Looks to me like you may have started a debate on who should be President whether you wanted to or not...
:-)
I am going to inject two words into this discussion along with their definitions as "food for thought". My view is that we have far too many of the First category running for office, and sadly far too few of the Second category running for this highest office in the land and world leader.
Politician
[pol-i-tish-uh n]
1. a person who is active in party politics.
2. a seeker or holder of public office who is more concerned about winning favor or retaining power than about maintaining principles.
Statesman
[steyts-muh n]
1. a person who is experienced in the art of government or versed in the administration of government affairs.
2. a person who exhibits great wisdom and ability in directing the affairs of government or dealing with important public issues.
Well, since the Moderators haven't taken this thread down by now, I guess they plan to keep it up. So here goes. IMO, there is and never has been but one Candidate for Texas and for Mineral owners all over the US and for promoting all aspects of our energy development. Do the research, and Cruz is the only candidate that fulfills all the obligations. Rubio might be for the Energy sector today; but, he will do or say what ever is necessary to get the Big Oil donors to channel enough money into his Pac. He talks a good game and he does present himself well; but, he will say or do what ever it takes to get him where he wants. I don't have a lot of trust for any politicians; but, Rubio's immigration voting record has proven his lack of trustworthiness. I didn't even mention Bernie Sanders since both he and Hillary are so far out in left field that I can't possibly imagine any mineral owner ever giving them a second thought.
Joseph, I think there would be a big difference. For one thing I don't think a true conservative would have lifted the sanctions on Iran who will soon be pushing millions of bbls of crude into an already glutted market ie. continued lower oil and gas prices.
Under the Constitution's "takings clause," the government would have to pay property owners for anything taken from them. But people in Washington, D.C., and in the Courts don't necessarily follow the Constitution any more, so who knows?
It's too bad / not good at all that there seems to me to be those people that clamor to be influenced / controlled; and that there also seems to me to be those people that strive to influence / control them.
To me, most things that are right and wrong / fair and unfair are obvious / self evident.
Also need to add a couple more things to the list of things I don't at all like :
Brain washing : I also don't at all like.
Oppression : I also don't at all like.
Also noting just now (at this late hour of my tenure on our planet) how those four things that I don't at all like seem to me to be tentacles of one in the same thing.
Oh well welcome to the world - about time to wake up and smell the coffee !
I don't strive to control anybody, but I do strive to influence and persuade as many persons as possible to what I believe to be right and fair. I consider that to be patriotic. And no, those things definitely are NOT "self evident" to ALOT of people. For example, Obama wants to impose a $10/bbl tax on crude-oil production, in the name of green energy and alternative fuels. Well, that's a noble goal, cleaner energy, and millions of Americans undoubtedly welcomed the President's proposal, not thinking for one second that such a tax would kill jobs and increase the cost of just about everything, especially anything that is transported, and increase taxes.
Unfortunately, you can avoid politics but it is impossible for politics to avoid you. In other words, even if you do nothing to engage in politics, you WILL experience the end result of politics: government policy that will affect you in just about every conceivable way. That's why, no matter how repulsive or inane it gets, I stay involved in the process so that I can say that I TRIED in my own small way to make things better.
As Winston Churchill famously said, any man who is 20 years old and is not a liberal has no heart, and any man who is 30 years old and is not a conservative has no brain. If you are over 30 and are using your brain, you probably agree with most Americans on basic fundamentals of right and wrong, fair and unfair. The problem is the young people, something like 70% of young adults aged 18-30 support an avowed Socialist for President! That is stunning...and dangerous, for all of us but especially for them because they are going to be around longer than any of us to deal with the ramifications.
That's because of the declining economics / job opportunities coupled with their want for the finest things in life and willingness to go head over tea kettle in student loans / other seemingly low interest loans to obtain it.
No good jobs to support the life style they want to live.
Big loans and no mechanism made available to them to repay them.
A machination of politics caused it all in my humble opinion.
Also, in the meantime, displacing a skilled and talented / very knowledgeable work force with minimum wage / low wage trainees / interns / rookies due to stagnant / declining workload demands.
Life in the big city because the empowered want that to be life in the big city.
From oppressed / enslaved parents or parent (these days if present and care enough to attempt to guide their offspring) as well as the non-caring / perhaps even oppressive / brainwashed educators empowered by the political machine in place.
Or maybe they just don't recognize it / recognize the dangerous ramifications it's bent on delivering.