It's also an argument that has a sound foundation in history, and you dismiss it at your peril. It's no accident of history that most U.S. presidents in the last 70 years were former governors. It's also no coincidence that the absolute worst presidential candidates (from both parties) in recent decades have been U.S. Senators. I'll include Hubert Humphrey, George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Bob Dole, Al Gore, John Kerry, and John McCain among them. And if we include candidates who lost in the primaries before they could even be nominated, I'd add John Edwards and Joe Lieberman to that group, too.
If it weren't for the fact that the 2008 election matched up two former U.S. Senators, we'd probably still be talking about how Richard Nixon was the last U.S. Senator to be elected president.
It's not just the "executive capacity" that makes a governor a far more formidable candidate for president. It's a governor's capacity to develop a track record in a political leadership role -- in a way that Senators simply can't do.
Oh boy, you stepped right into my trap - so predictable - and so easy to nuke.
There is not a damned thing, not a DAMNED THING, similar between the careers of the LOOOOOOOOOONG TIME go along to get along Senators you mentioned.
Again, a shallow thought process, no originality. No intellectual analysis...just the idea that because McCain and Dole are Senators and were bombs, that Cruz will be too.
Sheesh, how pathetic. Cruz work in the Senate at the moment, but he has zip zero nada in common with the others. Like I said, Rush and Levin made fools of this theory last week. I guess you missed it.