Posted on 03/24/2007 6:19:35 AM PDT by Josh Painter
He looks to me exactly like the guy who wants to run. He's loaded up his schedule with tons of appearances including guest hosting the Paul Harvey show ( an audience 2X that of Rush) and doing great op ed pieces all over. The idea that he's a stalking horse for McCain or Giuliani or Hunter or whoever makes no sense. Thompson's been consistently cobservative for decades, unlike Rudy and Mitt and their convenient sudden epiphanies. Neither Romney nor McCain nor Giuliani have won their elections by as large a margin as Fred. The man is a better speaker than all of them combined and he can win BIG.
He was never in charge of investigating Clinton. He was however responsible for voting for conviction of Clinton's impeachment charges. He voted to acquit on perjury and voted to convict on obstruction.
http://www.australianpolitics.com/usa/clinton/trial/statements/thompson.shtml
The reason he voted to acquit on perjury was not that he believed Clinton did not lie before the court, but because the perjury charge belinged in court, not the US Senate.
He is no paper tiger.
I think that the first two are true, and the third is a distinct possibility. While a somewhat known figure, an actor and politician of modest accomplishment, he is positioned to parlay that into a more serious role. He likely understands that he simply isn't configured to win outright, with the issues of money, name recognition, lack of leadership experience, etc. He's clearly a man of great common sense, but perhaps lacking the fire in his belly that you need for this kind of pit fight.
That said, he's got a lot going for him that could make him a force to be reckoned with. He's got almost all of the right positions, for the whole range of conservatives. For all intents and purposes, he's a better looking, better dressed version of Duncan Hunter, which will generate a lot of die hard support from the base automatically. Not enough on it's own to survive the American political process, but enough to make him a viable and valuable ally.
Rudy, for all his impressive strengths, needs such an ally to cover his weaknesses. A visibly conservative ally. Gingrich could have been such a person, but his negative numbers among voters are simply astronomical. And he's probably not too keen on playing second fiddle. Thompson simply isn't in a position to run and win on his own, but he can sure bring a lot to the table as a VP.
I have been in politics long enough to know that every politician is self-employed. Fred Thompson, who went from pro-choice to pro-life in order to become a Tennessee senator, is no different.
Very astute observations, my friend.
I predict a Rudy/Thompson ticket.
ok, if you have inside knowledge of the GOP and how they want to push liberal cannidates and not stand behind someone like Fred Thompson, then I guess we can say hello to Hillary and good bye to the GOP.
And Fred was not Pro-choice, that has already been de-bunked.
even if he was, he would be in good company with Romney and Rudy, on that issue.
Can you give a link?
He's got the Paul Harvey gig right now, with roughly 18 million listeners every day. When he announces, he has to give that up. I'm looking for a June or July announcement. That will give him time to raise money, but also let him keep his show for a while, and continue to build up credibility with the Harvey listeners, who are older and tend to vote in high numbers.
OK. That proves he's a damn sight smarter than me.
And that's a GOOD thing.
The GOP wants to win in November. They have a guy in the race right now who gets 50 percent of the vote in the general against any potential Dim nominee, has a very solid reputation and record, very low negatives, and can raise the cash. Most Republicans do not want Giuliani beat up in the primary.
On the other hand, there is a vocal, politically unrealistic minority opposed to Giuliani from the right. So how do you keep them at bay? Put up a guy like Thompson as a potential nominee, get them all worked up about him, then make him the Veep. Meanwhile, let Hillary's growing negatives continue to put the Dimwits in disarray, and keep them spending their money and beating themselves up.
It is actually a very wise strategy....
Question: Have you EVER voted for someone because he had someone else's endorsement??????
If so, why?
I'll agree with that.
The reason Thompson isn't going to run has nothing to do with policy and everything to do with politics. That is my main point, and I shouldn't have strayed from it.
Different take...
http://exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/2007/03/clueless-on-right.html
Me Me Me...add me..please
Like Novak is really a great source for anything. Novak works for the left IMO.
Which part of that three-part statement? :-)
It is not a matter of what I do or what you do. It is a matter of what the majority of voters do. In California, 91 percent of Republicans voted for Schwartzenegger. Do you think all of them were pro-abortion?
Voting is a strategic act. Most people will take what they can get. Most Republicans realize Giuliani is the best we are going to be able to do in the current environment. After the 2006 disaster, there is not a lot of hope that a candidate positioned to the far right can win.
As I say, it has nothing to do with policy. Policy is something YOU care about. Winning is something the party cares about, and policy is only important insofar as it advances the opportunity to win.
Conservative is becoming a dirty word in the swing states, so we must adapt or become donosaurs. Look to California and Europe if you want to see the future. I do not like it anymore than you do. But I have a Ph.D. in marketing and when I see the demographic and attitudinal data, I cannot ignore it.
Interesting analysis. However, Fred is supposed to be a big buddy of McCain. Perhaps, he is sucking up the oxygen so that McCain becomes the most credible alternative to Rudy. Some of the cranky Freepers who would rather have Hillary than Rudy as POTUS might then vote for McCain.
Personally, I despise McCain, but he's better than Hillary by a long shot. I wish some of the cranks would realize the damage they are causing by their ad hominem attacks against Rudy. IF he becomes the candidate, he does not need to be injured by friendly fire. The same goes for the other contenders.
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.