I support Cruz because he is the most likely to support The Constitution and Original Intent, but I am seldom 'giddy' or 'gushy' about that.
Most of my time has been spent in pointing out The Donald's resounding support of the EPA in Iowa (which agency isn't going to make America Great, ever), and his questionable dealings over land.
I figure if you catch a dog with chicken feathers all around its mouth, you don't put it out to guard the henhouse.
But I don't 'gush' over Cruz, unless pointing out that the whole load of crap about him 'supporting' BLM (which means Bureau of Land Management out this way) and other rioters is pure crap. He placed the responsibility for their actions on them. Then he talked about the tone of campaign rhetoric and said it would be good to tone it down. Then, there followed a sh*tstorm of lies to rival any in history. Amazing.
If defending a candidate when people lie about them is 'gushing', I'm guilty.
If calling a candidate's support of the most industry damaging agency in US history and his claim he's going to 'make America great again' a textbook case of cognitive dissonance is 'giddy', I reckon I'm guilty of that, too.
I can think of examples of 'full employment' in the past where private industry was not necessary. They aren't pretty outcomes, though.