One of Donald Trump’s greatest advantages is that as a national political figure he is pretty much an unknown. In comparison Hillary has been front and center in the national consciousness for a quarter century. We already know her, and our views – pro or con – are fixed.

Not so with Donald Trump, and hence the tremendous opportunity he has in using the coming five months of open-field-politicking to guide us to reach conclusions about what kind of presidential leadership he will provide. Much like the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania, Trump is essentially a “tabula rasa”, a clean slate onto which supporters and opponents can project their own conclusions. He does not have a status as a political figure other than what he tells us about himself and what we project onto him.

To call him mercurial in that context is an understatement at the very least. I heard a quip that summarizes this conundrum, “There are two sides to every issue, and Trump is on all three.” True or not it summarizes the concerns about perceptions of him that even most of his supporters acknowledge even as they are overlooking them.

Examples of this commence at the inception of his ongoing meteoric rise. While he rails continuously, and correctly, against corrupt politics, at the speech announcing his candidacy he cited as the main catalyst for entering the fray was his frustration that in essence all the politicians he had been bribing would not stay bribed once they got to Washington, and it was time for him to get hands-on. So at least in this matter he can indeed speak about political corruption from a first-hand perspective. Whether there is a difference being the briber or the bribee may determine in part his performance against Hillary.

The beauty and benefit of the coming five months is that Trump will have the field to himself, so we can get a very good idea about what kind of president he will make based on the things he says and does prior to the election. Frankly, no one will be noticing Hillary except in response to his condemnations of her. The media knows every exposure reduces her support. No, the discussion will be All Trump All The Time. I’m not talking primarily about the hand-wringing over Trump’s temperament – one man’s alpha male is another man’s bully -- but rather trying to read meaning into the things Trump does and the content of what he says.

In that regard the unfolding of the campaign machinations will be revealing as Trump will be 100% in charge of every aspect moving forward. I do not mean the screwups by underlings, that is simply part of the equation. I mean the serious things like the vision he projects for his presidency, the effectiveness of crafting his vision to the voters, the people he draws into his circle of advisors, the control over the RNC and the convention and platform, etc. While Trump’s loyal supporters will insist that all of these associations will show subservience to Trump rather than Trump being assimilated into the establishment, which is true?

The issue that catapulted Trump to prominence was invasion and border security, and he backed that up with the inclusion of Sen. Jeff Sessions on his team. More recently he named Art Laffer, Steve Moore, and Larry Kudlow as his economic advisors. (Full disclosure: Mr. Moore has been a friend of mine for three decades) Hmmm, if I recall correctly these three are all enthusiastic open borders advocates. 

Does this mean anything?

He identifies himself a pro-life pro-Constitution conservative, and backs that up with an impressive list of possible judicial nominees that no conservative could find fault with. Overlay that with his continued pronouncements on behalf of Planned Parenthood, his denunciation of Kim Davis, his confusion over bathrooms and gender, and that neither religious liberty nor the U.S. Constitution has any meaningful overt presence in his campaign.

Does this mean anything?

Since Trump has the nomination locked up, the campaign, convention, and the party platform are entirely under his control. Recognizing the truth of the old adage that, “In politics, personnel IS policy,” it is worth noting the people who will lead these efforts. The Platform Committee Chairman is Sen. John Barasso of Wyoming, one of the most pro-UN Republicans in the U.S. Senate, and the co-chair being Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallon, who just vetoed rigorous anti-abortion legislature in the most conservative state in the Republic. Who else is taking roles of prominence in the convention and campaign?

Does this mean anything?

These issues and many others will inform the voters over the next five months, they are the only hints we may get about a Trump administration. Answered rightly they might suggest his could be the greatest presidency in history. Answered wrongly, we may find ourselves longing for the good old days of Barack Obama.