Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Steve Chapman :: Townhall.com Columnist
Fred Thompson's Boredom
by Steve Chapman
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The United States Senate has long been known as the World's Greatest Deliberative Body. Under the Constitution, it has a great deal of power and responsibility -- confirming judges, ambassadors and Cabinet officers, ratifying treaties and serving as a trial court in impeachment cases.

Lots of lower-level politicians would consider a term there the apex of a career. Plenty of youngsters with an interest in government dream of someday sitting in that exalted chamber. Several American statesmen with higher aspirations -- including Henry Clay, Robert Taft, Barry Goldwater and Ted Kennedy -- have found they could make history without ever leaving the Senate.

And then there is Fred Thompson, who saw it as a waste of his time. Back in 1998, only four years after being elected, he was out of patience. "I don't like spending 14- and 16-hour days voting on 'sense of the Senate' resolutions on irrelevant matters," he snorted. "There are some important things we really need to get on with -- and on a daily basis, it's very frustrating."

When his seat came up in 2002, the Tennessee Republican chose not to run again, which he now takes as a badge of honor. Asked recently by National Review to name his most important accomplishments in office, he replied, "You mean, besides leaving the Senate?"

It's a mystery why he ever sought the job. A former federal prosecutor, he had served as counsel to some Senate committees in the 1970s and 1980s, but in 1984, he passed up a chance to run for the seat held by his mentor, Republican Howard Baker of Tennessee. "The hassle factor is up," he complained, "and the pay is not."

Asked the following year if he might someday change his mind, he scoffed. In his younger days, he told People magazine, "I thought that standing on the Senate floor, engaging in a great debate and making a difference was the pinnacle of political activity. The more I've seen it, the less interested I am."

But for a while, he managed to overcome his sorrowful disillusion. In 1994, when a special election was called to fill the seat vacated by Al Gore, Thompson decided the Senate needed his talents, promised "a major shakeup to change the direction of our country" and came from behind to win.

On his arrival, the veteran actor was too famous to be just another senator. Barely a month after he was elected, he was asked to give the Republican response to President Clinton's address to the nation on the economy. When his party won control of the Senate, he became chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee. He led an investigation into Democratic fund-raising.

In 1999, he took part in only the second presidential impeachment trial in American history (voting to acquit Clinton of perjury but convict him on obstruction of justice). He even got a few bills passed.

All this would be enough to keep most people engaged. And after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Thompson said he'd run for re-election, because it was "not the time for me to leave." But before long, he concluded that the war on terrorism could be fought without his help.

Unlike Cincinnatus, he did not relinquish power to take up his plow, but rather to resume a lucrative career of lobbying and acting. Apparently, he found sitting through makeup sessions and waiting for his next take a more rewarding use of his time than voting on legislation.

Since he began toying with a presidential race, he has been accused of laziness. But no one who has made a living as a trial lawyer, as Thompson has, can be suspected of congenital sloth. In any event, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have proven that the presidency does not require a grueling work schedule.

The real question is whether Thompson really wants the office and all that comes with it for four long years. The Oval Office has its own quota of dull obligations -- attending state dinners, signing off on budgets, traveling to countries no tourist would ever choose, trying to remember the housing secretary's name -- which could be excruciating to someone with Thompson's low tolerance for tedium.

Americans, meanwhile, should wonder about entrusting the job to someone who has proven unable to sustain interest in the responsibilities that come with high federal office. In weighing his candidacy, they may find that the more they see of him, the less interested they are.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Steve Chapman is a columnist and editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Wow...what a hatchet job
Amazing. Could you attack a Republican front runner more unfairly and with less substance? I don't think so.

Not
I am not a Fredhead, but there a few things I like about Fred. One is that he actually does say what he thinks from time to time, like being frustrated in the Senate and finding all of the navel gazing boring.

However, I would like someone to explain how Clinton was not guilty of perjury? If Fred can't come to the conclusion that Clinton lied under oath when it was obvious to every person to the right of Kos, why should I trust Fred to make crucial decisions as Pres?

Perjury
I am not a Fredhead, but there a few things I like about Fred. One is that he actually does say what he thinks from time to time, like being frustrated in the Senate and finding all of the navel gazing boring.

However, I would like someone to explain how Clinton was not guilty of perjury? If Fred can't come to the conclusion that Clinton lied under oath when it was obvious to every person to the right of Kos, why should I trust Fred to make crucial decisions as Pres?

So what are we supposed to vote for?
The things I like about Senator Thompson is he can clearly explain the Difused and Divided clause of the constitution. Shoot, I've listen to Mayor Guilliani brag about how he used the constitution as a weapon against the people of NYC.

Being someone that believes firmly in the wisdom of the Second Amendment, Senator Thompson has never deviated. Mayor Guilliani filed laws suits and pushed the "assaults weapons ban (never mind assault weapons weren't banned, just the semi-auto versions were). Governor Romney has bragged about his gun laws in his state.

While Senator Thompson supported McCain-Feingold he has admitted on more than once that it was a mistake. Senator McCain never has and it gets worse (McCain-Kennedy Immigration Bill comes to mind).

Gov. Huckabee thinks that we should violate private property rights, even though in this nation we don't have to work where smoking occurs. As a matter of principle I can't vote for him.

While I agree with Senator Tancredo's Immigration stance, after he was saying the President has blood on his hands because he won't seal the border he lost any support I could give him. It's bad enough to listen to the MSM tell us how horrible the President is, I'm not going to support a Republican that slams the President in such an undignified way.

Anyone that blames the US for 9/11 won't EVER get my support...so much for Ron Paul.

My support of Senator Thompson is based on his Federalism, the seven RINO's and the Liberatarian don't really seam to fit what I believe in. While Senator Thompson may not be hyperactive in his running for office, he's THE only choice I can give my full support to. This article just seams too moveon for Townhall, but that's just my plug nickle.


Apex My Patootey
I can't be reading that Steve Chapman thinks a job in the ineffectual blowhard Senate is a prestigious job. I rank the 11 Percenters right above jihadists on the admirable careers list. Yeah, they have power and responsibility but they don't use those things effectively or efficiently. I could see a good person being disgusted with the way the Senate works and opting out in favor of another job.

VETS Pick Fred as their man
REGARDLESS of what these blowhards (like Champman) say, MILITARY VETERANS are signing up for Fred at:

http://Vets4Fred.net

No Rudy!
Did you get that? The Republican Party will not win with Rudy Guiliani. I won't vote for him and neither will a lot of other conservatives. We will vote for Fred, like it or not.

No Rudy!
The Republican Party will not win with Rudy Guiliani. I and a lot of other conservatives will not vote for him.

I will not vote for Rudy McRomney either
Fred Thompson is the only person who seems like he doesn't want to be president, which is all the more reason to vote for him. The rest are all power hungry.

Rudy McRomney...Not!
Rudy and Mitt are out since Rudy thinks the (140pg) Fair Tax is far too complicated (versus the 70,000pg current tax code) while Mitt says he's for lower taxes but campaigned back in 2002 against his state's Prop 1 to abolish the Taxachussets draconian 9% income tax.

In the mid 1990s, McCain (along w/Pres Clinton & Sen. Hollings) pushed for a trillion dollar tobacco tax claiming that 3000 children started puffing butts every day without telling us that the same survey said 3600 "children" quit smoking every day.

Fred is okay, but what is he really passionate about?

All things considered, I'm putting a Huckabee bumper sticker on the back of my pick-up.

Newt doesn't want it either...

Nate writes: "Fred Thompson is the only person who seems like he doesn't want to be president, which is all the more reason to vote for him. The rest are all power hungry."

Yeah, that's why I waited for putting that Huckabee sticker on the truck...I was hoping it would be a Newt sticker... but he doesn't want the job either.

But then, he's probably the smartest one of all of them... choosing NOT to run

HUNTER 2008

Republican voters still get to decide who their nominee will be. Money only buys elections when people act like sheep. If 80% of Republicans are indeed seeking a conservative, we can nominate one. Vote in the primaries for Duncan Hunter. The money players won't like it and are trying to convince us only Rudy McRomneyson* can win. Hogwash. They want an open borders candidate. Give Americans a chance to vote for a candidate who WILL secure the border and watch turnout soar. Americans want their government to fulfill it's most basic responsibility.

