Thursday, July 12, 2007
|
|
Time for Fred! to Get In The Game
|
|
Posted by:
Dean Barnett at
4:53 PM
|
First off, I’m sorry for being absent from the festivities the past 48 hours. I was working on three (count ‘em – three!) rather large projects that all wrapped up today. Besides, today is the last day of my 30’s, and I’ve been trying to figure out if the McCain campaign would finally euthanize itself tomorrow as a 40th birthday present for me. If my beloved dog Stinky were limping around in such hopeless agony…well, I’d do what I had to do.
But I’ve not come here to pile on the McCain campaign or to observe how I’m already missing his gay sweaters. I’ve received a few threatening letters that if he pulls a Lieberman on us, people will look to me as a scapegoat. I want none of that action. Actually, I’ve come here to discuss something that will probably anger people even more – Fred! But first, the ritual disclaimer – I’m an avowed Romney supporter, but what follows is how I really see it.
This week, Fred’s non-campaign made a seamless transition from smooth to bumpy, and his team has looked decidedly not-ready-for-primetime. The story about who he represented as a lawyer and lobbyist resonates. The dodge that lawyers/lobbyists don’t need to share the views of their clients and shouldn’t be held responsible for them is a pile of hooey. Each lawyer, like every other member of society, is the conservator of his own talent. If a lawyer chooses to use his talents to try to spring Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, perhaps other lawyers will salute him and see nothing wrong with the effort. But I know and you know that said lawyer wouldn’t have much of a political career in front of him.
If I were a general contractor and profited from building a Planned Parenthood facility, I don’t imagine that fact would endear me to America’s conservative community. If I sought office as a conservative Republican, I would expect my primary opponent to make an issue of it. Lawyers want to play by a different set of rules, and in the eyes of their fellow members of the Bar, they do. But the rest of the country won’t buy it, nor should they.
If you read Thompson’s much-discussed essay on Powerline, you’ll see that Fred is hiding the ball. Why doesn’t he just come out with his client roster, or at least directly answer whether he lobbied for an abortion rights group? Regarding this alleged lobbying, Allah theorizes that “he’s trying to pull a straddle, where he denies that he lobbied for the group but then doth protest too much about how lawyers and lobbyists represent all sorts of people they don’t agree with.”
Fred’s essay is also noteworthy for its style. He offers a tribute to American icons John Adams and Abraham Lincoln, who also coincidentally were lawyers who took unpopular positions. I guess the only difference between them and Fred is that John Adams proudly admitted representing the British soldiers accused of the Boston Massacre, where Thompson’s essay is oddly non-committal on the parallel question.
LAST NIGHT I HAD DINNER WITH AN EAGER YOUNG MAN who is sure that Thompson is going to be the next president. I tried gently telling him that there’s a good chance 2008 will be a bloodbath for Republicans and whoever our nominee is, he’ll face an uphill if not impossible struggle. I then added that while Fred is the frontrunner right now, we have no idea what kind of candidate he’ll make. He responded by saying, “Did you see that Michael Moore video?!!!”
If you’re a Thompson supporter, the past news cycle has brought some bad news. The Thompson campaign (or whatever it is at this point) is proving itself less than nimble. In terms of message delivery and control, Fred and his team are roughly where Rudy and Mitt were when they blundered their way through the winter. In terms of Fred’s fundraising, the last thing we heard was six weeks ago when his “Founders” were going to raise $4.5 million overnight. Until yesterday. Then we heard,
“Initially, reports suggested that Thompson’s goal was to raise close to $5 million in the first month. Later, campaign staffers said the goal had always been $2 million in the first month, and they said that had been exceeded.”
But even more disconcerting is the news that Fred’s going to delay entering the race until September. If I didn’t know better, I would say the Thompson campaign thinks that he can get the nomination by running out the clock and relying on eager dorko-fanboys to keep saying, “Did you see that Michael Moore video?!!!”
As usual, to preempt the angry line of commenters now cueing up, let me assert that I like Fred. If he’s the nominee, I’ll support him enthusiastically. But his “campaign” is doing neither himself nor his party any favors. It’s time he enters the ring and proves that he can play on this level. It’s only fair that he allows Republican Party members to make an informed decision about the man who seeks to lead them.
