Politics- Fiorina v Trump

Background: So I am an amateur when it comes to politics, but over the past 3 years it has increasingly become all that I think about in my spare time. Over the past 2 months I have been following political leaders (particularly GOP presidential candidates) very closely. I spent a good two weeks in September researching each candidate on their policies. I want to be someone who votes on the issues, but I understand that there is more to picking the President than what a candidate says and believes.
There has been a lot of hoopla surrounding the candidacy of Donald J Trump. He tends to get people excited (either for him or against him). I see some of the things that his supporters like about him, but I'm not quite a fan. To be fair, Donald Trump comes in a solid 7^th on my personal list, at the bottom of the first half. I have no plans to vote for him in the primary, but I am not opposed to voting for him in the general election. I just think that there are plenty of candidates who offer great alternatives to Trump. There are several candidates who are far better than him in multiple ways. I am writing this post to draw attention to one of my favorites.

My Premise: Many candidates offer good alternatives to Trump. Fiorina is all the things that make Trump great, plus some.

First let's look at some similarities.

Both:

• Are outsiders- this seems to be the buzzword this election season. People really want someone who is not in the "political class". So much so that even political insiders like Sanders and Clinton must pretend that they are actually outsiders. Some say it's important to inject fresh blood into the political system, or rather have a total blood transfusion. Others would say that "outsider" is Latin for "inexperienced".
  I certainly believe that we should inject fresh blood into the system, but maybe they should be more tried before they run for politics. However, if we are going to pick an outsider, these two look like the best to me.
• Business leaders (with debatable success)- during the second debate Fiorina and Trump had a little contest over who was the best business leader. The jury is still out for me on who is better. Let's debate that in the comments! Their experience in business leadership are what make them the most viable outsider candidates.
• Excellent communicators- as someone who wants to make a career in public discourse, I have studied both of them, and admired their skill in communication. They have differences, which I will highlight later. Trump has his background in reality TV, and Fiorina in technology (the most important industry in our age). However, both have exhibited excellent skill in communicating their thoughts, and inspiring others.
• Think on their feet- I admire both of them and their ability to think on their feet. Trump is famous for boasting of not using a teleprompter, but Fiorina does the same thing: candid, "any question goes" interviews. My first exposure to Fiorina was on one such interview.
• Policies- When I look at my notes on their positions, I often find it difficult to find a distinction between them. Especially on the two issues that mean the most to me: abortion and the economy. Both seem to think we should compromise to push forward our pro-life agenda, and both have economic ideas that I agree and disagree with.

Trump does have a few strengths, which are what have put him ahead in the polls.

• He's a household name- Trump was a household name long before this election. If you are not following the election, there is still a chance you might not know about Fiorina, but there is little chance that you don't know Trump.
• Charismatic- Trump is simply a charismatic fellow. He obviously read Dale Carnegie's book. I think that Fiorina is a very charismatic figure, but apparently 30% of GOP voters think that Trump is more so.
• Simple rhetoric- the other thing that makes Trump appealing is his ability to speak the every man's language. Trump has been shown to talk at a third grade level. This does not mean that he has the intellect of a third grader, and isn't a necessarily a bad thing. It means that he can bring things down to the lowest common denominator. This is not a good or bad thing. However, none of these strengths I've listed for Trump are reasons to vote for him. Allow me to propose an alternative candidate.

Fiorina may not have Trump's three strengths, but she has other higher qualities. Here are the things that Fiorina has on Trump:

• Tact- A righteous person knows how to control what they say (James 3:2). This is more than me not liking Trump's personality quirk. He exhibits a lack of control in his speech. Not only can Fiorina think on her feet, talking without cue cards, but she exhibits an excellent amount of tact in doing so.
• Delegator- Both candidates, in fact all candidates, talk about all the things they promise to do. Fiorina, in contrast to Trump, is one of the few candidates that I have heard talk about inspiring others to do great things for our country. Rather than letting politicians do everything, we ought to talk about everyone getting involved. Leaders are supposed to inspire others to get involved in the work they are doing. Encourage everyone to contribute their ideas. Delegate work to others, and not micromanage. This is the exact opposite of what is happening in our political system today.
  This is Fiorina's greatest strength. For instance, she famously proposed using a text-polling system to see which issues were a priority to citizens. She talks more about wanting to inspire others than things she will do. I only hear Trump talk about what he will do.
• Policies- When I looked up their positions on the issues, there didn't seem to be much distinction between these candidates. On paper they both looked like moderate Republicans that were more liberal in the past. However, when you look at their campaign sites, Trump is focused on a few issues, but Fiorina is more well-rounded, tackling several issues. Which do you think is better, being well-rounded or focusing on a few issues. In the CNN debate she emphasized her pro-life stance, which I believe is the most important issue; and in this last debate she emphasized reducing government, which I believe is the second biggest issue. She also has a much better handle on foreign policy, due to her background as an advisor to the CIA (which I recently learned of).
• Finally, She's a Woman- No, really? OK, the gloves are off. Should we vote for Fiorina simply because she is a woman? NO! Just like we shouldn't vote for Hilary because she is a woman. In spite of this, Hilary is set to win, simply on the platform that she is a woman. The most strategic move for us would be to nominate a woman. Believe me, I would not be supporting this strategy if not for the things I said in the above three points.
  Hillary will run on the platform that she wants to be the first woman president. If we run Fiorina, that kind of steals Hillary's thunder. They might actually need to talk about policy. Hillary does not seem to be afraid of Carly, but she should be. Once you bypass the superficial points, Carly beats Hilary. Fiorina isn't the warmest Republican candidate, but she is far warmer than Clinton. She does an excellent job at representing conservatism, and if she can learn to bring it down to a third grade level like Trump, maybe she can do even better. Pitting Fiorina against Hillary is a long shot, a blood-bath even, but at least Hillary will not become President by calling for America to vote for a woman, and crying about how Donald Trump is simply bullying her.

So to recap: Fiorina is like Donald Trump, but with tact. She is more conservative on the issues, and she wants to inspire others to get involved.

What do you think? Who has the better business record? Is Trump better off for focusing on a few issues, or Fiorina for her being well-rounded? Who is your favorite candidate (of the two, or overall)? Comment below or tweet me @frank_perseo with your thoughts.