Meet Tommy Thompson in Iowa! (Coming to a town near YOU)

Thompson for President MySpace Blog ^ | July 5, 2007 | Governor Thompson's Scheduler

[fieldmarshaldj]

Fred’s about to bust the stereotype. ;-)

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Fritz Hollings? Nope, sorry, he's retired."

Try again. Cut the creep loose, your conscience will feel a WHOLE lot better.

[buccaneer81]

There’s only one Thompson in this race, and he ain’t it.

[RedOhioan]

Tommy Thompson Announces 90-Day White House Run

by Scott Ott

(2007-04-02) — Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson yesterday declared his intention to leverage his fame as former secretary of health and human services into a 90-day run for the U.S. presidency.

Mr. Thompson also hopes to garner an initial flurry of campaign dollars until donors figure out that he’s not former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson, the actor who stars in NBC’s Law & Order, who has not yet indicated his presidential intentions.

By announcing on April 1, Mr. Thompson takes advantage of the full 2nd-quarter fundraising cycle before his planned news conference in early July 2007, at which he’ll withdraw from the race because “the political process is too focused on big money donors and special interest groups and not enough on the people,” according to a leaked draft of his scheduled July remarks.

Mr. Thompson’s many trips to Iowa have paid off, with polls showing that he’s running a strong 5th-place in a hypothetical race for President of Iowa, in the event the state should secede from the Union.

Campaign insiders said that if the White House bid goes well, Mr. Thompson has “a decent shot at getting a seat in the next Republican presidential cabinet, perhaps as secretary of health and human services.”

[Diana in Wisconsin]

I love Tommy. He was a great Governor for us...longest running Governor ever, I think.

If he gains some traction, we’ll see...but I don’t see it happening. He has less thank 500K in the bank at this point, and I don’t see big donors lining up around the block.

Helluva nice guy. Flawed and normal like the rest of us. And with his brother Ed, we’d end up with another Billy Carter for comic relief. ;)

[Taichi]

No NO you’ve got it wrong. His name is Fred not Tommy.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Now you're comparing him to having the wild, zany, madcap feel of Howard Dean's campaign. Which is it? Is Tommy drab or overexcited? Those are polar opposites.

Just a little humor, not related to Thompson's personality.

You're simply backing the wrong horse. Tommy should have ran in 2000, when he had 3 terms as Governor under his belt.

And yes, him being on the board of Verichip scares me.

[Artemis Webb]

"I think that a Thompson/Thompson ticket would have great appeal."

Well...at least the GOP would corner the market on facial crags.

[FlashBack]

If TT is the last man standing on our side I’d pull the lever for him...that being said I don’t see his numbers translating into that fact bearing out. I could be wrong, so I keep my options open.

[BillyBoy]

>> You're simply backing the wrong horse. Tommy should have ran in 2000, when he had 3 terms as Governor under his belt. And yes, him being on the board of Verichip scares me. <<

Of course whenever someone question's Fred's background, his supporters blow it off and say it's a "smear" attempt because we "fear" him... so I guess you "fear" Tommy's great campaign ;-) (Kidding)

I agree with you that TT would have probably been a better candidate in 2000. However, he is 65, about the same age as Fred, and he's not over the hill yet. McCain's pushing 72 here, it's pretty obvious 2000 was his last chance. Actually McCain probably should have opted to run in '96, and maybe Fred too (he would have had made a better favorite son for Tennessee that year than "Lamar!") Tommy Thompson's odds of winning the nomination are pretty slim. But the primary election is the time to vote your conscious, and my conscious says Tommy has the best resume and the best overall position on the issues, and would subsequently make the best President. I'd vote for him if he was polling 0.0000000000000001%.

Look at alot of the freepers here who are hitching their ride to Fred, proclaiming him the savior of the GOP, and you'll discover they we were on this same threads a few years ago singing the praises of guys like Mel Martinez, George Allen, Tom Ravenel (the cokehead Rudybot was proclaimed the "true Conservative" in South Carolina), J.D. Hayworth (he was going to "Take out McCain", even though he endorsed McCain for POTUS, they overlooked that little fact)... not a good track record. Basically they go for the flavor of the week.

It's no different than the Arnoldbots, except the Arnoldbots go for anyone with any media-approved "R" next to his name that can "win", and the George Allen/Fred Thompson types go for any smooth talking "R" who tells them what they want to hear and can "win", regardless of that candidate's actual record. That's why they're out whining about how Bush and Martinez "betrayed" them. Bush said he was against McCain-Feingold in 2000, and by golly, if Bush says it, then we can't doubt him or it's a "smear". Martinez insisted he was "against amnesty" in 2004, so by golly, it must be true and anyone who thinks otherwise is just anti-hispanic.

You've tried to tout the virtues of Ron Paul here a few times, so I have to hand it to you, at least you don't follow the herd here on FR. I've been on this forum for 8 years and every time they go gah-gah over someone, whether it's Alan Keyes, George Allen, or Fred Thompson, the candidate turns out to be underwhelming. It's like Star Wars Episode I, no candidate can live up to all the hype. The GOP grassroots treats Fred Thompson as the Dem grassroots treats Obama.