Folksy blog posts are nice. But the country and the party deserve more.
Compliments? Complaints? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com.
|
|
At the moment the schedule does favor both Rudy and Romney. Romney will have the money to go head to head with Rudy where ever he wants to.
It is one thing to poll well it is another to have the ground attack to get your poll numbers turned into votes.
On average only 23 % of registered voters actually vote on Super T. Currently about 90% of registered voters are claiming that they are likely to vote.
You can be leading the polls and run 3rd if you do not have a strong GOTV in each state.
It would be very unwise to underestimate Romney. He is spending money but he is also putting in the GOTV that he needs to win. If he comes up another 10 points in SC and FL by Jan. he will be very dangerous.
Fred is a big question mark. How much money does he need to raise? How much organization will he have to have and in what states? Is he really competitive outside of the South? Will Gingrich get in and undercut his Southern strategy? |
|
|
Nice analysis on Fred and the Republicans. If the primaries were on the old schedule I think Rudy wouldn't have a chance but with the super Tuesdays and tighter schedule it plays to his favor. No guarantees just positions him better than a run in previous years would have. |
|
Actually Dem Set I tend to agree with the idea that the Reps will not be able to use a rev up the base approach. The Dems will already have their base reved and they seem to have a majority of the Independents.
Based on current party registrations, it will be necessary in the general for the Rep candidate to hold most of the base and be able to reach about 60+ % of the independents.
In the previous post, am saying that it is feasible for the Reps to win. It is not as bad as it currently looks.
However, I do not think that the Reps can win with a rev up the base approach this year.
About the only thing that could change that would be a terrorist attack. However, the Dems would blame Bush for not protecting the country and putting to many resources into Iraq. I doubt if even a terror attack would allow a rev up the base approach for the Reps.
I do not view Thompson as a viable general candidate at this point. He may wow Fredheads but in the general he has the following fatal flaws.
1. He is a Southern white Protestant like Bush.
2. He looks older than dirt on TV.
3. He has a monumental gender gap that will not fix.
4. He spent years as a hired gun on K street with tons of dirt to mine.
5. There is no evidence that he is an effective executive. He can't even decide if he is running.
|
|
Only Fred knows for sure why he won't commit. However, the dynamics of the race have changed since immigration.
To a large extent the RunFredRun phenomena was driven by Southern ministers who wanted a Southern Protestant candidate who would defeat Rudy and block Romney.
However, partly due to immigration the Fred campaign has killed off McCain. Rudy is still leading in most polls and Romney has proven to be resilient.
Some in the Fred campaign thought that all Fred had to do is say virtual campaign and he would immediately take the lead, save the Party from the Yankees and country waltz into the nomination.
It is becoming obvious that Fred will have to run a very vigorous demanding traditional campaign if he wants to even come close to the original goals of defeating Rudy and Romney. The campaign has not gone as some had hoped and requires a lot more energy and effort from Fred.
It is far better that Fred delay than to do a Perot. Perot got in, blocked Bush 41, got out, and then decided to jump back in to insure Clinton's victory.
Is Fred a serious candidate or is he a Trojan horse? Whoever wins this is going to have to give every ounce of effort, time and money that they have to win the nomination. There will be no virtual gifts. The general will be even more demanding. |
|
I disagree with you about the Republican chances. In my view the base has insisted so much on pushing aside the moderates that many feel little if any loyalty to the party anymore.
The current push to force a non-declaring candidate onto the rest of the party as the "chosen one" is turning off more people than the base realizes.
I agree about the advantages to Newt but as you pointed it, for him it would be "all about Newt" and little else. |
|
Like Thompson Gingrich has nothing to lose and everything to gain by getting in and/or flirting to get in.
If Thompson never gets in, he had made the asking price for his next movie jump by millions. He has gotten a ton of free publicity. It has cost him nothing so far. He is burning contributions while he explores getting in and at the same time gives himself millions worth of free pub. I don't blame him. He would be dumb not to flirt.
