

In summary, I am rooting for both R's. I am slightly prejudiced towards Randal because Randal attended one of my alma maters and he also lives in my state. I believe Trump will name Randal his apprentice... Much Success to R&R!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-13-05 at 10:48 PM
>I can see you're very pro-Randal


I am sorry I gave you that opinion. It is not that I am pro-Randal, but that I am pro-merit.

>and I too am more
>positively biased towards Randal than
>Rebecca.


I am not biased toward Randal. I like Randal, but I am biased, if you will, toward Merit.


>However, perhaps I overstated the >graciousness part on both R's,


No. Just on Rebecca's part. IMO

I still find
>Rebecca's demeanor to be much
>more professional than other female
>candidates in this season's show
>and the previous ones as
>well.
>

I thought Jen W's demeanor was the classiest I've ever witnessed on a TV program. To hold one's tongue and composure while being publicly flogged FOR CHEAP RATINGS was awesome! (Class: Grace under pressure)


>I can't name a single
>other female who was able
>to articulate flaws of other
>people based on actual task-related
>behavior


I'm sorry, but the list is legion.


(e.g., s/he didn't
>come up with creative ideas
>during brainstorming), rather than simply
>insulting other people's personalities (e.g.,
>a female at the beginning
>of this season said that
>the other women in her
>group were "intimidated" by her
>because of her "looks", and
>gave no solid, foundation-based reason).
That would be Rebecca's incompetent buddy, Toral. But rememer, Rebecca also said the women 'lacked intelligence', so I guess it's true that birds of a feather flock together.>
>

>In summary, I am rooting for
>both R's.


Not me. I'm rooting for the most meritorious one. The one who EARNED his right to be in the Final 2.


>I believe Trump will name
>Randal his apprentice...

If he does - and based on MERIT, he should - it will renew my faith in reality TV.

Much
>Success to R&R!

Hear! Hear!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Juni on 12-14-05 at 09:04 AM
LAST EDITED ON 12-14-05 AT 10:06 AM (EST)

To Lrlr1 & Singer:

This is the last post I will put up regarding my perspectives on Apprentice 4 because anything said afterwards would simply be reiterations. I think we have all made some valid points regarding the candidates. I cannot positively dispute your reasonings as again, my viewing was limited to a few episodes.

However, I believe you would agree that there is heavy editing of the program by the producers for dramatic and particular impacts. Therefore, much of what we do see is confined to the microcosm of what the producers desire us to see/hear.

Moreover, even if we did see all the videotaped coverage of the candidates and their actions, our evaluations are still restricted to what we know, observed, and experienced in our own lives. Whether we wish to admit it or not, our perceptions of what the candidates did/said are biased in accordance with how we ourselves see the world. That's not to say that we have no clue what we're talking about (e.g., racism and sexism does exist), but that our perceptions and reactions to the candidates are wholly individualistic -- more subjective than objective.

Essentially, subjective perceptions become realities.

With respect to employment, I believe hirings should be based solely on measurable (qualitative and quantifiable) attributes, which the candidate can demonstrate that s/he can bring to the organization to improve its bottom-line (profits). E.g., excellent marketing, presentation, and negotiation skills.

In terms of being chosen as Trump's Apprentice, which I define as a *leader* who can also work well with other people, s/he has to possess the extra qualities of *moral integrity* and *charisma* -- someone who can command respect and obedience from others without having to coerce them (via threats, pleas, etc.).

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by singer on 12-14-05 at 07:55 AM
"Having said that, and based on my own gender-based observations and experiences, I think that while a gentleman can compartmentalize their feelings and be thusly more rational in matters of business, I still find Rebecca's demeanor to be much more professional than other female candidates in this season's show and the previous ones as well."

1. There is nothing gender-based that makes a person good at business.

2. Opportunity, training, and native intelligence are the correct ingredients that create this result.

3. It is precisely viewpoints like the one stated above that make the Trump/Burnett stereotyping propoganda machine so horrible.

4. In other environments, people will use the misogynistic and racist misinformation that they promote as an excuse NOT to hire qualified women and people of colour.

--Singer

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by halfpintlemon on 12-13-05 at 06:50 PM
Rebecca's a very intelligent person, don't underestimate her.

The reason Randal is so nice is not just because he has integrity, which he does, but he also lacks the hunger to win. Whenever Trump or anyone else insults him, he just takes it and never tries to defend himself in any way...

I've seen every episode this season, too...:-/

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-13-05 at 10:24 PM
>Rebecca's a very intelligent person, don't
>underestimate her.
>
>The reason Randal is so nice
>is not just because he
>has integrity, which he does,
>but he also lacks the
>hunger to win. Whenever Trump
>or anyone else insults him,
>he just takes it and
>never tries to defend himself
>in any way...
>
>I've seen every episode this season,
>too...:-/


Rebecca's intelligence, or lack of same, will have nothing to do with who will win - this is Trump's decision to be fair or play foul. She is just a pawn in his game.

As for Randal being nice (because he has to?) by just taking it and never tries to defend himself in any way, you don't win as PM 3Xs and be mealy-mouthed. And you don't have a bunch of Type A personalities working under/alongside you and 'take it' and still be voted an exemption 3X's.

Which brings me to another Type A personality. Josh. My friend gave me a printout of an interview Josh did with his old college newspaper. (I didn't know he was only 24, and a self-made millionaire, too boot!) Anyway, in it he said: "The willingness to hang steady on the sublime edge of experience is what sets the industrialist apart from the merely industrious." In a fair world, this is why Randal would win. HE is the 'industrialist'; Rebecca is the wannabe 'merely industrious'.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by singer on 12-14-05 at 07:59 AM
"The reason Randal is so nice is not just because he has integrity, which he does, but he also lacks the hunger to win. Whenever Trump or anyone else insults him, he just takes it and never tries to defend himself in any way..."

Randal's refusal to behave like a boor is not co-equal with his "lack(ing) the hunger to win." It appears that he spends most of his time planning his numerous successes in the game, rather than slagging off his opponents.

In the end, a good brain earns one money in business. A big mouth rarely does.

--Singer

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by Wacko Jacko on 12-14-05 at 12:42 PM
This would not be too much of a surprise for use hear because I started this topic off 8 days before you brought it up for the second time.
"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by lrlr1 on 12-14-05 at 02:11 PM
>This would not be too much
>of a surprise for use
>hear because I started this
>topic off 8 days before
>you brought it up for
>the second time.


See?! This is what I'M talking about! The American Way. You build a better mousetrap and they will come!

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by prosecutor on 12-14-05 at 10:42 PM
I think all of you who feel they will tell us that it was a tie and therefore they both get the job are wrong. The final surprise has to be something else,because DT would make them flip a coin so maybe Melania is pregnant with twins or something heehee.or that Bill works there full time now,or that he DT will not do any more apprentice shows.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by DooWahDitty on 12-14-05 at 11:34 PM
Bill's leaving (announced several weeks ago) and they're moving the show to L.A. for next season. And it couldn't be that he's not hiring either one of them. But one never knows.

"RE: Trump's Big Surprise: TWO Apprentices? "
Posted by singer on 12-15-05 at 07:11 AM
>>This would not be too much
>>of a surprise for use
>>hear because I started this
>>topic off 8 days before
>>you brought it up for
>>the second time.
>
>
>See?! This is what I'M talking
>about! The American Way. You
>build a better mousetrap and
>they will come!


You two are SO funny!

ROFLMAO

--Singer