Not sure why anyone would claim to be the new...
Posted on 03/20/2007 5:22:54 AM PDT by IrishMike
Seismic shift in Republican Party leadership.
Liberal cheeks are puckering all over this country, including at RNC headquarters, at the prospects of a Fred Thompson presidential campaign. The last good-ole-boy conservative actor turned presidential candidate became the most universally beloved US President of the 20th century!
In my own unofficial not-so-scientific regular reader poll, which asked my mostly conservative regular reader mail list one simple question, Who would you feel best about supporting for President in 2008?, the answer could not have been clearer... Fred Thompson 43% Newt Gingrich 17% Duncan Hunter 10% Rudy Giuliani 10% Ron Paul 8% John McCain 6% Mitt Romney 4% Tom Tancredo 3% Sam Brownback 0%
I can only guess why the results are what they are. But my readers are not alone in their search for an unapologetic, no-nonsense, plain-spoken conservative leader who shares their conservative values.
After six years of "compassionate conservatism", which turns out to be more compassionate than conservative, the conservative core of the Republican Party seems finally in the mood to force a seismic shift in party leadership, from recent liberal RINO control back to the conservative values that founded and built not only the Grand Ole Party, but this nation.
Traditionally liberal rags like the NY and LA Times are talking about the conservative quake underway at the RNC on a daily basis. RNC leadership seems baffled at the news that their hand-chosen liberal frontrunners are meeting with a less than exuberant welcome from the party faithful. They just aren't used to constituents telling them what to do and they are not so sure they like it.
Even Republican talk show hosts like Sean Hannity, seem agitated that they are unable to anoint Rudy Giuliani, who is having trouble connecting with conservatives over his liberal social values.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
Kinda premature to call him the next Ronald Reagan isn't it? He won't decide until April if he is running and then his background will be scrutinized. I have no doubt he's a good candidate but I hope we aren't letting us in for a big let-down.
Ron Reagan is a jerk and an affront to his father's legacy. Who needs another one of those?
I wonder if the Rudy supporters are going to have the "may the best man win" attitude or try to tear him to shreads.
LOL
Right. I thought Ron Reagan was the one in the underpants who shills for embryonic stem cells at Dem conclaves.
OOPS I thought they meant Ronald Reagan. EWWWW Not Ron Reagan!
I have no problem with Fred Thompson running. The more the better. He won't get torn down by the Rudybots. It will be the Clintons who try to tear all the candidates down.
I wonder if the Rudy supporters are going to have the "may the best man win" attitude or try to tear him to shreads.
Fred ping
Not sure why anyone would claim to be the new...
"Solid conservative, good man. A Guiliani/Thompson ticket could be the ticket."
Hey Rudy!
MOLON LABE!
Any gun grabber on the ticket is a non-starter.
We all have our lines that we won't allow to be crossed.
Rudy crossed the big one.
Yeh.
Too many are jumping on bandwagons without actually looking at the polices these guys have supported in the past.
They tend to overlook the warts and baggage.
Many would have jumped on the Powell bandwagon for 00, but were glad they didn't, after Powell's not-so-illustrious stint as SoS.
Many would jump on a Gingrich bandwagon and ignore his personal and professional ethics problems, his past, his closeness with the Clintons, etc.
Many would jump on the Giuliani bandwagon, understandably for some of his strengths after 911. However, I am still suspicious of why he bowed out so early in the Senate race against Clinton (he withdrew in the spring, but didn't enter cancer treatment until the late summer/early fall). Had he ran and defeated Hillary, she would be nothing but a footnote in history beside Geraldine Ferraro, instead of being the strongest (currently) contender on the other side.
Many would jump on the Thompson bandwagon, but his political experience was in the Senate. [What is with all these Senators thinking they have executive leadership skills?] He supported McCain in 00, supported CFR, supported most of the pro-immigration bills.
Being and Senator and voting for or against bills does not make one an executive leader.
There is no low, to which the Clintons will not stoop, in attacking anyone in either party who dares to oppose them. Illegal taticts are not out of bounds for them either, we witnessed that for 8 years.
I speak of Clintons, plural, because they are indeed a team and equally evil.
A Guiliani/Thompson ticket would cause me to vote against Thompson. In fact, I would have a hard time voting for a Thompson/Guiliani ticket. Some combination of Thompson and Hunter sounds a lot better.
A Guiliani/Thompson ticket would cause me to vote against Thompson. In fact, I would have a hard time voting for a Thompson/Guiliani ticket. Some combination of Thompson and Hunter sounds a lot better.
Too premature to even call him a candidate...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.