Like Bush was so great. He was a disaster. Except for the tax cuts.
Clinton was only viewed as a good President because Newt and the Congress dragged him kicking and screaming into tax and welfare reform. Clinton was just smart enough to take credit for it.
Carter was a disaster.
Mark Levin is right. You can hire managers. What we need is a leader. Ted Cruz is a leader.
What has Cruz led over the last two years? So far as I can tell he’s responsible for an amusing filibuster and not much else.
One of the reasons why Reagan was so good is because he got his teeth wet as Governor of California. He knew how to lead an executive branch, which allowed him to focus on bigger picture issues. When a President doesn’t know how to lead an executive branch of government their Presidential honeymoon gets bogged down in them learning the job. Obama and Kennedy both had this problem.
Not everyone is a good executive manager, not everyone is cut out for it. Obama is terrible at managing and that trickles down to everything he does. My issue with Cruz isn’t that he’s wrong on issues, he isn’t wrong on anything so far. I question though why we should throw our weight behind someone who has no track record of getting the job done. We certainly want someone who will actually be able to do something for the conservative cause while in office. With no track record of success, why should we simply trust Cruz is capable? Especially so early in the primary race.