This executive capacity argument, which has been ridiculed and totally destroyed by Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, and many others is starting to really get boring.
It is the coin of the realm of those without original thought.
First, Cruz has been an executive over a part of Texas gov’t that is probably the equal of an entire small state government. You know, like Wisconsin or Indiana or Louisiana.
Second, the Prez is NOT AN EXEC ADMIN MANAGER type position. As Mark Levin said so well.....give us a visionary, and then he can HIRE the managers.
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.
Thank you!!!!