The primary responsibility of the U.S. government is to protect the territorial integrity and people of this country. They have completely abdicated this responsibility. Both parties have been complicit in this. We are being told it is not possible to control our borders, enforce our laws, and thereby control our destiny as a nation. Hogwash. We are being sold out by corporations intent on importing workers for jobs that can't be exported with the taxpayers paying the true costs, financial and human. If we act like sheep and don't stop the inundation across our borders, we will lose our country without a bleat.

http://www.gohunter08.com
*(h/t portlandmom)

I like Huckabee's.......
....personality, the positive aura around him and the fact that he supports the FairTax. However, I have friends who live in Arkansas who have a complete different view of him. Huckabee has raised taxes over and over and his fixes for healthcare are bothersome and over reaching. He has been pretty quiet about his faith but I do not know how comfortable I would be about having a preacher in the White House.

Hard to find pefection in a candidate
Apparently if your comments are more than 2000 charatcters you need to store them someplace other than here. I never have been able to do that. They give you an option to start a blog, I guess now I will find out what that is.
http://barrym.townhall.com/

Judi
"....The Republican Party will not win with Rudy Guiliani. I and a lot of other conservatives will not vote for him...."


So if it's Rudy against the Hildebeest a year from now, you will essentially cast a vote for Hillary. Why? Because you want to act like a spiteful, spoiled kindergartener? If you want to shoot yourself in the foot, do so in your private affairs; don't include the rest of us in your pettiness.

With "allies" like you, who needs enemies? Give me Osama over your ilk anytime!

I sent
a check for Fred's campaign - the only one I am supporting with my $$. One thing is for sure, it is going to be interesting. If I was voting democrat - it would be Obama.

The guy doesn't want it
It's looking pretty clear that Thompson regrets throwing his hat into the ring. His appearances in Iowa are stirring zero pulses. At the most recent, he just stopped speaking boringly and broke the ensuing silence by asking the audience if it wasn't going to applaud. It did, tepidly. Looks like Fred isn't up to the challenge.

What to do?
Even though it is still over a year until the general election, the early scheduling of many primaries is rushing us into a decision on who to nominate.

Except fot Duncan Hunter, who seems to be the only true conservative in the lot, all the rest have something in their backgrounds that make me loath to vote for them. Many examples have been cited above.

Unfortunatley, Hunter doesn't seem to have the chance of an ice cube in hell, so I'll vote for whomever the GOP puts up. Any of them is better than what the Dems have to offer.

Nothing new here
"Americans, meanwhile, should wonder about entrusting the job to someone who has proven unable to sustain interest in the responsibilities that come with high federal office."

Any reasonable assessment of the job that Congress does indicates that it is filled with people unable to sustain interest in the responsibilities that come with high federal office. They routinely fail to perform their most basic duties while spending massive amounts of time playing political gotcha for the TV cameras and dreaming up new things to do which they are not authorized to do.

They should all be chained to their desks until all of the business they are required by law to perform is completed. Then they should be sent home.

'Caligula in 08.' It wouldn't be any worse than what we already have.

Nominate Rudy=Elect Hillary

Conservatives can nominate a conservative. All it takes is not acting like sheep and getting herded into nominating a northeast liberal. Vote in the primaries and we can make Hunter the nominee, 49% will never vote for Hillary, only 60% voted last time. Turnout was the difference. Give Americans a chance to vote for someone who WILL secure the border and watch turnout soar. Americans want their government to fulfill its most basic responsibility.

The primary responsibility of the U.S. government is to protect the territorial integrity and people of this country. They have completely abdicated this responsibility. Both parties have been complicit in this. We are being told it is not possible to control our borders, enforce our laws, and thereby control our destiny as a nation. Hogwash. We are being sold out by corporations intent on importing workers for jobs that can't be exported with the taxpayers paying the true costs, financial and human. If we act like sheep and don't stop the inundation across our borders, we will lose our country without a bleat.

http://www.gohunter08.com

I like Fred too
But he has no record of success or leadership. McCain-Feingold is a pretty big stain, if you ask me. Not only that, he is so lackluster in his interviews and speeches. He doesn't seem to have it in him, although once in a while he comes out and says something really right on the mark. I don't think it's enough, though.

You have to want it bad enough to fight to win against Hillary. I don't see Fred doing this.

ex-wyomingite
Great comments. It is clear Hillary will be the democratic nominee. All you conservatives and moderate Republicans, liberal Republicans, centrists, independents, libertarians need to bear that in mind when making public comments, sending money or pulling the lever.

Romney is a good man who has lived a good and sucessful life both personally and professionally. No scandal is attached to him. So he has waffled on abortion and gun control in order to be elected in liberal Mass. So what? So Thompson talks slowly. That doesn't mean lazy,dumb or without core conservative ideals. Stick to what is important and how much the nominee reflects the bulk of the conservative ideology. Oh, and don't hold a man's relgion against him (mormonism.)

AMEN!!
Sgt Relic and ex-Wyomingite, Amen brothers!

ex-Wyomingite: awesome post!

Hillary is the biggest threat to the USA since South Carolina fired on Fort Sumter in 1861. My parents survived the depravities of both Nazi Germany during WW2 and Stalinist Communism afterward. It is eerie how Hillary's language, bearing, thought processes, "philosophy", etc, resemble those of the concentration death camp guards, apparatchiks running the Soviet Union, and the Communist fanatics who enslaved half the world for half a century. Anyone who wishes to understand what makes this termagent tick should research Elena Ceausescu. Hillary is literally a reincarnation of this witch. Fredheads, the Ron Paul kook nuts, and various and assorted one-issue anti-abortionists who are throwing their temper tantrums against Republicans who are not "their" candidates had better understand the catastrophe that THEY THEMSELVES will impose on us should Hillary win.

I was an earlt supporter...
...of Fred.But as time went by,I was apalled at his complete lack of decisiveness.The more I learned about him,the more I turned against him.He is totally off my charts right now.If he is truly campaigning for the White House(and there is doubt that he is),he is the worst campaigner to ever do so.

Good bye Fred,been good to know you.

Traitors?
Why not elect someone else not tied to either party machine, PACs or lobbyists? Neither party has anything to offer America but more big government, less personal freedoms, and a growing influence to the internationalists who hate our country.

We should recognize that we have been duped into selling our birthright to these elites who have rigged the election process to assure themselves a virtual lock on power. An elite President from either party is the real act of being a traitor.

It is time to reclaim our inheritance and send the elites a message they cannot fail to understand. We should deny them the Presidency, the only way to begin the journey that will restore the Constitution, rule of law, and will of the people. Doing the same old thing, voting for the lesser of two evils never has and never will produce a different result.

If you want a clear explanation of how we got into the mess we find ourselves stuck in and the way to break the hold on power the elites have created for themselves, visit my website, JOEOLIVAFORPRESIDENT.ORG. It is the only place you will find a common sense way to reclaim what the elites have stolen from us! Thanks, Joe

Fred Thompson
I have lived in Arkansas all my life....Know Clinton's and Huckabee and they are all from my state(or, at least lived here a long, long time). Our Country will be in big trouble with any of them ! Fred is not a fast talking, glib, full of lies person. He is sincere, and appears to be just a simple man some of the time. But, he is smart and very ambitious. Ambitious, in a good way.......not, for personal gain/but for his country and he is very, very patriotic. Do not be fooled by the Clintons, as we will all pay dearly in the years to come if we don't elect a President with values like Fred has.

How Dare Fred!!!
How dare Mr. Thompson snub the austere body of the U.S. Senate for a private career with more fiscal transparency than the Congress itself. Kudos to Mr. Chapman for pointing out that Fred actually changed his mind on running again after September 11th. The gall! The audacity! The bravighare!

In another fine investigative piece, TownHall.com has done us all a service by indirectly pointing to the incomparable Mayor Giuliani, who was utterly honest about his extramarital sexual appetites, and to Governor Romney, who has openly seen the light through the many angles of the truth prism.

Dare any public servants not make a career out of windbagging and power-grabbing on the public dime, TownHall.com will be there (to exalt candidates who whore out 9/11 and Slick Willy wannabes who reinvent their politics before your very eyes).

I also was
an early supporter and thrilled to think he might run ...until he took months to get there and now seems blah. So I am just waiting...I agree with those who are saying the only thing we have to fear is Hillary.
My bumper sticker will read "ANYONE BUT HILLARY"
I will vote for anyone the Republicans finally decide to nominate and I URGE every Republican to drag all their friends out to vote. THIS IS NO TIME TO POUT OR STAY HOME OR WORRY ABOUT ANY SINGLE ISSUE!!!!