Conservatives really need to try voting their conscience for a change. These guys have it backwards -- they vote for the star candidate in an open race, wait til he's an incumbent, then try to slit his throat if he "betrays" them. 90% of incumbents get re-elected. In an open primary race, you should vote for the most qualified person who agrees with you on the issues, and then in the general election or incumbents re-election you should vote for the conservative most likely to "win" and beat the Dem.

Honestly, if he these guys had tried back in 2004, we might have a real Senator from Florida. I seriously doubt Amnesty Mel was the only person who could "win" that state.

[SJackson]

Thanks, please keep me on the list. While he has little chance, he’s the only blackpowder hunter running, which is more than some candidates have to their credit

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

So Fred's conservative 8 year Senate record means nothing to you.

People are attracted to Fred because of his clear, no-nonsense stand on the issues. The fact that he was a Senator is irrelevant. Being a Senator is still important, you don't exactly sit on your rear and just vote on bills. Fred did a lot of behind-the-scenes work on committees and such that rivals that of being an executive of a small company or perhaps county executive.

Tommy was elected to four terms as WI Governor. To me, his decision to run for Governor a 4th time rather than doing the smart thing and stepping down in 1998 and easily be the GOP front runner in 2000, in addition to his mediocre job as HHS Secretary, showed me that he isn't capable of leading nationally.

[BillyBoy]

>> So Fred's conservative 8 year Senate record means nothing to you. <<

I have gone over Fred's "conservative 8 year Senate record" numerous times on this board. It is EXACTLY like Lindsey's Graham's Senate record, except Graham is slightly to the RIGHT of Fred (91% lifetime conservative rating for Lindsey, 84% for Fred). BOTH voted solidly pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-ANWR, pro-tax cuts, pro-spending cuts, pro-WOT, pro-victory in Iraq... but on the negative side they buddied up with McCain numerous times and passed awful "bipartisan" compromises, and looked the other way when illegal aliens invaded this nation. I have documented this on issue after issue. If the Fredheads loved Fred's "record" as much as they say they do, they'd be begging Lindsey to be his running mate, not demanding Lindsey be run out of town on a rail.

The Fredheads simply want us to believe that being McCain's buddy and rewarding illegals is "treason" -- UNLESS Fred does it, in which case it becomes "well, nobody's perfect", and he deserves a promotion. And that premise that we are supposed to hold candidates to different standards is simply laughable.

>> People are attracted to Fred because of his clear, no-nonsense stand on the issues. <<

Really? I'm not "clear" about Fred's position on cracking down on employers that hire illegals. He current claims to be of the minutemen mindset on the issue and very concerned that Washington hasn't acted. But when he was actually voted on the stuff, Fred was the key vote on the Senate Judiciary committee amendment (S.1664, passed out of committee by an 10-8 majority) to REMOVE the higher fines for businesses caught hiring illegal aliens. Various study commissions have found that the willingness of U.S. businesses to hire illegal aliens is the No. 1 incentive for foreign workers. He earned a "D" rating on his lifetime scorecard for "preventing incentives for illegal alien amnesties"

So I'm not "clear" where Fred stands on this one. Should I believe Fred's position from 1994-2006, or what Fred says in 2007?

>> The fact that he was a Senator is irrelevant. <<

The last time the GOP sent a Senator directly to the White House was 1920. 88 years ago. Ignore history at your own peril. You guys did when you nominated Katherine Harris, alot of good that did us.

>> Being a Senator is still important, you don't exactly sit on your rear and just vote on bills. Fred did a lot of behind-the-scenes work on committees <<

Yep, and I'm still waiting for Fred's fan club here to tell us what were all the great bills he authored behind the scenes and reforms he accomplished in U.S. Senate. (Instead they talk Nixon impeachment hearings and helping confirm Roberts after he LEFT the Senate) I'll be happy to discuss Tommy's record on the same in Wisconsin. He did more than just sit in the governor's mansion and sign bills.

>> such that rivals that of being an executive of a small company or perhaps county executive. <<

I'm sorry, a governor or even a county executive has far more authority than a junior Senator not in the leadership. Fred was one of 100. The Senator picked to run things was the OTHER guy from Tennessee, Bill Frist.

>> Tommy was elected to four terms as WI Governor. To me, his decision to run for Governor a 4th time rather than doing the smart thing and stepping down in 1998 and easily be the GOP front runner in 2000, in addition to his mediocre job as HHS Secretary, showed me that he isn't capable of leading nationally. <<

The fact Tommy Thompson opted for the Presidency, rather than end up a 67 year old junior Senator in the minority party, shows intelligence to me. There was nothing left to prove by winning another election in Wiscosin. And he also earns bonus points for not opting to stay on as Secrety of HHS during Dubya's 2nd term, seeing how that turned out to be.

You're right that 2000 might have been his time. But I'm thankful we have him in the race now to make up for the poor selection of other statewide officials in the mix. And perhaps Fred would have been better off running for Governor of Tennessee in 2002, where the nomination was his for the asking and he might have done some good.

We'll see.