That was my first real "whoa..." moment, considering "...life, liberty, and property..." are the big three. Further investigation yielded more reasons for concern.
I have been suspicious from the onset that someone who used 90% of the headlines might be a stalking horse, and there are a lot of 11th hour changes there. We have been played as an electorate before, and not so long ago.
Attack is fine, refreshing, even, but you have to make bloody sure before you loose the dogs of war that they are on your side.
Trump can negotiate, (The Art of the Deal), but it doesn't help if the deal leaves us out.
While it can be argued that Trump is beholden to no one and doesn't need their money, that can work out that his loyalties belong to the person with the checkbook--Donald Trump.
We don't need cronies, we don't need to be played by a player, we need someone who has a track record of Conservative stances on the issues, who is smart and articulate.
The lack of airtime they have been given is a side effect of the Trump effect, not their qualifications.
I like Cruz best so far, but would consider Walker as well.
Consider who Hillary would rather not go up against and that’s who Trump attacks. When was the last time he hammered Hillary or the IRS or pick a scandal? He’s a Democrat.
This is from his June feed: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/when-donald-trump-attacks-gop/
Notice that he’s now going after Fiorina and Carson. Note also that his attacks are absurdly immature, nearly childlike in their silliness. He’s not talking about issues, just vague phrases that encourage projection by the voter.