You are correct. Governor walker actually runs a state. Candidates Paul, Cruz, Rubio, Santorum, etc are senators where all they do is a lot of speeches. They have never balanced any actual budgets, never actually deported a single illegal, never actually reduced taxes, never actually increased private sector employment, and never got elected in a bluish swing state like Wisconsin...3 times in 4 years! Well may be except Santorum who did win twice in PA.
You’re right. A good governor like Walker is more qualified and appealing than a senator.
God Bless you and your truth!
However a few of them can sure give a speech. lol. Good God like we need that crap again. But I am good at speaking.....Lord help us when the conservatives are impressed with that......next will be a catchy slogan....barf!
Yet Obama was a senator (briefly) and he has been able to execute his leftist agenda and accomplish quite a bit. He set out to destroy the country, and he has almost succeeded.
Right after Cruz announced, I thought Rush did a very good job of demolishing the false argument that we need governors instead of senators. Rush asked if anyone really thought Obama would be a better leader if he had run a state. Of course the answer is no. Rush stated, correctly, that it isn't lack of experience that makes Obama a disaster---it's his ideology.
And of course the same principle applies to Ted Cruz. It's who he IS that's the determining factor.
“You are correct. Governor walker actually runs a state. Candidates Paul, Cruz, Rubio, Santorum, etc are senators where all they do is a lot of speeches. “
we need a candidate who can articulately make his case, and who isn’t afraid to tell the MSM where to go. Cruz is that man, i believe.