Gingrich is in the same position. If he gets in he can lay the ground work for his next 4 books and hype his current ones. |
|
I do not think that Newt will win. If he gets in it will be so that he can raise the issues that he wants in the platform. He may also get in to protect his influence in the party if there is a brokered convention.
Newt does not have to run to win. He would take it if he could get it or VP but he needs to shape the debate and that is hard from the sidelines. It would help his stature in the party and his ego and be worth a ton of book money if he got some delegates and raised important issues.
One more important observation. Right now things look bleak for the Rep Party. The numbers do not look good. Party registration is down and many MSM polls show a strong disadvantage to the Dems.
Don't buy into the doom and defeat beat.
I have been looking at the sampling of many of the MSM polls. Even when they use LV screens they tend to way over represent 30 and younger voters. Those voters show up in the polls in much larger numbers than they actually vote. That age group leans heavily to Dem and Independent. It is one of the reasons why the polls reflect the extreme anti war sentiment and also so many Dem leaning Independents.
As we get close to the election the likely voter screen will tighten. |
|
I think Fred should have announced by mid July.It could be said that it appears he is afraid of the scrutiny.I'll admit that the wait has caused some loss of excitement for me.
Hope he doesn't wait too late. |
|
|
If Newt jumps in and gets nominated Hillary will win in a landslide and rightfully claim a "mandate". Newt needs to stay as far away from running as possible. Radioactive. |
|
Dorko Fanboys!! Love it and it fits so perfectly to the many rabid Fred! defenders.
"He sounds presidential, Arthur Branch rocks, Next Reagan, wife is a hottie, he is a stud...."
but not a clue as to how he really stands on the issues let alone how he will match up with someone in an unscripted encounter. |
|
1. Romney and Rudy are tied in the insider poll. Fred is an insider and they know him best but are not supporting him. They must know something that the rest of us don't.
2. It just occurred to me that if McCain's national poll numbers come down another 5 points or so (likely in a week or two) and especially if Fred starts to droop, Gingrich is much more likely to decide that he should enter.
Gingrich can base his decision at least partly on the demise of McCain instead of just on how well Fred is doing. McCain's demise provides an opening for Gingrich. |
|
full of bs yes---that's what you would like to believe--but reality will smack you in the face real soon! Most of what you state is hearsay--you have no way of corraborating any of the garbage you spew, --so please sit back and watch the world go by,and FRED will be your esteemed Leader in a strong USA.
Need info? go to:www.imwithfred.com
http://www.FredHeadsUSA.com |
|
|
....for the best performance ever in the non-candidate for president division! Wake up everyone--Fred is just yanking your chain. Fat, bald wheezy Fred loves looking presidential, but he lacks that fire in his belly to just go for it already. If he can't make up his mind about running for president, I cringe at the thought of what would happen if he actually became president. Aren't you all tired of being played for suckers? |
|
|
|
|
|
Most of you have lost your patients, somewhat like the Dem's on Iraq. This is Fred's race - so let him run it or not. We sideliners can only sit back and see what happens. I don't confess to know all the ends and outs of turning your life (and your family) upside down and start having a million knives thrown at you but I can only assume that it's not like deciding do I cut the grass today or tomorrow.
So - kick back your jets and lets see what happens.
Side Note for Dean - from where I sit the 08 race have yet to be decided. Nancy, Hill, Harry, John, Ted and Dick have plenty of time to keep sticking their foot in their big mouths. |
|
As I recall Fred did say it was bad taste to declare on the 4th but he was pretty definite about declaring slightly after that. I have no problem with him postponing, but then I am not a Fredhead. It may be a good strategy against Gingrich. It may also back fire.
If do feel it will cause a lot of people to turn away. It turns the Rah Rah Run Fred Run into some serious contemplation of actual capability.
I do not think I would call Fred the front runner. He is second in most polls and only slighly ahead of McCain in the realclearpolitics averages. He also lags Rudy in the betting.
Fred has had a good run, the real question is how much of it will hold up without a real campaign to solidify the gains.