(P.S. I would have liked to see Newt run )

More Chapman on Fred.
"When he finished a speech the other day, no one moved. He had to say, "can I get some applause?" to the audience."
==========
This is too funny!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/015849.html

Buzzkat, re your Prez Hillary hysteria
That didn't work last year, either, with the "Speaker Pelosi" hysteria.

If the best a candidate can say is "Hey! The other guy's worse!", that campaign's in very deep kimshee.

RINO Rudy the Bald Hillary is virtually indistinguishable ideologically from the Hillary With Hair, and is a total clone to Lieberman, which means he's running in the wrong party. He'd make a pretty good Democrat candidate. As a Repub, he's a sure loser to even a self-defeating candidate like Hillary. He will assure gun owners and other conservatives stay away in droves. In a political world where presidential elections are decided by a few hundred votes in a couple of states, Giuliani loses.

If we're going to have a lib in the WH, better they have a (D) behind their name, so at least the right party gets the blame for the disastrous lib policies that follow.


One Issue Only
These issue was covered very well by Sgt Relic, ex-wyomingite, and dakota ranger. A Demonrat either Hillary, Edwards, Gore, & Obama would be the worst thing that could happen to this Country. With Conservatives having to fight Unions, the MSM, NEA, Single Woman, and the Democrats we have to come together and support the Candidate who wins the GOP nomination, whoever he is, even Rudy or Mitt. I will not allow Rudy's serious flaws prevent me from voting Rudy against Hillary. I will not allow Mitt's mormonism to prevent me from voting for him either. I will not support a 3rd party candidate and give Hillary the POTUS - this would be disasterous. I will support Fred until NEWT enters the picture, who is the Truest Conservative and best leader the GOP has to date. Newt can destroy Hillary or anyone else in any debates and I know the MSM will bring up his baggage, who cares what the MSM says anyway. If it is a baggage issue, Hillary carries alot more than any candidate. No matter what I will support and vote for whoever wins the nomination for the GOP and pray that Hillary is defeated in a landslide and that the GOP takes back both the House & Senate. Is anyone out there watching what the Demonrats in the House & Senate are doing....? God will be thrown out of America. Socialism and Oppression will reign. Time for an armed Revolution to take back America. GOD BLESS AMERICA - especially the one my father and my forefathers gave us.

Nam65-66
I agree with you buddy! McCain/Feingold/Thompson did it for me. I know he has since stated that it was a mistake, but who doesn't make that claim when it comes back to haunt you. It's like the old adage, if I had known then what I know now ...

Besides, I want to see a candidate with passion, not someone that seems bored with the effort of campaigning.

I was Newt person, but now lean toward Huckabee. In the end I will vote for whomever the GOP candidate might be.

Anyone but Hillary!

well portlandmom, now you LIKE FDT??!!
Boy if that didn't just make my coffee spit right outta my mouth!!! That was the funniest thing I've read here in awhile.

Here's the thing though:
Rudy- can't win (wwwaaayyyy too lib most don't know it yet though)
Mitt- can't win (too wierd- and WHAT was the bashin' Rush to Huffpo about?)
Huckabee can't win. (I don't even need to go there)
Hunter won't win though I would LOVE to see it!

FDT CAN and WILL WIN! Don't be tellin' me he's lazy- I don't want him to clean my house! And I don't care HOW many hands he shakes or frankly if they like him in Iowa or New Hampshire. But I DO care what Rasmussen says- because they're right more often than not.

Shoot! I forgot...
FDT the next POTUS! Yeah Baby!

Forget Fred - Support Duncan Hunter
Fred Thompson clearly does not want to be president. A Thompson presidency is something that Howard Baker, Jeri Thompson and the Draft Fred folks have wanted but I do not believe that it is something that Thompson actually wants for himself.

This is, in all honesty, what I believe is the true reason that he delayed his announcement for so long. Procrastination, as we all know, is a characteristic of one who does not want to do something.

Conservatives still have time to position themselves to take this nomination away from those that Duncan Hunter has referred to as the "Kennedy wing of the Republican Party". Giuliani, Romney and McCain will not garner the conservative votes needed to win this election and Thompson doesn't want it.

Gingrich has duly noted that, given the current state of the GOP candidacy, "there is an 80% chance that Hillary will be the next President".


Fred v Hillary
All Fred would have to do is come across convincingly as a human being, and all Hillary's negatives would be chips on his side of the table. He would be a genuine anti-Hillary, when Guiliani and Romney are either too liberal or to eager to please the crowd.

It is less important that he really really wants the job than whether people would be able to trust him as a decison-maker.

for Nate
Nate writes: "Fred Thompson is the only person who seems like he doesn't want to be president"

A candidate who really doesn't want to be President will be chewed up and spit out by the Hillary attack machine. Because she wants to be President more than anything else in the Milky Way Galaxy.

You have to fight fire with fire, as Obama is now learning the hard way. He too tried to run a positive campaign and he's getting clobbered for it.

And unlike Bush in 2004, Thompson won't have Karl Rove to take the low road so he can take the high road.

When (not if) Fred loses Ohio, he loses the general election. There aren't enough Electoral Votes in the Red States to put him over the top.


for loco
loco writes: "All you conservatives and moderate Republicans, liberal Republicans, centrists, independents, libertarians need to bear that in mind when making public comments, sending money or pulling the lever."

FYI, we social moderates have ALWAYS compromised. We've always been forced to vote for Republicans who are more socially conservative than we are, because we agreed with them on economics and foreign policy issues. I voted for Bush 43 twice, even though I disagreed with him on abortion (I'm pro-choice through the 1st trimester) and embryonic stem cell research.

It's the social conservative voters who refuse to compromise even one little bit.

I'll vote for Thompson even though on social issues I don't agree with him.

It's the social conservatives who are refusing to vote for any Republican who doesn't endorse exactly their domestic agenda.

Ex tex
I DO like Fred's personality. Never said I didn't. But he is completely unprepared and unqualified to be president. However, if he gets the nomination, I will vote for him. I've always said that.

Seems that you don't seem to let the facts of Fred get in your way. If nothing else, I guess I admire your loyalty.

MSM Violating America - Again
Has anyone seen anything from the MSM about Hillary being too polarizing and igniting the GOP against Hillary lately?

Those who support Osama Obama use to feed their base with these type articles hoping to unseat Hillary. I guess that the MSM has already nominated Hillary as their Candidate and won't provide anything negative, but continue to blast the Republicans.

America needs to WAKE UP and we need to penalize the MSM. Don't buy their products or services and boycott all advertisers. Hit them in the Pocketbook where it hurts. America should have honest reporting for all Candidates, and they should deal with the ISSUES. Socialism has been steadily making inroads into America for way too long and it needs to be stopped. If not, Oppression and Enslavement will occur and America won't be America any longer.

Mike Huckabee is the right man!
Fred Thompson can't connect unless he has a script. In interviews, he spends a lot of time looking at the floor. Speaking to crowds, he sounds like he's searching for the next prompt.

Mike Huckabee has the credentials, the plan, the drive and desire and he can articulate his vision. I won't settle for someone who will pretend to be something he is not so that he can become President. Before Ronald Reagan, people commonly said there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between the two Parties. They were right.

Ronald Reagan was different. Mike Huckabee is different, too. A true Conservative Republican.

A Republic, If We Can Keep It

Securing the border and enforcing the law is the only way we get to keep our rule of law, our representative Republic, and our Constitution. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this will no longer be the United States of America.

The so-called "top tier" will not get out the voters necessary for a GOP win. Increasing turnout is the key. Give people something to vote for. Not just the lesser of two evils. Won't work this time. People are fed up with the inundation of illegal aliens. They would come out in droves for the clear choice of D=amnesty or R=enforcement. They will stay home if they both equal amnesty.

There is a huge majority of American citizens waiting for someone to pledge to uphold the laws and secure the borders, let's ignore them some more.

http://www.gohunter08.com

The Senate IS boring
It is also unproductive, unconstructive and an enormous waste of taxpayers' money. Witness what has been done in the last few years: First, a spending spree by a Republican-controlled Congress, and recently a complete inability to "end the Iraq war" by the newly Democrat-controlled Congress. Frankly, I'm amazed that anyone thinks serving a term or two in the Senate, nowadays, has any value at all. I think it's a stomping ground for political baffoons.

Fred doesn't appear to have overwhelming experience OR much enthusiasm. However, the man is consistently and forever a small government advocate who strongly favors returning to local governments and to state governments those issues which should be appropriately and properly decided at those levels. And that is exactly what I like about him. And that, also, is what I believe our country needs more of.

