Posted on 06/26/2007 3:41:27 PM PDT by Rick_Michael
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
The biggest question in the race for the Republican Presidential nomination is whether or not former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson can sustain his warm-up act once he becomes an actual candidate. The actor once did what many politicians could never imagine by walking away from a career in the Senate. Now he is on the verge of doing what few politicians can even dream of by entering a race for the White House on top of the polls for his party’s nomination.
Thompson, preparing to formally announce his candidacy, leads the pack in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey with 27% support. That gives him a four-point advantage over former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani who is currently preferred by 23% of Likely Primary Voters. A week ago, it was Thompson 28% and Giuliani 27%. Two weeks ago, they were tied at 24%. Prior to that time, Giuliani had been on top in every weekly Rasmussen Reports poll for five months
Thompson leads Giuliani by 13 percentage points among conservative primary voters while Giuliani leads among moderates.
Among Republicans, 74% now have a favorable opinion of Giuliani. That’s down from 82% in late May. Twenty-three percent (23%) of Republican voters have an unfavorable opinion of the former Mayor. Thompson’s numbers among the GOP faithful have been moving in the opposite direction. Sixty-six percent (66%) of GOP voters have a favorable opinion of the actor while just 18% have an unfavorable view.
Among those with more strongly held opinions, Thompson currently has an edge --21% of Republicans have a Very Favorable opinion of him while 14% have a Very Unfavorable opinion. For Giuliani, those numbers are 18% Very Favorable opinion and 19% Very Unfavorable.
Another new poll shows that both men are competitive in general election match-ups with the Democratic hopeful from Illinois, Senator Barack Obama. Obama is currently second in polling for the Democratic Presidential nomination.
This week’s GOP poll also finds former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney earning 12% support and Arizona Senator John McCain attracting 11%. Romney is viewed favorably by 56% of Republicans nationwide and McCain is viewed favorably by just 55% (40% have an unfavorable view of the former frontrunner).
On Monday, McCain strongly denied rumors that his recent plummet in the polls might cause him to drop out of the race. Over the past month, McCain lost a net ten points in a general election match-up with Senator Hillary Clinton. McCain’s decline among Republicans is tied to his support for an unpopular Senate immigration bill favored by just 22% of all voters.
Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is atop the second tier safely behind the leading candidates at 3%. Six other candidates--Senator Sam Brownback, Congressman Ron Paul, Congressman Tom Tancredo, former Governor Tommy Thompson, Congressman Duncan Hunter, and former Governor Jim Gilmore—split 7% of the vote. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.
Rasmussen Reports releases updated polling data on the Republican nominating contest every Tuesday. Results for the Democrats are updated on Mondays. The current survey is based upon national telephone interviews with 587 Likely Republican Primary Voters conducted June 18-21, 2007. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. The Rasmussen Reports sample includes not only Republicans, but also independents who say they are likely to vote in a Republican Primary.
I know most of his positions, but what is his main thrust?
He's just Fredtacular!!!!!!!!
To be honest, I get the impression he’s doing this for his children and the long-term future of America.
His comments seem to support that...but then again, that’s just how I view his decesion to run.
it’s time for us conservatives to get rid of this rudy mcromney nonsense and get serious, as things stand right now hillary would embarrass any of them in a presidential election.
It tells me that nobody currently in the race has sparked the gop or conservatives yet.
I’ve gotten that same impression as well. I have a 7, 5 and 2 year old and he seems to make that connection to me.
I tend to agree with you.
From what I can see, Fred’s main motivation has to do with the philosophy of government He’s a Federalist and a Constitutionalist, thinks our current government is neither, and wants to fix it.
My impression (which could be totally wrong) is that if he could sit back and enjoy time with his family while some good man ran the country, he would like to do that. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that's an option. The only way a good person is going to occupy the Oval Office is if Fred Thompson runs and wins. He may not want to subject his family to the pressures and hassles they'd face while he was President, but that would be better than having them live in a country that was falling apart.
Go Fred!!!!!!!!!!!!
I figure you like any news of Rudy’s fall. Don’t we all!?
: )
But, can he beat the bitch?
“My impression (which could be totally wrong) is that if he could sit back and enjoy time with his family while some good man ran the country, he would like to do that. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like that’s an option. The only way a good person is going to occupy the Oval Office is if Fred Thompson runs and wins. He may not want to subject his family to the pressures and hassles they’d face while he was President, but that would be better than having them live in a country that was falling apart.”
That’s exactly what I think. The truth is...if he doesn’t run, chances would be slim for America’s future. We just wouldn’t be the same.
I like that reason to run more than anything.
Who? Edwards?
;-)
threat of radical islam, economy, borders, federalism
I think so. 47% of voters out there said they’ll vote against her, and he’s got less of dissaproval rating. All he has to do is gain a fairly small amount of support in key areas.
And to be honest, if Bush could do it in 2000 and 2004...under the conditions he did, I think Fred will fair off much better. That’s my impression. I think with time and debate, we’ll see that to be true.