I would really like to know if his fund raising is as bad as the rumors say it is. He is going to have to go $ for $ with Rudy and Romney. Unless you implode like McCain all of the cumulative $ that you have spent helps you get votes in Jan. |
|
1. The July 4th announcement was a rumor started by Fred supports that thought that would be cool and it spread like wildfire.
2. Fred is not coming into the race late, the others started earlier than usual. He is actually being very smart about when he enters the face. Look at McCain, he entered early and now he is out of money and he is out of staff members.
3. The agenda or minutes that keep getting referred to as proof are not proof as all they say are Fred Thompson, Esq. No middle initial, no mention of affliated law office, nothing to substaniate that it was Fred Dalton Thompson.
4. Fred had believes Roe v. Wadge should be overturned because any abortion laws created should be on a state level. This is because he is a Federalist.
5. Fred is the front runner in the legit polls even with the liberal MSM attacking him. Remember the old adage, just a book by its cover. That is how everyone should be viewing the NY Times.
6. And, lastly if it is proven that Fred did lobby for the NFPRHA, that was 16-17 years ago and guess what people change their minds about things. Even if he was pro-choice in the past, that does not mean he cannot be pro-life now. |
|
Hey old kid--- I was appalled to see what you wrote under Hugh Hewitt's by-line--OK with me if you fly away or another 48 hours or more: I found your article to be a rather unabashed travesty of truth and I do believe you WIN the "SNIDE TRASH PRIZE" for the week! A bit of a 'hatchet boy maybe', yes?
For truth and reality, so you don't get so far offside in future good journalism ventures,
please go to: http://www.imwithfred.com Good luck! |
|
Dean,
I have generally enjoyed and sometimes agreed with your comments but you should be careful--you're beginning to sound a lot older than forty.
Happy birthday!
FWL |
|
|
Romney was staunchly pro-choice is what I meant to say. |
|
...than FlipFlop Mitt.
I see this article as another example of the obnoxiousness typical of Flipper Mitt$ supporters.
You'd have us believe that a lawyer can only be expected to represent those he agrees with? We're to assume that all criminal defense attorneys are pro-criminal? Ridiculous.
The lobbying story was a hit piece shy on details on heavy on innuendo- it was some 16 years ago, and we don't really know what Thompson's involvement was- the man who was to be lobbied denies it happened the way the Hillary supporters quoted in the story said it did.
What we do know is that as governor, Romney was not staunchly pro-choice and went so far as to argue against Roe v Wade (one of the most poorly reasoned decisions of modern times) being overturned. Of course that was pre-presidential campaign Mitt, not the new and reinvented version. This is but one of the issues Mitt has done a 180 on- reliable conservative he most certainly isn't.
Oh, and your suggestion that Fred's supporters can cite little more than the Micheal Moore video is ridiculous and beneath you. I'll chalk it up to desperation. |
|
"...does anyone really believe mainstream America will consider a moonbat socialist with the threat of radical islam hanging over us. "
You would definitely think America wouldn't do that, but I have been wrong before. However, that is no reason to despair. We need to move forward with cautious optimism. |
|
whether it's Fred or Mitt or Rudy or Newt or even Duncan or Mike Huckabee...we have a vastly superior group of candidates to evaluate & choose from compared to the moonbat liberal characatures; hollow, handled & protected from any serious or confrontational questioning. Puzzling that this is the best they have to offer after craving the white house so desperately for 8 years; oh wait there's got mr. occidental petroleum green jeans waiting in the wings...to save America & the planet...does anyone really believe mainstream America will consider a moonbat socialist with the threat of radical islam hanging over us.
|
|
|
I can tell by all the crying that Fred is doing just fine and all those that support anyone else is having fits trying to denegrate Fred. For Dean to think, and write, that the Dems have the race almost won already, is foolish at best and idiotic most probably. The Dems have Hitlary as the front runner and she is unelectable. Obama has yet to say anything, althought that does not preclude him from winning. Edwards is toast just like McCain, Kucinich, Brownback, T. Thompson, Paul and probalby Hunter. Although, I think that whoever is the Rep nominee, he could do no better than to have Hunter as the VP candidate. |
|
"james
Your a, b, c, d, 5 list missed one:
VI: He's winning without "entering," so where's the rush to "enter"?