Is he perfect? No. No candidate is. Is he a small-government and controlled-government advocate? You bet.

Front Runners
In the latest RAS tracking poll there is no significant statistical difference between Romney at 17, Rudy at 20 and Fred at 22. It is a statistical dead head for front runner.

THIS is why Mitt and Rudy can't win...
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/10/04/video-log-cabin-republicans-take-revenge-on-mitt/

Every time we attempted to use Hillary's lib positions against her- The Dems would hit back with something like this!

Our Candidate MUST be a PROVABLE long term conservative. And I'm talkin' specifically about Caught-on-tape policy ptatements or personal opinions! AND ABSOLUTELY ANTI-AMNESTY!

I agree with those
who say that all the other candidates are power hungry which is all the more reason to vote for Fred.

Fred Thompson may not seem exciting and "gung ho" about campaigning. In my opinion, who would be? The long hours on the road or being away from home would be terrible for his small children. However, I do not doubt his love for the USA nor his conservatism. I believe he is a serious and sincere person. Therefore, there is a time for jokes and a time to be serious. I also think he feels that other people would see him as a phony if he came out all hyped as if he always had too much caffeine. Who would want to be so hyped that they scream uncontrollably, except maybe a Democratic candidate? We saw how that turned out for Mr. Dean.

As for the McCain-Feingold issue, you people who are criticizing him need to look at your own lives. Everyone makes mistakes. It's just that some mistakes are more public than others and thus, are more difficult to apologize for. You should be giving him credit for acknowledging that it was a mistake. What would be worse, for him to say he was wrong or to say he stands by his decision?

Huckabee - liberal on illegal aliens
He favored giving scholarships to illegal aliens:

http://www.nwanews.com/story.php?paper=adg§ion=News&storyid=104629

He criticized an ICE raid on an Arkansas poultry plant that resulted in the deportation of 107:

http://www.katv.com/news/stories/0805/249679.html

Of course, this was in 2005 and before he wanted to be president.

long term?
This article is actually saying that unless you make politics a life long career, you will not make a good politician. Wow! If you read the constitution it mentions that senators were to come from the ranks, not be paid and only serve for a shor time. Now there is a concept I could live with. Too bad we will never find out.

BrianR
First of all, those of us last year warning about "speaker Pelosi" were exactly right. We predicted one of the worst, most incompetent Congresses in history and look what we have now. I personally even stated that it's best for the country to elect these wingnuts in an off-year election to prove to all Americans how truly pathetic and dangerous the Far Left is. It seems, however, that this is exactly what many Americans (e.g. welfare queens, single women) want, and their voting patterns will destroy the original essence of this country.

But your comments equating Hillary with Giuliani and Liebermann prove that you have no clue. As I wrote, research Elena Ceausescu and educate yourself!

Well, buzzkat
First of all, as a tactic last year, it didn't work worth a damn, did it? It won't work this time, either.

Further, I think Pelosi and Reid have been doing an excellent job of accomplishing exactly nothing while driving the approval numbers of Congress so far down they're covered in undiscovered crude oil.

And Dude, I don't have to research anyone else. I know Giuliani's and Liberman's stands on the positions, and they are the same. Other names mean nothing.

If you want to see clueless, go find a mirror and take a look.

Fred or Hillary
Conservatives won't vote for Rudy McRomney because of their chameleon like untrustworthiness.

Huckabee is too "religious" for most fiscal conservatives only.....Fred is the only one who can take both sides of the Republican Party and keep it together to beat Hillary.

You will see some big time bashing of Fred, because really, he is the only one that the Dems really fear.


Bush deserves it
Dakotaranger:

The left is right, Bush is one of the worst presidents in the last forty years, shall we review?

Allowed for the de facto take over of the state educational system via No Child Left Behind; claimed McCain-Feingold was unconstitutional, but signed it anyway, supported amnesty for 20 million illegal aliens which at the same time would have eliminated many US citizens from bringing in their family members; signed the Medicare drug scam, "Brownie, you're doing hell of a job," and I could go on and on.

Bush is no more of a conservative than Hillary Clinton is, has increased the scope and size of the US government more so than any president since LBJ. And while you can debate the wisdom of the war in Iraq, it has been run badly, very very badly--starting with too few troops, leaving not enough troops, dissolving the Iraqi Army and no real plan on what to do after Saddam was gone and then hang on to the master of the diaster, Rummy.

The GOP deserved to lose in 2006 and frankly it deserves to lose in 2008.

This has been a clueless administration and Tancredo rightfully called it correctly.


Rudy
No one else in this field will beat Hillary either. The nominee is going to be Rudy or Romny and these 1 percenters like Hunter have no hope and even if the GOP was stupid enough to nominate someone with only 4% support in his own state, that would just give Hillary all of the 538 electoral votes, big a bigger bloodbath than 1984--at least Mondale could carry his own state.


ANYONE BUT
ANYONE BUT HILLARY
ANYONE BUT HILLARY
ANYONE BUT HILLARY

Oh, OK I will continue to back Thompson.

here's how I see things...
no pro-war Republican can win in 2008. Not with 75% of Americans against the Iraq invasion, and fully half of 2004 Bush voters against the Iraq war. Ron Paul is the *only* candidate who can beat Hillary or Obama. And Paul's the truest conservative in the race. I can't figure out why some self-professed small government Republicans don't support him.

Ron Paul is the only candidate in the race who:

-never voted to raise taxes and was voted "Taxpayer's Best Friend"

-is staunchly pro-life

-is staunchly anti-amnesty

-has never voted for an unbalanced budget

-is a 100% pro-gun advocate

-is proposing to end the IRS and a host of other useless government agencies in DC

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Nice hatchet job
A rather negative article about this candidate relative to other Republican contenders. Romney is all over the place, in fact reminds me of J. Kerry. Of all the other potential R... nominees the only other one who appears to have any thing to offer conservatives is Duncan Hunter. Mayor Giuliani appears to be another rino as is Pres. Bush. I definitely would support a Thompson - Hunter ticket, with either name first.

C-excellent analysis!
FDT the next POTUS! Yeah Baby!

Then why, please tell us
Va. Patriot:

If as you claim "There is a huge majority of American citizens waiting for someone to pledge to uphold the laws and secure the borders...."

Then why is Hunter polling tied or below Ron Paul, who blamed 9/11 on American foreign policy?

If you are polling at only 4% in your own state among your own voters that tells me you aren't very viable.

The future is this...

Hunter will come in 6th or 7th in Iowa, then New Hampshire, Nevada, SC and by then he will have no money coming in at all, start closing down offices and laying off staff and he'll be shut out of the debates in upcoming states as they'll invite only the viable candidates (Rudy, Romney, McCain and Thompson), the media will ignore him except for the announcement when he will announce he is withdrawing from the race (or the less honorable "suspending his campaign).

Then he'll get to make a speech at the GOP convention and then he'll vanish back into the political wilderness from which he arose.

Joe
Don't want to hurt your feelings however; Newt just has to much baggage to be elected President.

BrianR - part 1
What the heck "tactic" are you talking about? The way to beat Hillary is to expose her for what she is, using her own words! Furthermore, she needs to be pinned down by real interviewers, not the sycophant pussies who have interviewed her so far. The problem here is that most Republican politicians are cowards when it comes to speaking out against Hillary and the other Far Left fascists. Note that Giuliani seems to be the only Republican candidate going directly after Hillary.

And again, the facts speak for themselves as far as the differences among Hillary, Lieberman and Giuliani, your head-in-the-sand denials notwithstanding. Giuliani and Lieberman are foreign policy hawks, Hillary blows with the wind but seems to lean instinctively with her peacenik nut base. Giuliani understands the benefits of lower tax rates and cracking down on criminals, unlike Lieberman and Hillary, and proved it as mayor of NYC.

The abortion issue is the purview only of extremists on both sides; most Americans couldn't care less whioh side of the issue a politician falls on; furthermore, it is an issue for the courts and local politicians, not POTUS.

Gun control is an issue local to NYC for the mayor of NYC, and I take Giuliani at his word that NYC-style gun control is not appropriate for the rest of the country.

I also take Giuliani at his word that he will nominate constructionists for SCOTUS.

You see, Giuliani has a proven record to stand on.


BrianR - part 2
National polls have been showing consistently for the past year that Giuliani is the Republican with the best chance of beating Hillary, especially as he is the only Republican with some ability to neutralize the Democrat-owned MSM propaganda machine.

