No, but a success rate would be good. It is not necessary to always be successful, just mostly and overall grow your assets. Trump meets that -- and most of his projects involve working with various governmental agencies that he can't simply dictate to. One of the problems with businessmen in politics is they expect people to follow their decisions and not have to talk them into it.

Again you fail to include Gary Johnson who has accomplished a great deal outside politics creating a successful business and not looting in the process. Trump only looks better when compared to other statists and looters.

And has zero chance of winning. I know, if we all voted for him he would win -- but if that were remotely possible he would be polling well.

Cruz is an evangelical Christian and as such cannot integrate morals and the political goal of individual rights. . Science is his enemy as is the concept of individual sovereignty as human minds are subordinate to Gods will.
If he announced he was a Deist then all would be fine but he wants god in our lives and laws. Never. Any one but a pro lifer.

I'd give Trump a little more on the second amendment because he has a concealed carry permit.

I actually like Cruz's positions better than Trump's but I don't see Cruz being able to execute. He's a first term senator who has not particularly gotten along with anyone. An obviously brilliant lawyer and, frankly, if he winds up the guy I'll be oh so much happier than I was going to be with Bush.

But I think Trump may be able to actually implement and actually deal with some of the waste. Any attempt to scale back the EPA or other departments will result in a blistering attack by entrenched forces. The ability to weather that attack is essential to the process.

The only principle Cruz has is to get what he wants and the means do not matter --- he does not care if he lies and cheats. As to this principle, he is principled.

If he does, I certainly will agree with you. My hope is that unlike Obama, his orientation is toward making deals with congress to get what he wants. He's had to make deals with various agencies to build all the things he's built -- he knows how.

And my concern with Cruz is that he does not. He is often standing for principle -- alone. It's a sad thing because I like the principles he espouses. But I don't see any sign that he can actually get anything done without signing executive orders -- and we've had enough of that. While you may think Trump is the one who wants his way, it's Cruz who points with pride to the fact that he is steadfast in his position and doesn't make deals. Politics is about deals.

Makes me wonder if Trump can ever focus on any one thing (like a presidency position) for more than a few weeks before his attention wanders...

Trump is not an innovator. His businesses are all existing assets or leveraged assets which only by negotiating the deal did he cause any increased value. His buildings are architecturally bland except Trump Tower for which he never hired that Architect again.
His deal making is based on finding additional value for the other person to get what he wants. The classic is I get price you get terms. He is not a thinker, has never had a new idea but is superb at taking others ideas or assets and getting what he wants out of them. .

Only if there is a Republican house and Senate can he be prevented from bumbling blindly about. But he could actually cut government with both houses if they said that is their goal.

ummmm ....... voting is mostly voluntary. -- j
.

let's see....... he multiplied his net worth by 50 after
inheriting bucks as a young man. . I did, too, and by
approximately the same multiplier. . okay by me. -- j
.

The premise of your statement is that running government is like running a business. That is at best only partially true. The other fundamentally unsound premise is that business success automatically transfers into government success. You may choose to try to defend such a premise at your peril. The third assertion you make is that the politicians have done nothing. This is logically absurd and hyperbole.

I'm not going to go into Rubio. He dropped out of contention. What we do know is that he was a proponent of amnesty for illegals - a proposition many (including myself) find issue with. I'm not going to go into Kasich either. His only path to the nomination this year is one of usurpation via brokered convention. That he is staying in the contest tells me that he is willing to ignore the will of the people in order to gain power.

Regarding Cruz, I see someone who actually has principles and someone who has bucked his own party to further them. Now you may disagree with those principles, but an argument that he has done "nothing" falls particularly flat. If you have a specific issue to discuss, go there rather than resorting to extreme generalities.

What really lies at the heart of government is philosophy, i.e. what set of governing beliefs is one going to follow. What I see from Trump is someone with a history of overt narcissism. What troubles me about Trump is his penchant for rhetoric. It inflames the passions, but does nothing to educate the voter. It is precisely the same tactic that Obama used to become President. I don't want a President who is inflammatory, nor do I want a narcissist in the Oval Office. I want someone who understands the Constitution of the United States and will act within its original intent and defend its original intent. Let's take a look at how Donald Trump scores vs Ted Cruz on the more salient points:

1. First Amendment. Donald Trump has come out openly in favor of prosecuting or suing those who disparage him. Ted Cruz is willing to engage them in honest debate. Donald Trump freely uses his First Amendment rights to call his opponents liars, to degrade women, and to issue tirades. Ted Cruz acts thoughtfully. He has also defended the First Amendment - successfully - before the Supreme Court. Ted Cruz +2, Donald Trump -1
2. Second Amendment. Donald Trump in his younger days was a proponent of the Brady Bill. His "Lifetime Membership" to the NRA was only purchased when he decided to run for President - his NRA membership doesn't actually go back more than two years. Ted Cruz defended the Second Amendment's original interpretation before the Supreme Court of the United States - and won. +2 to Ted Cruz, 0 for Donald Trump.
3. Fourth Amendment (FBI vs Apple case). Both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz came out in favor of the FBI. -1 to Ted Cruz, -1 for Donald Trump
4a. 9th and Tenth Amendments (Healthcare). Donald Trump opposes "Obamacare" but still favors government-sponsored healthcare. -1 for Donald Trump. Ted Cruz favors repealing Obamacare in its entirety and converting Medicare to State-run block grants - and he proposed legislation to do it. +1 for Ted Cruz
4b. Ted Cruz campaigned - and won - in Iowa on a pledge to eliminate energy subsidies and level the playing field for business (+1). Donald Trump has used eminent domain and political contributions to further his businesses at the expense of others. (-1)
5. Fourteenth Amendment (immigration). Both have been outspoken about the need for illegals to return home and come back to the United States through proper channels. Ted Cruz actually inserted a "poison pill" into legislation that would have legalized illegal immigrants. +2 to Ted Cruz, +1 for Donald Trump.
6. Sixteenth Amendment (income taxes). Donald Trump supports lowering taxes on businesses (+1) but at the same time wants to force them to repatriate (and tax) their foreign holdings (-1). Ted Cruz wants to lower both personal income taxes and corporate taxes (+1) but at the same time has forwarded a proposal to institute a VAT tax (-1).
7. 19th Amendment (women). Trump has repeatedly denigrated women in general (-1). Cruz' campaign spokesperson is a well-spoken and thoughtful woman (+1).
8. Presidential powers. Trump has said that he would use Executive Actions to further his agenda. Cruz has said that he will only use Executive Actions to rescind prior Executive Actions. Cruz +1, Trump -1.