Right, he's "winning" in that "new environment" inhabited by Fredheads only. See a above.
|
|
The latest RAS poll is out and Thompson is down from his peak of two weeks ago and tied with Rudy. The new insider poll has Rudy tied with Romney.
At this point in spite of all of the Thompson hype I feel that Rudy is in the strongest position. It also would be very foolish to discount Romney and his slingshot strategy.
Time will tell on Thompson but he needs a real campaign to deal with the negative press he is getting and going to get.
A lot of sizzle is going out of the Thompson campaign as he delays his announcement to Sept and dodges an important debate. He has written off IA already. He will not win NH. He will probably not win FL. SC is up in the air.
We have a long way to go. The big questions are: will Newt get in? & Which campaigns will make major mistakes between now and Jan? |
|
Your a, b, c, d, 5 list missed one:
VI: He's winning without "entering," so where's the rush to "enter"? |
|
a--as suggested above, he's "cagey, showing how to run a campaign in a completely new environment" (ie, the new environment where nominees are chosen without answering questions, engaging adversaries in debates or advocating for any position beyond Mom and Apple Pie--snicker--sorry);
b--he's having some organizational difficulties;
c--the money ain't exactly poring in, and the longer he can postpone disclosing what he has raised, the better;
d--he's still waiting for the results of those polls his non-campaign commissioned; and
5--he really hates debates, speeches and answering questions live and in person.
These are the reasons that occur to me.
|
|
McCain, Mitt, Fred, Mitt, Fred, Fred, Fred. Come on. The story is, has, and will be in the future Rudy. Even the minor bumps Fred experienced seem to have benefited only Rudy. Check out the most recent intrade quotes. Fred has gone from a slight lead over Rudy to a slight deficit. Meanwhile McCain continues to “crater,” and Romney is in the mid-teens and declining steadily.
Dean Barnett not being impressed by Fred’s much-quoted Powerline essay means a lot to Dean Barnett. But as a political commentator, Dean, you should probably acknowledge that whether you personally find its arguments compelling is irrelevant given the fact that the great majority of those who have read it seem to have.
There are some real stretches. Fred is as much of an abortionist as Mitt is a pornographer. Only’s Mitt’s most clueless critics thought that the fact that Marriott offered PPV porn made Mitt into Larry Flynt. Trying to link Fred’s personal views to those of each of his clients is similarly feeble.
Dean, does it occur to you that several of your Fred shortcomings will resolve each other? Yes, his “non campaign” has been less than nimble in responding to attack, and yes, he hasn’t entered yet. But obviously when he does enter and have an actual campaign up and running, it will be more responsive than his nonexistent current campaign is.
Jeff, we have been in a cycle of electing governors for the last quarter of the 20th century and the beginning of this one. Before that, we were in a cycle of electing senators. You say that senators rarely make “good” presidents. No, that’s not it: In the past 35 years, senators had trouble being elected president at all. But that can change. Red may have come up at the wheel more often than black recently, but black will have another spin.
As for the effectiveness of gubernatorial presidents, well, you have Reagan. Then you have Clinton, Bush, and Carter. It’s hardly an unblemished record of success. The senators include FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, and Nixon. Some controversial names in there, but also some highly popular ones. Are you going to claim that Carter was better than Truman or the pre-Watergate Nixon? Or that W and Bill are as well-regarded as FDR?
Laura is right: Thompson is winning. Why does he have to prove to Rudy’s or Mitt’s supporters that he knows how to play the game? Winning needs no excuses. Fred has exactly as much experience running for prez as Rudy and Mitt have. The only one he trails is McCain (whom Rudy and Mitt also trail), which shows how valueless actually entering the race or races is in itself.
BG, that’s pretty weak. Of course his rate of increase in the polls has leveled off. He’s gone from nowhere to 25%. He’s not going to keep increasing his share of support by a factor of infinity every six months! If you want to call leveling out at 25 going flat, what would you call leveling at out 11 like Mitt, or dropping from 25 to 10 like McCain, or leveling out at 27 like Rudy?
