Since the 2016 election I have gained an appreciation for Ted Cruz. He's a brilliant thinker. When he speaks he carefully crafts his words. He would be great SCOTUS material.
I voted for Cruz in the 2016 GOP Mass primary based on my
recollection of
his prior appearance(s) on Mark Davis's DFW-area morning drive-time talk show.
(I don't mean campaign beauty pageant stump speech stuff in the runup to 2016 -
I mean at least a few years earlier).
IIRC, Cruz had what
I'll call the "small-government/free-market freedom rap" down pat.
You've heard Rush, and I 'spect Ronaldus Magnus, deliver it.
(And trust me, neither Romney nor McCain could fake it with both hands and a flashlight).
But I had (and have) zero qualms about voting for Trump in the general election.
One doesn't have to be a lawyer to sit on the SCOTUS. A sense of right and wrong and a decent moral compass are far greater attributes as qualifications. All the legal stuff is done by clerks anyway......having a great clerk staff that does good research is important.
Lincoln had plenty of army generals who could swan about with the best of 'em.
Without the ability to change colleagues' minds, it's all dust in the wind.
We need justices who fight, and win.
And if the others (of course) have decades of experience parsing case law,
then some prospect's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" act is going nowhere fast.