I'm willing to look at any other points, but so far I'm tallying up the scores and this is how it stands: Donald Trump -5, Ted Cruz +9.

I am a big fan of X-man movies. I think that everyone has one or more of what I would call "x-man superpowers". These superpowers are not the ability to throw fire from your fingertips and things like that, but they are things that for whatever reasons of innate ability, early learning, experiences, etc., make a person better able to perform certain tasks.

The process of growing up, in my opinion, involves finding out what our x-man superpowers are and then how to use them to get what we want in life.

You say that Trump's superpower isnt what is needed in this presidental race, but I would disagree. We need someone who can win over enough people to beat that evil woman Hillary- the modern day reincarnation of Nixon's self protection, and the successor to Obama's policies and failures. Of the possible candidates, Trump is the only one who even has a chance to beat her. I know that bothers you in that you think he will be a Hitler-successor, but I really do think he will at least stand in the way of the terrible excesses of Obama, and keep Hillary from destroying the rest of our country (just the $12-15/hr wage would really kill off small businesses)

Successfully navigating a deliberately and needlessly difficult regulatory system like NYC's doesn't make you a producer. It means you are probably one of those who made the system that way, to wall out your competitors. Trump doesn't even try to deny this; he glories in it.

If we must have a corrupt president I would much prefer Hillary, because her kind of corruption is less competent and easier to dismantle after she leaves.

You got it right ! It is damn hard to start businesses and have them all succeed. Good entrepreneurs learn to PIVOT when something goes bad- stop it, change it, sell it- and keep on going. Its pretty hard to have perfect knowledge of everything that could affect your business. Sometimes what you think is a perfect product design just isnt accepted by your customers (I have had that happen a couple of times, and I still dont really know what I missed !!)

I hope the evil woman Hillary loses. Donald winning would be a lot better, but of course not perfect. He would be constrained by the congress substantially, but at least he would veto the more disastrous bills the socialists in the congress passed.

I like your analysis. I think it fits whats going on. A perfect candidate would have to be determined by each of the voters. How could one of Romney's 47%-ers who want something for nothing ever agree the same candidate was perfect that was chosen by a free market objectivist voter??

This is a 50.1% mob rule country now, unfortunately. We have Hillary, a truly evil person most likely to win in November. We have Trump on the other side, who has correctly identified and capitalized on the upset and anger resulting from the socialist and frankly idiotic actions of current government.

Trump is the only one who has a chance to win against Hillary. It wouldnt be a perfect objectivist candidate, but John Galt would probably win only a couple of states IF he were running at this time in our country.

So lets see what Cruz, Rubio, or the other politicians have done. NOTHING. They have no clue how to run businesses. I would give Kasich a little more credit than the others, but he has no presidential appeal unfortunately.

Without investigating every "failure" it is difficult to come to a conclusion. However, of the few very rich businesspeople I know, most keep trying new ventures over and over. Some succeed. Some succeed big. Some fail. Some fail big. In many cases it is as natural to them to do this as breathing.

Those I am referring to are multi-millionaires, not billionaires. I often wonder how they would do if they had started with millions from Dad as Mr. T. did.

I would say that people dont WANT to fail, but we all must learn on our own HOW to succeed. Its not taught in the public schools for sure. Some are smarter and quicker than others. Learning from failure and adapting does eventually breed success, however.

One must define failure. If you fail in business because the economy in general changes (general recessions), new technology comes from out of the blue and makes your product or service obsolete, or other things like that- its not the same as just failing because of overspending, being lazy, etc.

Is there anything that summarizes what these do or their relative size (income, etc.)? Anything like the other article on profitability, length of time in business, etc.?

Exactly. Starting a business is difficult. You try and see what the customers want and try to fill the need. Customers change their minds, technology changes the options customers have, and oftentimes government regulations and interference (cronyism) sends business to competitors unfairly.

Blockbuster could have pivoted into streaming before Netflix took over, but it didnt and paid the price.


Edison could have pivoted into AC power instead of sticking to DC power, but didnt.

The Wright brothers could have kept on inventing instead of relying on government patents, while competitors (Curtis) and WW2 made their patents worthless.

Really? I just noticed that Barry Soetero (aka Barach H. Obama) is trying to increase his salary.
I guess you don't mind paying for that, do you Taxpayer?