And that’s a pretty sleazy allegation to make based on nothing: he’s delaying entry until September because there are a lot of skeletons in his closet? In what universe would that even make sense? Hey, maybe Roger Clemens delays signing until June every year because he spends April and May selling crack to schoolchildren. Makes sense to me.
Not a single voter in South Carolina gives a damn what Iowa does. If Iowa votes for the national frontrunner and future nominee, Rudy, the rest of us will “follow.” If Tancredo or Romney or Paul spends $20 million to eke out a close Iowa win, the rest of us aren’t all going to mindlessly follow the lead of 10,000 Iowa Caucus voters.
BarrySanders20 offered great common-sense advice: “What's the Hurry? Fred's just doing it a bit different is all. Anyone who is paying atention now is a junky, and we all know he's in.” |
|
Time will tell. However, Romney's slingshot strategy is the right one for him. Thompson will try a Southern not a national strategy. He lacks organization and money at this point. That may or may not change in the future.
He already stated he could and would not run a conventional campaign as it was already to late to do that. You are stuck with the pluses and minuses of a virtual campaign with some selected appearances. If the press does not bash you that works well. However, the press is thur playing nice.
Those of us who know political history know that the sling shot approach has a powerful effect on later states. If you win both IA and NH you have always won. That may or may not hold in 2008 but there will be a powerful effect. Romney needs about 25 % in key state polls and a good ground game to win. He also will have the money he needs to compete on super T. If he figures out how to get his numbers up to 20 in SC or FL he is going to be difficult to stop. |
|
"Fred has gone flat in the polls and the odds. He has upside potential due to the demise of McCain but his Gallup numbers are the same as they were in June."
Priceless! This idiotic comment comes from a supporter of the candidate who flashes up an "impressive" NINE PERCENT in yesterday's Gallup poll after spending 35-40 million over the last 7 months.
Let's say it again, NINE PERCENT.
Fred's doing just fine when compared to Weird Willard. |
|
.....the frustrated, the disaffected, conservative whose place you will find under the bus, (Thrown there by the GOP) is/am growing damn tired of the "game" of presidential politics.
PleaserunfredPleaserunfredPleaserunfred
Please! As my Grandma used to say s^&t or get off the pot!
The suspense is disgusting me! (and should be embarrassing for you!)
|
|
Time has a new poll out.
Overall Romney is viewed as the most religious candidate in both parties by 26 %, (23% Dems and 32% Reps). Obama is second at 24 %. McCain, Gingrich, Hillary and Rudy are at 15 % or less. Romney is viewed as about twice as religious as the other candidates by Reps.
I down loaded 393 pages of cross tabs. When I get time I will mine it for details. |
|
Fred has gone flat in the polls and the odds. He has upside potential due to the demise of McCain but his Gallup numbers are the same as they were in June.
Fred may be delaying his official announcement due to poor fund raising but I doubt that. He should be able to raise 5 mil with little trouble given his poll numbers.
I do not buy the lame excuse that they need to build a full staff before they officially announce. He is already in full campaign mode.
Delaying the official announcement has dangers that most campaigns would not risk unless there is a compelling reason.
Fred has been hit with a lot of dirt this week. Trying to combat that with a virtual campaign will not cut it.
One reason that Fred may delay committing is simple. Maybe he knows that there is a lot more damaging mud out there and he would like it to surface (and see how damaging it is) before he makes a final commitment.
I hope he delays until Sept. The longer he delays the harder it is going to be to reverse the damage. There is an S curve to the damage. It will have a cumulative effect. At first it will be a slow droop and then all of a sudden it will kick in with a vengeance. |
|
...my favorite blogger. If only everyone else out there had half the common sense you do.
