I absolutely agree.
The lesser two risks are Trump and Cruz.
I don’t like Cruz. I don’t like his insider connections while claiming to be an outsider. At least Trump owns up to his political expedient actions.
Chad Sweet was also involved with the Cruz campaign for Senate. Former Director of CIA and NSA had already become a Principal at Sweet’s firm by then. Cruz is no outsider
I used to. I have advocated for a Supreme Court appointment for him.
But there is something, and I can't pinpoint it, that just doesn't sit well.
If it is down to a choice between him and Hillary/Bernie... yeah, he's got my vote. I'll have no choice. But not until then.
And what's more: Every time I read the hell-and-damnation rhetoric, every time I read the Bible verses posted in his favor by well-meaning but tone-deaf church ladies to attack another candidate... it pushes me further away.
I don't like that type of person in real life, and it is certainly not going to sway my vote.
Both Trump and Cruz have a lot of flaws. And the attacks on both candidates are legit to a degree.
But that being said, they are still much better than the rest. This is the hand we’ve been dealt.
You may not like Cruz, but I’ve been in the intelligence business for 40 years and I’ve been unable to identify a single former director of NSA (who are always military officers) or CIA that are affiliated with the Chertoff Group in any way. To whom are you referring?
True, Sweet is a former Director of Operations at the CIA, but I don’t see how that’s a disqualifier in any way. Shouldn’t ANY prospective candidate for president have some advisors with intelligence backgrounds?