My friend Jim and I have a running debate via e-mail about the candidacy of Donald Trump. I maintain he is not presidential material in any way while Jim thinks he is the best of those running.  His argument is that Trump wants to build a wall and deport illegals and that he is not politically correct.  I maintain these are shallow criteria for a president.  I counter that Trump has very few if any qualification to run this country and many characteristics that rule him out.

In a recent post, Jim commented that I did not like Trump because he made me uncomfortable.  My response:  he doesn’t make me uncomfortable at all; he just ticks me off.

Why does he anger people? It’s primarily a matter of courtesy and fairness.  He interrupts everyone as they try to talk while they await their turn (as one should in a debate).  He just about ruined the South Carolina debate with his constant interruptions.  Every time someone opened their mouth, Trump spouted some inanity at them.   (E.g., he thinks Bush caused 9/11 when it was really Clinton who refused to take out bin Laden when he had the chance..)  The previous debate (which Trump boycotted) was much more civilized and informative.

Trump’s foreign policy would be a disaster because, in a meeting with a representative of a foreign country who wants a real discussion, he would be playing reality show host, cussing and fuming at them continually (a leopard can’t change its spots).  Yes, Trump said the border should be secured and illegals sent back; that has some merit even as a questionable goal.  But he is a one-trick pony with no other agenda to speak of — no knowledge that I can see regarding what government is or how a government is run.  His idea of Conservatism is a joke (‘conserve your money’).  He is all over the map with his policy ideas — for something and again against it.

Closing the borders and deporting illegals is not going to do any good if we don’t very soon get back to following our laws and the Constitution.  All other considerations, wants, and needs should be secondary to that.

What I like about Cruz is that he is consistent in what he believes needs to be done, and he is a strong Constitutionalist.   He wants to get us back to the days before Obama, Bush, Clinton, Johnson, Roosevelt (both of them), and Wilson who all have been shredding the Constitution little by little until it is no longer recognizable as a guide to governing.

If we don’t govern by the Constitution (with any properly added amendments necessary for our times), then we might as well forget about borders and deporting, because we will tear ourselves apart internally and die a slow socialist death by anarchy and economic ruin.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/why_cruz_and_not_trump.html