Now, Fred is waiting unti September? There's an old saying: either poop or get off the pot. |
|
i am convinced now that he has backed up is announcement date for month after month that this shows only weakness. why else would he not get in. at least he media is beginning to treat him like a candidate.
it makes me think he really is not ready to handle the heat. we are all WAITING to see how he is as a CANDIDATE, not the perverbial "savior of all the unhappy republicans" myth that media has run with for months now. but by him continuing to not get it, by avoiding the august 5th debate, by avoiding the ames straw poll, by avoding letting his campaign cash numbers out, i am beginning to think he has something to hide.
although, i may be overloocking hte claim that he is just plain lazy and wants to skirt by with as little as possible for as long as possible in case he doesn't end up winning anway. this seems quite likely. maybe he is running for vp.
he is so uninspiring to me. how can people be so excited about him when he won't even proof himself? i think he avoided teh debate becuase he didn't want it ot be in the spotlight about his shifting abortion stance just like romney and guliani both had to go through. this guy wants to be president. what happens when the liberal media and the dems start harping on him if he is pres, will he run away then too?
uninspiring I tell you.
he is my second choice however. I don't think guliani will end up with the nomination. his skip the first states and go for the big ones approach will backfire just as it almost always does. |
|
|
make the worst leaders. Oh wait. |
|
It's hard for Fred to jump from playing someone who exudes leadership to actually being a real-life leader - he's not and never has been.
He may be fun to listen to, but right now he is not communicating very well, he is stammering, he seems uncertain of what he wants to say, and he is less than enthusiastic. Not to mention the fact that he does look old and worn. Reagan was old, but full of life for the things he believed in.
He does not want to overturn Roe and has a murky pro-life history.
He may be on the right side of most issues now, but he's not convincing me that he is the man to deliver the conservative message. He was a lobbyist for 20 years. His conservative credentials are questionable, he was not a champion of anything in the Senate except for McCain-Feingold!
And he thinks it's fine to take people's money and support without doing one thing. Kind of re-inforces his lazy reputation. |
|
Laura,
I agree, it is impressive that he has moved so far up the ladder without formally being in the campaign, and without spending a lot of money. However, if he's going to run, I think it's time for him to join the fray.
Jim C |
|
|
Fred's best attributes seem to be that he is delaying getting in (people seem to like a rebel) and that he can raise campaign cash without officially announcing. I'm impressed! |
|
He's has a very likable persona, but beyond that he's an empty suit. Come on people! How do any of you know he would make a good president?
Make your case for him. I'm waiting. |
|
"It’s time he enters the ring and proves that he can play on this level."
I think he's already done exactly that, being cagey and showing how to run a campaign in a completely new media environment.
I think it's nuts that the campaign has started so early this year and frankly find it refreshing that Thompson is communicating with the base and moving on up in the polls without wasting a lot of campaign money. Frankly that appeals to this fiscal conservative. :)
Best wishes,
Laura |
|
Actually, I do like Mitt and know he'd make a great president. I like Fred a little better and know he'd make a great president too. As would Rudi but I like Rudi a little less than the first two guys.
However, our cup runneth over, perhaps, or it just might seem a bit full. Fred needs to really get into the race if he's serious about running and then go like heck. It would be good for our side if those front leading three had a real debate and not one of those MSM candystore displays.
But, the real issue now is for Fred to openly declare his candidancy now and not next June or July. If Fred does fail to move forward, well then, Mitt has made a good pickup of support or perhaps Rudi has.
|
|
He's got Mary Matalin advising him. Stick a fork in him. Fred's dead.
Chppsing Mary Matalin as an advisor? Fred's dumber than I thought. |
|
|
I don't think that who Thompson represented as an attorney is an issue either. The only thing from his law career that could matter are possible ethical violations, and I am not aware of any. |
|
Keep talking. Fred(!) has done fine so far. If he waits a while longer people won't care about what happened this week. That's how it works. You guys sound miffed that a guy who has "Aw shucked" his way into the lead without spending much moolah is not playing by your rules. When did we start campaigning 2 1/2 years before the election?
I don't even care if Fred(!) wins the nomination. I am just enjoying the fact that he is not following the herd. And now that I mention it, I think there was another guy who "Aw Shucked" his way into the White House, who few people had heard of, and who had little executive experience, unless you call goofing around in Little Rock, executive experience. |
|
...doesn't matter to my candidate, but it does matter to the primary. I want Romney, but I also want a deep bench of Republicans that are organized and ready to go in the event that my man doesn't get the nomination.
