In every interview I've seen, his answers have been choppy and disjointed. Now it's possible that I missed the good ones. But it's also very unlikely. A knock-it-out-the-park performance would have made news.
I guess we weren't watching the same debates. Yes he got limited time, but the time he did get he didn't use effectively. Whoever did his debate prep did a horrible job. The questions were hardly unexpected and Carson should have been ready to give the perfect answer - an answer that had been honed and refined and had the unnecessary whittled away until only the pure essence remained. Instead we got rambling answers... delivered... in a slow... stunted... choppy... manner... from someone... half... asleep.
I have no problem with people "outside the beltway" coming into politics because the people inside the beltway are, by and large, horrible. Now, as to the things you claim qualify him, I'll address them slightly out of order.
You say that his ideas qualify him. What ideas are those? I can't think of any, other than the principle of taxing based on the principle of tithing. Seriously. That's all I can think of, and it's a horrible idea. Name one policy idea that Carson has that's literally knock-your-socks-off great.
You say his temperament qualifies him. What temperant? Was he supposed to project "steady, careful and deliberate"? He doesn't need to have "ferret on double cappucino" levels of energy, and it's great to see someone who's in control of their emotions, but he came across as borderline comatose.
You talk about his successful career and his intelligence. Certainly Ben Carson was successful at his chosen profession which isn't easy, but he's hardly an intellectual giant, or someone whose success is unfathomable. If all it takes to become President is to have a successful career and be moderately smart then is Ben Carson the best we can do?
As for his integrity, I have no beef with Dr. Carson on this issue. I don't know him first hand, but I have no reason to doubt his sincerity and honesty. While those are both laudable attributes, they don't serve politicians - or those who seek to become politicians - well.
In my opinion, Ben Carson was poorly qualified to even run for President, let alone become President. And, for whatever it's worth, it's an opinion that the majority of those who voted so far seem to share.
Yes we have a different take on his debate performances. I didn't say he had a "knock-it-out-the-park performance." He did a good job.
I like his ideas about the size and role of government, his attempt to give more power to people instead of the power brokers in D.C., his tax ideas, etc. And I have no problem with a flat tax. Who cares if he got the idea from tithing? Big deal. It's still sound. Plenty of candidates push a flat tax.
His temperament is great. He doesn't get rattled. He doesn't get down in the mud and lose his cool. He always sounds like he is under control. You may not think those qualities are important. I do. Especially for a leader.
Overall, keep in mind he was drafted to run for office. He came into this process with zero political experience, very little name recognition (despite being one of the most successful neurosurgeons in world history), and made himself a presidential contender in a matter of months. He had a steep learning curve and did pretty darn well when you put things in context IMO.
I don't know what he plans to do going forward, but he should stay involved. We need people like him, particularly people of integrity.