Any of the Republican candidates, other than Ron Paul the isolationist nut, are fine with me for President - even McCain - over any of the Democrat candidates. My fight seems to be against so called conservatives such as yourself who will screw all of us in a petty, childish temper tantrum because YOUR right wing candidate was not nominated. (KMA)

Your inability to distinguish the unique threat that Hillary poses, which is far beyond that of ordinary liberals, is appalling. If your cluelessness is typical of other Americans, this country is in deep crap.

I don't know
I don't know Al, maybe because he blamed the US policy in the Middle East for 9/11.

And like the idiots that support Hunter, Ron Paul is polling at around 1-2%. Want to know when the last time a sitting House member won the presidency? Hint: no one had electricity and they used horses to get around and a good number of states now in the Union, weren't then.

Ron Pauls's future is the same as Hunter's, Tancredo's and Huckabee's--the only question is who will drop out first. And will they let Ron Paul speak at the convention.

Ron Paul...
will last longer than McCain. You can bank on that, Akagi. If Republicans are smart, they'll nominated him, lest we get Hillary. Just keep on trying to marginalize Dr. Paul while he keeps up his steady flow of supporters and contributions.

US policy *is* partly to blame for 9/11. It's a very inconvenient truth, but don't take my word for it - please consult with the CIA and 9/11 Commission Report. I don't believe those 2 entities are run by loony lefties, are they?

The entire nation is finally waking up to the fact that our foreign policy is broken. I guess the neocons are choosing to ignore this as long as possible, kind of like those who still advocate that we should have gone to Vietnam.

Here's a pragmatic question for you: how is a pro-war Republican supposed to win a general election when 3/4 Americans are against the Iraq war? Did you happen to miss the 2006 Democrat sweep? Have you not checked public opinion polls in a few years?

As atrocious as Hillary is, she *will* win against a pro-war, pro-Bush Republican. Voters will hold their noses while voting for her, but vote for her they will. It's either Ron Paul or Hillary. Whom would you support?


DickMorris who helped Fred win Senate...
said he is "not a high energy guy." That fact alone would negatively effect my view of Fred. Rudy is a high energy guy. I am probably going to support Rudy.

Hillary is the unknown
as there is not a policy she would not jettison if the time (politics) were right. Will swing voters fear the unknown as investors fear the unknown in the stock market? Or do they think they know her?

Buzzkat,
The "tactic" I very clearly defined in my original post was the hysterical Chicken Littling about "President Hilarious", which is nothing more than recycling the unsuccessful "Speaker Pelosi" hysteria of last year. I mean, c'mon man, that's pretty basic.

As to your proposition that there's any difference between Giuliani and Lieberman, once again you are wrong.

But of more interest to me is that you buy his waffling and weaseling about the 2nd Amendment, my litmus issue.

This is a guy who tries to hide his anti-gun attitude in some kind of justification that the 2nd Amendment is subject to Federalism and local interpretation. Is your 1st A right to Free Speech, Free Press, Free Religion, Petition for Redress also subject to local interpretation and Federalism? How about the 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination, or the 4th Amendment requirement for search warrants? Subject to local interpretation or Federalism?

How about his claim on the one hand that he'll appoint "constructionist" judges, while also saying he considers "Roberts as qualified as Ginsburg"? That doesn't set off alarm bells? Or his record as mayor of appointing incredibly liberal municipal judges? Doesn't bother you?

As to those polls you cite: Bro, according to the polls, Dewey beat Truman.

You think I'm "screwing" you? Tough. I'm more concerned with the long-term future of this country than any one election, particularly when it seems to me that both parties are intent on driving the bus of this nation over a cliff, the only argument being how fast and which guardrail to crash through. I'll be damned if I'll mash my foot on the gas pedal.

I've held my nose through the last 4 election presidential election cycles. No mas! My nose is chapped!




If this is so
Then why is your Dr. Paul still at 1%. I bet I could bring over Hu Jintao and he could get 1%

Oh, Paul might be stupid enough to stay in the campaign as he comes in near the bottom over and over again just like Dennis did for the dems in 2004, but McCain is what about 16% in the polls and Paul is 1%?

Yes, the US should have been gone to Vietnam and should have stayed in Vietnam, but as has been its habit over the last 40 or so years, the US has this very nasty habit of running and leaving its allies to rot when things get hot. Kinda like in a street fight and you are told "I got your back" and when you turn around, your "back" is running away.

And in fact there are a good number of leftys at both the CIA and in the 9/11 Commission--one of which was probably directly responsible for what happened on 9/11.

And if you don't think Hillary won't win every state in the Union if Paul is the nominee, then you have some mental defect.




BrianR...
I simply refuse to hold my nose. Only one candidate stands out to me, and that's Ron Paul. I honestly can't think of any significant difference between Mitt/Rudy/McCain vs. Hillary. Not one. I challenge anyone to come up with one. Gun control, taxes, foreign policy, abortion - what is the difference?

You raise another good point: that the Hillary Hysteria isn't working with the general electorate anymore than Speaker Pelosi. What will, however, resonate with voters in the general is the claim that we'll get more of Bush with Rudy McRomneyson. None of the 4 so-called "Frontrunners" stand a chance in this climate.

Ron Paul is the only choice if the Repubs are serious about winning.

Fred Thompson
Is from the south. People from the south move, and talk slower than people from Other areas. Even we in Okla. don't talk as fast, or move as fast. We're more laid back, but don't take any guff.
Fred as said the biggest mistake he ever made was signing on to McCain/Feingold. He said this many months ago.

I trust Fred Thompson to be POTUS.

Huckabee IS soft on illegals. I live on the Oklahoma side, about 25 miles from Ark. We get Arkansas tv channels. Huckabee was for in state tuition for illegals, for one thing. I know he let them work freely in Arkansas.

Akagi
some mental defect


well, thats about all I got out of his post, anyone else?

Hunter 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com


Akagi, Roberta Roberta wants the underroos back today!

Bored?
Why wouldn't an intelligent person be bored in the Senate. "Greatest deliberative body" my posterior! They are mostly buffoons who waste time on honoring commemorative plaques and avoid any issue of substance. Thompson displays a genuine motivation to protect this country from its true enemies, unlike most who are afraid to even identify its enemies. He has my vote. I'll not vote for Giuliani, Romney or McCain. That's the same as voting for Hillary.

well, Akagi...
if you think we should have stayed in Vietnam any longer, that speaks volumes. That was an unmitigated disaster from the start. I guess you like losing good soldiers in quagmires and spending the US into oblivion.

To refute your ignorant claim that Hillary would win every state in the union, here are a few facts for you:

1. the president's approval is one of the lowest in history, mostly due to Iraq

2. Congress' approval is even lower, mostly due to Iraq

3. 75% of Americans want a different foreign policy, mostly due to Iraq

4. Republicans got crushed in 2006, mostly due to Iraq

Ron Paul would draw massive support from anti-war Democrats and independents head to head with Hillary, mostly due to Iraq and the fact that Hillary is so repugnant.

Which polls are putting Paul at 1%? Are you citing polls from March or something? And remember, many of Paul's supporters 1) do not have landlines and 2) did not vote in the last Republican primary in 2000, so his real numbers are higher than what the polls indicate.

McCain has far less cash on hand than Ron Paul, and his numbers peaked in 2000. He's done. The Old Media will now have to pay attention to Dr. Paul, which means even more supporters and more contributions.

Just a few facts for you to chew on before dismissing the candidate who has the most momentum.

Arrogant Attempt To Hurt Your Team
Does the author know any actors? My daughter has worked 16 hour days for minimum SAG wages and the chance that SOMEDAY she will have the opportunity to do what she views as her "calling" as a full time career. Acting is hard work and like anything else can be done with honesty and honor or without those traits.

So,Thompson would have been like Cincinnatus only if he had gone home to farm or do some job Mr. Chapman sanctions as worthy. I'm not certain of who I'm supporting in the GOP race, but I certainly don't support garbage like this article!

Fred's "mistake"
So if Thompson changes a position in order to run for president it's called a mistake, but if Romney does it it's a flip-flop. Fred probably has more flip-flops than Romney or Guiliani. (Abortion, free speech, gay marriage, immigration and governmental control, and more.) He is not a social conservative.

But Fred's biggest mistake - McCain-Feingold-Thompson, actually impacted everyone in the US. Romney's flip-flops were merely personal opinions and had no effect on any legislation. Romney governed as a true-blue conservative.