Regardless of the timing, Thompson is going to have to go through the learning curve: the goofs, the gaffes, and otherwise get his campaign in battle mode for the Democrats. The sooner he does that, the more time he'll have to tweek with things before one of the Republicans go into high gear with the Democrats. I want whomever gets the nomination to be a well-oiled machine.
Another point: Republicans should remember the golden rule in the primaries. The nominee is going to need the support of those whose candidate didn't win the primary. One day, quite a few of us will be shoulder to shoulder. Who we once supported will not matter that much at that point. |
|
look we all make mistakes (particularly about long ago occurrences) but I heard FT yesterday on Sean's show ... he was "extending the truth" or just confused. It is never the crime but the cover-up.
Hannity questioned him about a recent Los Angeles Times story alleging that he lobbied the George H.W. Bush administration on behalf of a pro-choice group, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn. Previously through his spokesman, Mark Corallo, Thompson intitially denied ever lobbying for the group...When informed there were written board minutes of the group which appeared to confirm engagement of Thompson as its counsel, Corallo indicated that Thompson had no recollection of the lobbying effort. In his interview with Hannity yesterday, Thompson at first distinguished between a lawyer and his client, contending he represented many types of clients in his 35 years of law practice. Then he made this statement: "I called Sununu. I said 'You remember this?' He said 'No.' And that was the end of that." Contacted last night Corallo denied, despite Thompson's on air comments, that Thompson had called Sununu to compare memory and/or question Sununu's recollection. Corallo did not respond when pressed as to what Thompson then meant by his remark to Hannity. Corallo did confirm that Thompson denied lobbying Sununu or for that matter anyone at the White House.
Thompson can't have it both ways here. He can't have not called Sununu and called him at the same time. He can't be a principled leader and have been willing to espouse any client's policy preference for pay at the same time. This story is moving into very dangerous territory for Thompson. He'd do well to set the record straight, quickly.
FT and his team are far from compelling organizationally.
|
|
I agree that Thompson's list of legal clients should be a non-issue, for reasons already given.
But he's made it an issue with his disingenuous "If I represented them, here's why" response. A straightforward "Yes, I represented them; here's why they were entitled to representation" would have actually scored some points with me if expressed well.
|
|
|
I agree with you 100%, and I too like Fred. I have narrowed my pick down to Fred or Mitt. This Fred non-campaign-campaign is what is turning me more toward Mitt. Fred is dodging the negative and hard hard work part of campaigning by manipulating us with a wink wink. A President can't do that. If the campaign is a job interview and we are evaluating his skill set, he is making a bad impression. |
|
|
I also meant to mention this fact, that most Thompson supporters gloss over: the man has not had one day of executive experience in his life. He was a senator, senators rarely make good presidents. At least Rudy and Mitt have been in charge of running something in their lives. |
|
Fred!'s non-campaign is getting downright obnoxious. Why can't he just announce already? He is already campaigning, everyone knows he is going to run, there is no reason for him not to jump in and just do the thing.
And the Michael Moore video, wow, that. was. awesome. I like how he dodged the question and gave a 5 second response. That totally shows that he could be the president. /sarcasm
The fact of the matter is that not everyone is "excited" by Fred!'s candidacy. To me he is just some old guy who was apparently on TV. Great. I can't wait.
All of the Thompson supporters are as irrational in their belief in Thompson as they claim Hugh and Dean are in their support for Romney. Let's try to get a grip people.
Oh, and happy birthday Dean. BTW, you are apparently famous now, you have your own Wikipedia page. |
|
Fred's just doing it a bit different is all. Anyone who is paying atention now is a junky, and we all know he's in. So he's more relaxed than most, but that's a quality that is endearing to a degree, If that lapses into lethargy, then we got a problem.
Have to disagree about lawyers and clients. This was a long time ago, and appears rather minor in terms of time, effort, and result.
|
|
That is the only thing I disagree with you on; as any contender on the left will be a lawyer. Hillary, Edwards, Obama are all lawyers. I agree that who you defend should not be an issue. As it is the constitutional right for everyone to receive legal counsel and be provided a rigorous defense. And, sometimes, when you do pro bono work it is the luck of the draw.
Just my opinion, but the lawyer issue is a non-issue. |
|
|
|