Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Quick Reference
Fred Thompson FAQ: THE Fred Thompson Web Resource
Posted on 08/31/2007 10:20:33 AM PDT by Josh Painter
There has been no end to the speculation about why Fred Thompson has waited to officially announce that he will be a candidate for the Republican nomination for President in 2008. Many have opined that it all has to do with contract obligations to NBC for the "Law & Order" series in which he was a cast member. Sounds reasonable, but it's wrong.
Backers of some of former Sen. Thompson's opponents are saying that Fred picked September 6 over Sept. 5 so he could avoid the GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire. They say that Fred is "afraid" of facing his rivals, especially ____________________ (enter the name of your guy here). Not only wrong, but ridiculously so. If FDT is so fearful of that early September debate, then why will he participate in the one later that month (September 27 ) and all the GOP debates thereafter?
The common sense answer is that Fred's campaign hasn't been ready for him to enter the fray until now. The organization's inner circle has been shuffled to get the right people into the right positions, and state and local troops are still in the process of being organized. In addition, Fred has not been actively participating in politics since he left the Senate five years ago. He's a bit rusty, and FDT has been getting himself up to speed on all of the relevant issues and honing his debating skills. This answer makes a lot of sense and has some truth in it, but it still doesn't explain the chosen date. Why September 6, and not the 5th or the 4th?
The answer can be found in the arcane rules of the Federal Election Commission. By waiting until September 6 to formally declare his candidacy, Thompson won't have to disclose any campaign cash donations to Friends of Fred until January 31. By that date some important GOP preliminaries will be over and done with, including the caucuses in Iowa and Nevada, as well as primaries in New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Florida, the latter a state that Team Thompson has has identified as one of its most important targets.
We've seen what happened with Thompson's earlier disclosure that he raised $3.5 Million in his testing-the-waters campaign's first 26 days. Significantly, that amount is more than ten times greater than what Rudy Giuliani managed to raise in the first month of his campaign's exploratory phase, and it's more than all of the lower-tier GOP candidates were able to raise added together. And it was done without the benefit of using a direct mail campaign or phone trees. Only Mitt Romney raised more money in his first month, but he had the added advantage of being able to write his campaign a personal check for $850,000. Not only did Fred raise more than most of his opponents, he spent less, paying out only a bit over $625,000 from the haul.
But we heard none of this from the liberal media. All we heard from them was that the $3.5 Million Friends of Fred raised "failed to meet expectations." It's become a key part of their anti-Fred mantra. All because some of Fred's backers had mentioned a fundraising target of $5 Million.
And while Thompson was being dissed for raising "only" $3.5 Million, Democrat activists from the DNC down to the most obscure leftist blog were gleefully cheering on internet gadfly and liberal activist Lane Hudson, who filed a bogus complaint against Fred's organization with the Federal Election Commission. The Left, always wanting to have it both ways, ridiculed Fred for not raising enough money, but filed a complaint charging that he raised too much. It is more than significant to note here that one of the first hires by Fred's budding political group was no less of an expert on campaign law than Michael Toner, a former chairman of the FEC. Among his duties is giving Team Thompson advice on just what it can and cannot legally do during the testing-the-waters phase of the campaign. Smart. Very smart.
So perhaps now you can understand why Friends of Fred picked September 6, 2007, of all days, to make Fred's official announcement. It's the earliest possible date which allows Fred to get in the race, yet not have to disclose how much he raised in donations until the end of January. Having been burned by the media and the opposition, who turned his fundraising success story into a sad tale of disappointment, they are following the "Won't get fooled again" strategy.
Again, smart. Very smart.
I hope he’s as good as his supporters say he is.
I still think that there should be a debate between the top three candidates of each party. Moderators from Fox and CNN. Each question put to the candidates need to be answered by “ALL” candidates and the candidates should not be shown the questions prior to the debate. The questions should be handled by a top security organization and handed to the moderators, one at a time.
I seems crazy that people only get to see the top candidate from each party debate each other. I would much prefer to see three from each party at the same debate. This could be a three hour show. And, don’t let the candidates side step the questions. A third moderator could be employeed to determine if the question was answered. If not, ask it again.
I’ve ran campaigns, we always scheduled fundraisers so that the monies wouldn’t be reported till as late as possible, so the opposition could invent imaginary scandals in the media.
Thanks for the post. What attracts me to Fred is the reason he is running. Early on I recall him saying that he decided to run because he did not like what he saw going on in the country and he fears for the future. I think it his two young children that gave him the inspiration to once again serve. This makes sense in light of the fact that he was definitely sitting in the catbird seat with his current station in life.
That said, it has been a hoot to watch the media and GOP opposition camps hype his delay as being _________________ (insert reason/complaint). He has got millions of dollars in coverage for purposes of name recognition and it is only the political junkies that will remember the delay after he announces. Methinks he is in it to win it and I ain’t got no complaints so far....
Rational explanation as to why, but I don’t understand why that’s a positive for Fred? Doesn’t it give opponents more ammunition to say that he has to be hiding something like disappointing numbers if he times this so he doesn’t make any disclosures until the voting starts? Other than the disappointing one that the campaign/exploratory committee made no effort to downplay until days before it came out, of course.
I think it’s also because he’s stayed out of a lot of the mudslinging that’s gone on before now. Almost all of the candidates (on both sides) have embarassed themselves with comments they’ve made (since in many cases we’ve reduced politics and campaigning to rather than touting your position, attacking the other guy’s position). At this point, he’ll be the proverbial breath of fresh air for the GOP.
Fred for president bump!
What are you some kind rebel?
Get back in line.
What are you some kind rebel?
Get back in line.
This is true, but I predict that Fred will voluntarily reveal his donations, as a way to show penitence for Campaign Finance Reform, and along with proposing his alternative (no limits, full and immediate disclosure on receipt.)
I predicted this a few months back, that he would enter just after the time deadline, as if he wanted to hide the info, then reveal it in a politically impressive gesture of openness.
Bring it on. Let's roll to victory.
>> I still think that there should be a debate between the top three candidates of each party.
I’m in favor of ANY debate format that gives us a chance to see how the candidates compare head-to-head, without the obfuscating layer of the “kingmaker-entertainer” press between us and them.
Your idea certainly has merit.
Also, the way the French do presidential debates (little or no moderator involvement, no time limit, they are free to talk all over each other if they wish, etc.) is kinda cool.
Somehow or another, though, we have to get the media jackasses out of the picture!
So, with September 6th he gets a two-fer. He gets to duck the September 5th debate and hide his disappointing fund-raising. That is inspirational leadership.
Was that because he failed to receive illegal Chinese contributions funneled through a mailman in Daly City?
-PJ
I hope that you're right. It'd pull the rug out from all of his opponents but good, and would show both guts and smarts.
You get an “A” for snarky. Unfortunately you get an “F” in rational thought.
I feel pretty good about this race so far, for me, I’m in a win-win.
I plan to vote for Duncan Hunter in the primary (of course here in Maryland, the race will be all but over by the time I get to vote), but I see no reason to mind one bit if Thompson gets the nod.
It’s going to be a very interesting primary, one I won’t mind watching develop, now that the RINO and the “truther enabler” are both solidly out of every political junkie’s mind. (anyone with a mind to begin with that is).
It truly is going to be a joy to watch.
“I’m in favor of ANY debate format that gives us a chance to see how the candidates compare head-to-head, without the obfuscating layer of the “kingmaker-entertainer” press between us and them.”
Agreed. Here are some options:
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/debformats.html
You just eliminated HRC.
Not that that is a bad thing, by any means. :)
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.