I don't think Fredheads should be so quick to dismiss the willingness of Fred to curtail free-speech rights. So much for his devotion to the constitution. The fact that McCain-Feingold-Thompson was the only thing he worked for in the Senate is revealing.

I also think blowing off Dobson the way he did was foolish. Why make enemies if you don't have to? It shows that he is not presidential material.

Al, yeah, it's interesting
I think we're on basically the same page. I do have some issues with Paul, though I certainly admire the fervor of his supporters. I can't agree with his foreign/war policies, which are very reminiscent of Buchanan. Unfortunately, I think they're uninformed, naive in today's world, and unsound. That having been said, were he to secure the nomination, I could vote for him, certainly in preference to anyone the Dems field.

But the other shoe; I think the odds of his securing the nomination are very slim, as they are even for the candidates I personally favor, Hunter and Tancredo. The problem, of course, is that the GOP machine has thrown itself behind the "moderate" wing of the party -- frankly the kiss of death -- in their foolish quest to pander after some mythical and non-existent "uncommitted" demographic. The reality is that there's no such thing. Though it's true most people aren't political junkies like us, they still know what they believe in, and when neither candidate at election time embodies their ideals, they simply stay away. And the majority of the country is conservative. So without the votes of those folks OR the activist conservatives, the GOP loses every time.

That's the lesson they refuse to learn, earning the name The Stupid Party. History bears this out: Reagan's 2 landslides, and Gingrich's 1994 Contract With America landslide.


Flip Flop Thompson
Thompson now thinks that the government should be in the business of subsidizing ethanol -- a product that basically uses more fuel and other resources to create than it ever provides and is a huge giveaway to Big Agribusiness. In the past he thought that subsidies for ethanol were bad policy. At least the other "top tier" candidates numerous flip flops have been to the right side. Jeesh!, I just can't get even remotely excited about any of these guys.

The Primaries

When you vote in the primaries, choose the candidate who most closely mirrors your values. Don't buy the propaganda being pumped out by the MSM. They want Rudy to be the nominee, they know it will split the GOP.
If a cross-dressing, former mayor of a sanctuary city who marches in gay pride parades reflects your values, vote for Rudy. If not, vote for the man you think would make the best President.

Al on Vietnam and RP
Once we went, and the left wing kooks (see Hanoi john skerry and haoni jane fonda) had there way, it was all over. The boys did not lose; the idiots back home gave their commie pals a victory. My point being It was not always a mess, just when the politicos back home thought they knew more than the generals (kinda like moveon.duh) and TRIED to give orders, instead of letting the professionals do their job. Politicos and the dummy’s like Hanoi john (I have never shot a duck) skerry and Hanoi jane (i'm sorry till the next war) fonda and also stupid is as stupid does, george sor holes to keep their nose out of it, when the men are given a job to do. No sorry RP could not trim the nose hair of Gen. Petraus in my book.

Hunter 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com

Hal:
Roberta Roberta wants his uncle george sor hos underroos back today!


portlandmom writes:
Romney's flip-flops were merely personal opinions and had no effect on any legislation. Romney governed as a true-blue conservative.

Well I reckon he will be ok then, since no governs by their "personal opinions" do they now?

Hal:
Roberta Roberta wants his shaggy underroos back today!

Pay attention Reggie!!!
Reggie writes: Thursday, October, 04, 2007 10:43 AM
Fred Thompson
I have lived in Arkansas all my life....Know Clinton's and Huckabee and they are all from my state(or, at least lived here a long, long time). Our Country will be in big trouble with any of them ! Fred is not a fast talking, glib, full of lies person. He is sincere, and appears to be just a simple man some of the time. But, he is smart and very ambitious. Ambitious, in a good way.......not, for personal gain/but for his country and he is very, very patriotic. Do not be fooled by the Clintons, as we will all pay dearly in the years to come if we don't elect a President with values like Fred has.

Reggie, you need to be a little better educated regarding your candidate, Fred. He has been a lobbist most of his professional career, and become quite wealthy doing so. He is a very good actor if you think he is "just a simple man of the time." So naive you are . . .
"Ambitious, in a good way ......not, for personal gain" get a life fellow, of course he has always been ambitious for personal gain. His first wife was from a very wealthy family,(he was not), and thanks to his father in law, he attended college and law school. There is nothing wrong with being ambitious for personal gain, but do not get caught up thinking he is another Abraham Lincoln. Fred cares about Fred, and I just do not think he wants the responsibility that goes with the job. The world isn't like it was when Bush took office - with all that is happening today, our president will have to be very involved to do what is best for this country. Can't be on perpetual vacation.

WIN, FRED, WIN
Sorry you have found so many niggling nitpiks to focus on. Most Americans would welcome LESS government, and Fred seems to be the man to lead in exactly that manner. He says ONLY what needs to be said and doesn't ramble on...or worse, CACKLE like a wicked witch. Most every time he decides to say something, you know he has given it some thought, unlike so many of the other candidates who try to shoot from the hip and really don't know what they are saying until it's all over...and even then, who knows what they said.

I firmly believe Fred Thompson will lead our country back to a land of values, a country we can once again be proud to call our own!

Polls
Al:

Fox, ABC, CNN, among others and various state polls--give me a state and I'll give you a poll.

And no, these polls are from September (as in last week).

And if you think Democrats are going to vote for Paul, you have more mental problems than I thought. Care to wager some money on Paul getting the nomination--didn't think so.

Oh and that goes for you too, Doc. Care to find me a reliable poll that shows Hunter over single digits, anyplace? Oh and the reason you didn't get anything out of my post is because you are stupid and are unable to understand written English it seems, sorry I can't fix stupid.


And Al
McCain actually rose 6 million to Paul's 5 million. And both are far far behind Rudy at some 11 million. And comparing Paul to McCain is like comparing the #7 car in Nascar to the #4 car, both are going to end up losers. The only way McCain wins is if something very bad happens to Rudy, Romney and Thompson all at the same time. The only way Paul wins is if he only has to run against Tancredo (let's nuke Mecca) and Hunter--and even then it would be close.

Oh and Romney without having to raise a cent can spend 17.5 million.

Polls again
Polls are far more accurate than they were in 1948 as well. You would have a point if say Paul or Hunter was running at say 25% and Rudy was at 32% (behind 7 points with a m.o.e. between 3.5 and 5), but he is down by 25-31 points. And even if some Paul supporters don't have landlines and they are all these new supporters who aren't in the polling data (a very dubious claim), they wouldn't make up 25 points worth.

The bottom tier--Hunter, Paul, Tancredo have almost no support and are unlikely to ever be a real threat to break out to compete with the top tier as much as that may break your little heart.

Worried about

"one issue social conservatives?" Don't worry about this one. I have always said that anyone who is "pro-choice" isn't qualified to be dogcatcher, let alone POTUS. True, the POTUS doesn't have much to do with abortion, but to me that issue is a window into a candidate's values and worldview. But the fight against global jihadism, open borders and creeping socialism have come to trump all in my book, and I'll vote for a pro-choice RINO before I vote for Hillary. Actually, I'd roll around in double-edged razor blades and soak in a hot tub of Tabasco before voting for her.

I'm asking everyone to think that way. Is the Repub candidate you dislike most not solid on the 2nd Amendment? He's better than Hillary. Pro-choice? No more so than Hillary. Not posessing what you consider 100% true conservative credentials? Consider the alternative. Is he soft on illegal immigration? Not as badly as Hillary. Has he raised taxes in his state? Not like Hillary will.

As crucial as those single issues are none of them count more than the single issue of the unthinkability of a Hillary Clinton presidency. Any Republican candidate who is in your view weak on one or more issues is better than she who is disaster on all of them.

Please, no pouting "I'll show 'em" stay-at-homes this time, no third party vote-splitters, no "making a statement" with hopeless write-ins. What we need to be considering most is who has the best chance to beat Hillary? It's as simple as that.

Akagi

No I am pretty sure I got it right! If you believe news polls from the states you are mental. Polls here are wrong day after day, and they usually follow who pays for them, IMO so do not put so much stock in them!
I would really like to know who takes them. I have never been asked to do one by any means, a person on the street or by phone and I have been a registered Republican prolly longer than you have been alive. So forget your polls, I just don't buy em and anybody who cast their votes by them really should have their head examined!