He’s busy fixing his hair....give him another ten runs to actually get the primary win.
Well, that's kind of vague.
I'd rather see some kind of measurable target he's shooting for.
OK...that gives an idea of a possible goal.
However, I still don't have an idea of what he wants to do about it exactly.
And what does he want to do about those exactly?
I mean...I've heard vague talk. But not much real direction as of yet.
Thanks for the response but this is not an answer to my question.
There are about 30 specific articles by Fred Thompson on these very issues available here on F.R. Nitty-gritty specific things, like on Roe v. Wade to the vampire bill. Probably more specific policy statements than any given candidate.
Just click on the keyword “Fred” and scroll down.
As a not-yet-announced candidate, Fred's "direction" would of necessity be vague at this point. One thing we know - it won't be the same direction as Rudy.
Fred's no rookie; he knows what people will be expecting of him. Let's wait for a while and see what unfolds.
I’m shocked MCamnesty got 11%!
Well, perhaps I could offer a paraphrase of Fred's command about his Senate record, to the effect that sometimes stopping bad legislation is as important as 'doing' anything else.
While I'll readily admit that there are some things a President must actually do (e.g. leading the military as Commander in Chief), in many regards I think the nation would be served better be a robot that would simply stamp "VETO" on anything put before it, than by most of the current contendors.
Right...but his main priorities?
I mean someone above said the WOT, economy, etc.
OK...these are good larger-picture things to emphasize. But what does he want to DO about them?
Well, at least we know Rudy's MAIN priority is the WOT. He speaks about it more than any other issue.
Not to say I'm voting for Rudy...but he outlines his priorities better than I've seen Fred do.
“I’m shocked MCamnesty got 11%!”
But he said he’ll come-back....lol.
Yeah right!?
He’s been in the race longer. Patiences....you’ll have all your answers.
We all await that.
I'm not a believer in that.
I liked the funding for the troops that was recently signed, despite the Dems attempt to not get that bill passed.
I'd rather have a leader than a robot.
As I note when I see this complaint about any candidate, what do you want? A Five Year Plan?
There are detailed statements from about 2 years worth of the “Fred Thompson Report” posted here containing specific issues and topics. Here’s the list:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?m=all;o=time;s=fred%20thompson%20report
That’s more specificity than you’d get from any other candidate.
His main priorities appear to be reducing entitlements, government and taxes, along with solving the Iraq mess and securing the border.
I really believe Fred is in this race for all of the right reasons. I think we will see more and more of what he is about after he announces. Go Fred!
True, but Fred had been in public service for years.
We should know some of his reasons for being by this time.
Patience? I've got plenty. I'm not jumping the gun. I won't decide who I vote for until May or so of 08.
Until Fred declares he doesn’t have to position himself on any issues. Now the big challenge in 2008 is the Electoral Map with Ohio trending left and no where to make up for it. Can Fred outpoll Skankles in Ohio? If not, what states can he bring over? He may make California closer, but not enough IMO. We are on our heels in this one. We can hold the South, but we need to get either Ohio, Michigan, or Pennsylvania.
There are some things for which we need a leader. But President Bush seems determined to totally overwhelm the good he's done in the past by driving this country into the abyss. At least a veto-bot wouldn't do that.
Thank you. This is a little more specific.
Still looking for what he would do on these large issues. Sure, I can wade through myriads of articles to try to piece it all together. But I like to hear a nominee or his followers be able to articulate clearly his positions when asked.
I had looked for leadership from Thompson on the campaign finance mess. He did not impress me as Chairman during those hearings. He was smooth and talked well (and his ability to talk is why I think a lot of people are gaga over him now), but he did not accomplish much. He's a good lawyer which is why he can talk, but I don't know what he has actually done or proposed on a larger scale.
And I was very disappointed that he backed McCain for President. That showed a strange lack of judgment IMO. I like the guy, but don't think he's necessarily a real leader.
Just need to know what he intends to DO as President.
looks pretty close. imagine how romney would be doing if he were one of the hollywood types !
We know that he won’t lead the charge to give amnesty to illegals.
Right now, that’s important.
I don't think voters should have to try to read a candidate's mind to find out what his intentions are.
As far as I've read, Thompson has not been very forthcoming about how he would handle illegal immigration.
I don’t know what Thompson was supposed to do when his “witnesses” were pleading the fifth or leaving the country.
I admire that he angered the GOP by insisting that EVERYONE be subject to investigation.
In 1997, the Governmental Affairs Committee was tapped by the Senate leadership to conduct an investigation into alleged improper or illegal activities growing out of the 1996 federal campaigns. At the center of the investigation was a fundraiser attended by Vice President Gore at a Buddhist temple. The Committee exposed a campaign finance system rife with abuse and open to foreign influence, and produced a 9,600-page report that led to several indictments and criminal investigations.
This is one result:
http://hsgac.senate.gov/12.pdf
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.