HUNTER 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com

Roberta Roberta
Hurts so good, Come on , Akagi make it hurt so good, sometimes love don’t feel like it should, come on baby make it... hurt so good



Dakotaranger and Reggie
Well said, I agree! But I'm so sick of the unworthy attacks from the same people who post the same old crap and keep writing "Fred Thompson is not a real conservative" ...the same people who are moving the Republican Party to the left. We know Fred's not perfect, but for those that can't understand why we support Fred now, you never will! If you don't like Fred, don't vote for him! You deserve the people you elect! But first, read chapter 5 of Power to the People by Laura Ingraham, and think about which of the few that are electable: (Mitt, Rudy, or Fred) will do the best job to give the power back to the people.

Oh, Akagi...
so wrong again. Where do you see Rudy getting 32%? I've only seen him break 30% in NY, NJ, and FL (where people from NY and NJ retire).

Here are some more inconvenient facts:

1. Rudy has already lost the religious wing of Republicans. Say goodbye to the evangelical vote and the monopoly on the South that Bush enjoyed.

2. Again, 75% of Americans are against the Iraq war. A pro-Bush candidate will lose the general.

About McCain - he raised a little more than Paul, but check out how much cash on hand he has. That means a wee bit more than how much he's raised. Paul's destroying McCain here.

Romney's unelectable for similar reasons as Rudy - northeastern with a liberal track record and a flip-flopping gun grabber who's pro-abortion. Not a recipe for success unless you're a Democrat.

R. Paul raised $5.08 mill without donating to his own campaign and with virtually zero Old Media coverage. Pretty impressive.

Only Ron Paul gives conservatives a reason to go to the polls. The Old Media-annointed "frontrunners" are hardly different from Hillary.

And how can you say Paul has no support? If you'd bother to read up a little, you'd realize that he has almost 50,000 volunteers who contribute countless volunteer hours for their candidate. Who else gets that kind of support?

Polls
When poll after poll show Hunter at 1-3% (his high tide mark is one state poll in California, his home state noless) then you get a pretty good idea the polls are indeed accurate. If you had some polls (more than one) showing Hunter at 15 and others having him at 8 and still more having him at 4 you could express concern in the accuracy of the data, but when you have a constant 1-4% (which would be in the m.o.e. of them all 1+3.5=4.5 or 4-3.5=1.5), then you can have a high degree of confidence in the data.

You think the polls are so badly off that they have under represented Hunter by 30 points? Only someone that is dilusion would think so.


H R C
IMO that is why a real Republican or Independent will vote for who ever gets the Republican nomination. We sure do no need billary or that ilk in there. Not only will they tax us to death, they will get us killed IMO by trying to “understand” our enemy’s, when all they understand is violence. I sure hope if it is not Hunter, it is Fred!

HUNTER 2008!
http://www.gohunter08.com


Doc:
See I told you, Akagi do not put your finger in that light socket! Now look at your hair!

BrianR...
Good points. I know my guy and yours are long shots, but I'll be damned if I vote "lesser of 2 evils." Look what that's accomplished: record debts and a horrible quagmire... and Dem control of Congress to boot.

Yes, the Republicans need to revert back to small government conservative values. Reagan's landslides and the Contract With America are excellent examples. Conversely, the 2006 Congressional Elections are a superb example of what happens to the Repubs when they get away from traditionally conservative/Republican principles.

I do respectfully disagree with you on foreign policy, but I'm sure we'll have that discussion in another forum.

al
I'm not sure why a pro-war candidate would be major liability, given that the leading Democrats are now shying away from a pull-out. The closer they get to power, the more they will look like Lieberman.

Also isn't the appearance of Hillary enough to get out the Republican vote?

doc
again too many think that running a city or a state or in mitt's case a commonwealth determines how they would run the country. Local vs national are two different things. The repubs need to put dollar amounts to all of the missus clinton's proposals and how many times she plans to spent the same amount of maney she thinks the govt will realize from keeping more tax dolars from the wealthy. Economists tell that she is talking of increasing tzxes by 15 to 20 per cent. But the public needs to have these amounts laid out in terms they understand like what their new take home pay will be under a clinton administration. Of course publicizing her lunatic statements and showing her in action can't hurt. My personal favorite is her ebonics lessons given at selma. Missus clinton remains the biggest obstacle to her getting elected. She can run but she can't hide from herself and her history

Al (and PeterE)
Amen, Al. I do believe we have a meeting of the minds.



PeterE, you wrote: "Also isn't the appearance of Hillary enough to get out the Republican vote?"


Republicans, maybe. Conservatives, NO.


PeterE...
I believe it's a liability because the war is so unpopular. Hillary is banking on a Bush clone to win, and if she takes a "stay in Iraq" approach, she can garner support from the pro-Israel lobby and look like she's consistent, having voted for the war. Anti-war issue voters will support any Dem over any neocon Repub, so she figures she has that vote locked up.

She'll be sadly mistaken if Ron Paul takes home the Repub nomination.

BrianR - again, you're correct that principled conservatives will have zero reason to get up and vote for Rudy McRomneyson. Just look at the Republicans' dwindling numbers of late.

Mitt the RINO Too
“So he has waffled on abortion and gun control in order to be elected in liberal Mass. So what?” … Loco

Then Mitt needs to run under the Democrat ticket where that Flip Flopping RINO belongs.

www.ronpaul2008.com Vote for Ron Paul
I am voting for Ron Paul. He is the staunchest defender of the U.S. Constitution and the right to keep and bear arms of all the candidates. He is also the only true conservative. It is time for us to restore our constitutional republic. Vote for Ron Paul in 2008.

Well Steve
I guess Fred's got one big NO vote from you. On the other hand, he has mine.

I don't which numbskull you want to annoint, but I can tell you I WILL NOT vote for Guiliani, regardless of who the Democrats put up. If it's someone other than Rudy, I probably would hold my nose for just about anyone else. But not Rudy. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not ever.

I have never voted for a Democrat in my life, which means I have had to hold my nose mny times while pulling that GOP lever, but it ain't gonna happen if Rudy is the nominee. I will either not vote for president or I will vote for a third party, because I ain't ever gonna vote for Hillary either.

And Stevie Boy, you have got it backwards if you are one of those people who want to accuse true conservatives of giving the election to Shrillary by refusing to vote for Guiliani. Those who insist on foisting Rudy on true conservatives will be the ones handing the election to Clinton.

If in fact, you are one of those GOPers who would pull the lever for anyone, so long as the letters GOP were beside it, then you shouldn't have any trouble pulling the lever for someone other than Guiliani, because if you don't, it is you who will be handing the election to Hillary.

Better to have a bored Thompson...
...than a moral degenerate like Guiliani.

A pro-abortionist, pro-Sodomite, pro-gun control politician who brazenly and publicly betrayed and humiliated his wife while estranging himself from his children doesn't get my vote. End of story. And if that stand causes Hillary to win the election because too many others in the GOP didn't mind handing the nomination to Rudy, then so be it. As far as I am concerned, the blame will rest with them - not me.

Amen Sandman
.

not now, but...
he's the only Republican with any momentum at this point. Support and donations are up where the rest of the Repubs' is down. He hasn't been openly spurned by any particular voting bloc within the traditional Repubs (neocons don't count - they're Wilsonian Dems). He's energizing younger and disenfranchised voters. This explains the avid volunteers and donations.

Thompson - people are realizing he has no handle on the issues.

Romney - gun grabber, two-faced flip-flopper from Mass. He turns a lot of conservatives off. If he hadn't donated to his own campaign, where would he be?

Rudy - evangelicals won't support him. Neither will Second Amendment advocates.

McCain - floundering and has less money than Paul.

The time is right for Ron Paul. There isn't a Repub in the race who energizes voters except for Paul. That's why he was able to raise $5 mill with a virtual Old Media blackout.

Well said, Sandman!
Bravo, and amen!

Rudy Can't Win
The justification for Rudy's nomination is that he can beat Clinton. There is no more justification.

The latest 3 head to head polls show Rudy getting kicked by Clinton.

ABC/WP, Rudy 43 Hillary 51
Fox, Rudy 39 Hillary 46
Rasmussen, Rudy 43 Hillary 48

Those were taken before the Religious Right threatened to form a 3rd party if Rudy got the nomination.

Rasmussen reports today that 27% of Republicans will support a 3rd party candidate if Rudy is the nominee.

With a 3rd party, Hillary gets 46 %, Rudy gets 30 % and the 3rd Party gets 14 %.

Today the Rasmussen tracking poll has Fred at 22, Rudy at 20 and Romney at 17. That is a statistical dead 3 way dead heat.

The justification for a Rudy candidacy is gone. He can't win if the Religious Right do not support him.

Hahahaha, Roberto
Yeah, dude, leaving you with what? A perennially irrelevant "party" that can't win a thing.

Good plan, Roberto!


Florida Head to Heads
Survey USA just release some new head to heads for FL. Rudy 43 Hillary 49, Fred 42 Hillary 50, and Romney 41 Hillary 51. Romney is within 2 points of Rudy.

The idea that Rudy is a better candidate against Hillary is nonsense. Romney and Fred are far less well known than Rudy and they do just as well as Rudy against Hillary. Both Romney and Fred have more upside potential against Hillary as they become better known. The more conservatives know about Rudy the less likely they are to support him.

The idea that Romney has to make a speech on religion can wait for the right time. All Romney needs is a strong campaign and some good press. He can beat Hillary in the general.


I don't believe
the American people are against Iraq because it's Iraq. Americans want to win, unless they
are liberal DemonRats running around their maze in Congress, along with the marxist moonbats. It's all about winning. And I believe many of us
are fed up with this Vietnam redux we are having
pushed in our faces. I know my hubby and I have
NEVER forgotten their treachery then and don't want their treachery now to have us cut and run.
We want the military to be free of P.C., and do it's job without fear of court martial.
If the GOP loss in 06 was anything, it was because they refused to listen to their base, just as Jorge refused. It's the invading hordes of illegal third worlders and the Senate's weasely support that lost them the election. And I guarrantee, if the candidates don't wise up
taking us for granted, and don't have a believable plan to secure the border, enforce the laws etc, the GOP will lose and we will
have a vicious, evil marxist to deal with. If the Party hacks wanted Hunter to move up, they'd push it but they are the ones whose arrogance lost us control. I like him.

Al
I see that you like to say: "Romney - gun grabber, two-faced flip-flopper from Mass. He turns a lot of conservatives off. If he hadn't donated to his own campaign, where would he be?"

I'm sorry you are so uneducated on the issues. To answer you last question first, he raised over $6 million in one day -- January 5, 2007. It was the greatest single day haul of any candidate. Why fault the guy for putting his money where his mouth is. At least he believes in what he's doing. Don't forget, he has not had the name recognition of Giuliani, McCain or Thompson. Nor the free press of Obama. So what's he supposed to do, sit on his hands?

He is no gun grabber. Don't forget. He governed as a conservative in a state which a legislature of 85% demoncrats. Sometimes, you don't get to pursue your own path. You can only minimize the damage. Space prevents an elaboration.

AS for flipflopping, if you don't want any converts to your conservative principals, then why argue your points. If everyone has to believe what they believed ten or even five years ago, why advocate for change.

Mitt's life is a demonstration of integrity, committment, and talent. What he did for the Olympics, what he did for the Massachusetts budget -- these are accomplishments which stand far and above the minimal accomplishments of the other candidates.

Don't buy into the media hype.



FT
The 2008 election is 13 months away. Most Americans are more interested in OJ, Paris, Britteny,& Di than this infernal, eternal election process.

Do not mis-underestimate Mr.Thompson. I'm sure that he knows the voters are more interested in more mundane things at the moment. He will quietly bide his time and allow the other candidates,of both parties, to savage each other and gradually succumb to a 'Howard Dean' moment.

Fred is not worried about the primaries. He has his eye firmly planted on Minnesota in September 08.

Watch for things to heat up beggining next spring.

Thompson/Hunter beats the Hildebeast like a redheaded stepchild.


Nuty conservatives?
WTF? You mean us folks who believe the government is too big, over bearing. The same people who champion lowering the tax burden and who believe that The Constitution means what it says and respects those boundaries?

Earth to Robert, the reason the GOP is in a mess right now is because they are acting like Democrats while the Democrats are acting like 1930's Soviet political hacks.

A move to the left is a move to the left. In reality, there is no center. I am sick and tired of seeing spineless noodle Republicans agreeing with democrats. They are helping the socialists grow government and take away more and more of our freedoms.

Also, the war is going good and if you all think that the GOP will only win with an anti-war candidate, then Ron Paul would have a 60% approval rating. Instead he is getting 5% and I say half of those are liberals trying to throw a wrench into the system. Anyone who says that we are responsible for 9/11 should be taken to the woodshed and flogged. I probably agree with Ron Paul on 90% of the issues but it is abhorrent for him to blame us for the attacks of Islamofascists.

Polls
Al:

Foxnews Dynmaics: Rudy: 34%; Paul 2%
taken 9/21/2007

CNN: Rudy 27%; Paul: 1%
taken: 9/8/2007


Gallup: Rudy 30%; Paul 4%
taken 9/15/2007

Pew Research: Rudy: 32%; Paul: 1%
taken 9/14/2007

Avg. of all Iowa polls:

Rudy: 15%; Paul 3%

Avg. of NH polls:

Rudy: 22%; Paul: 3%

Avg. of SC polls:

Rudy: 23%; Paul: 2%

Avg. of Nevada polls:

Rudy: 18%; Paul 1%

50,000 huh? So, that comes to about 1000 per state--think 1000 is enough to win a state?

And as for cash on hand, McCain won't be winning the nomination either so comparing Paul to McCain is again like comparing a car that comes in 7th to the car that comes in 4th. McCain isn't going to win the nomination either. I'd love to have polls to show you a head to head with Paul against Hillary or Obama, but Paul (and Hunter) are so insignificant that no one is willing to pay money to examine the issue because unless every other candidate leaves the GOP field, he will never get the nomination.

Again please show me a recent national or state poll that has Paul above single digits. His support is so low that if you look at the m.o.e. his support maybe actually zero. And you judge support by the polling numbers, not by the fact some idiot is putting up Paul signs on Interstate overpasses.

I hope you enjoy his speech at the first day of the convention, because it will be Rudy or Romney or Thompson that makes the last speech--accepting the nomination of his party.


questions, fairfacts...
1. Did Romney sign an assault weapons ban into law in Mass?

2. Has Romney flip-flopped on abortion... coincidentally when he was running for office in a liberal state vs. when he was trying to get a conservative bid?

Sorry, I'm looking for results, not excuses. I'm looking for principle, not pandering. His job was to govern, not convert people... especially in a state that'll always be liberal. My bad for expecting a little integrity from my candidate. Romney has clearly shown he doesn't have it.

The truth about Romney is he's no conservative. He talks the talk now, but how can we trust him? Who knows what he'll say to win the general if he (God forbid) gets the nomination?

About money, Romney's accomplishments are overblown. When you "loan" millions to yourself, it's not as impressive of a fundraising feat. Besides, he's not putting his money where his mouth is. He's just boosting his Q3 numbers.

well, Asagi...
true enough his poll numbers are low, primarily due to the virtual Old Media blackout. Now, however, he's getting more in the public eye with his donations and volunteers.

The reason I think Paul has a shot is because:

1. he has momentum
2. Americans are very tired of the status quo (see opinion polls of Bush and Congress), and it's due in large part to Iraq.

Assuming you're correct, that one of the faux-conservatives like Rudy, Mitt, of Fred wins - how do you figure they'll do when 1) they're Bush clones and 2) Bush has one of the lowest approval ratings in history?

Only a non-establishment, Republican can win the general. Americans will hold their noses and vote Hillary before getting 4 more years of the same. Or maybe 2006 wasn't enough of a wake-up call for you.

Paul is not a Republican
Paul only runs under its banner because his party, the LP, does only slightly better than the American Communist Party.

I expect that neither of the viable candidates (Rudy, Romney, Thompson and McCain) to win against Hillary. The only question is how bad will the defeat be. But even if the GOP were to become a cult and nominate Paul, not only would the GOP lose but lose in a Mondale/Hoover fashion.

I guess if Paul was to be the nominee the major question would be could he win Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah, because as the GOP nominee these states would be in play for Hillary.


very telling...
so you expect the Rs to lose with anyone? I surely expect the Rs to lose with anyone *who's close to Bush*. If the Rs are smart, they'll nominate someone who's as far away from Bush as they can find on Iraq. That way, they'll stand a chance to pull from that 75% of Americans who disapprove of the war. And the long term gain will be phenomenal... notice how many younger voters are drawn to Paul?

In 1976, Reagan was sharply criticized for sticking to principle and running a strong campaign against Ford. Now, Reagan's an icon, one who set the conservative agenda for Republicans.

Of all the candidates, Ron Paul is by far the closest to Reagan... only he's even more conservative.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.