Skip to comments.The Contest For the Republican Presidential Nomination [Why Fred Thompson has a real chance to win]
Posted on 09/21/2007 1:10:26 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Recent Rasmussen polling provides important insights into why Fred Thompson has a real chance to win the Republican nomination for President.
The most recent Rasmussen polling shows Thompson leading the field with 28% of likely primary voters followed by Rudy Guiliani (19%) and John McCain (13%). Mitt Romney is in 4th position with 11%.
Thompson is doing so well with likely Republican primary voters because he is perceived as the most conservative candidate in the race. The Republican primary electorate is made up predominantly of ideological conservatives, with better than half of likely voters characterizing themselves in this way.
So with 48% calling Thompson a conservative and only 25% viewing Giuliani this way, the Tennessee Senator would seem to have a decided advantage.
By contrast, 42% called Romney a conservative and 33% called McCain a conservative.
Also, Thompson's favorability at 64% is almost the equal of Giuliani (68%) and is virtually identical to McCain's and Romneys (63% each).
Complicating Thompson's advance is Romney's early state strategy. Despite his relatively low national numbers, Romney leads in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Nevada, according to the Real Clear Politics averages. The latest Rasmussen Reports polling in New Hampshire shows Romneys lead declining, but he is still on top.
Given that Romney is already seen as the 2nd most conservative candidate in the race, any momentum that he generates by dint of success in early state primaries will only make Thompson's job more difficult. The former Tennessee Senator now only leads in one state, South Carolina, which is now slated to hold its nominating contest after the first three or four ballots are conducted.
Rasmussen Reports releases a daily Presidential Tracking Poll to provide the latest updates on Election 2008.
Douglas Schoen is a founding and former partner of Penn Schoen & Berland, and a Fox News Contributor.
Fred Thompson/Duncan Hunter or Duncan Hunter/Fred Thompson ticket would be a real winner.
Which is why if he wins the nomination, the dems will take it all.
Romney's organization can target specific areas right now, but the simple fact is that while he looks good on paper, he simply doesn't grab the public the way a novelty act like Clinton or Obama would, and if Americans want a change from Bush, they'll go with either of them or Edwards over Romney.
Romney's bucks can buy him a lot, but he simply can't get those national numbers up.
Ron Paul now has a fight for that last place spot.
Thompson Leads Giuliani While Clintons Lead over Obama Grows (Harris Poll) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1899408/posts
Fred leading in Colorado!
Thompson campaigns in Miami’s “Little Havana” neighborhood: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1899393/posts
I have faith that Ron Paul can pull off a last place “win” next year.
I fear nothing will stop HRC from becoming our next president, but I hope Fred is the nominee in case the American people have a last-minute bout of sanity.
Well, I live in Boston and work in CAMBRIDGE, so you'll have to take that into account. ;)
The fact is that after eight years the American people would like a change. If a Clinton is their idea of change, we're done for; if a conservative who actually leads AS a conservative more often than W has (and I LIKE W, and much of what he's done, but in terms of illegal immigration, budgets, etc. he isn't as conservative as I want) is their idea of change, Fred is in.
But I see the media hyping this person, and the 24-hour guilt sessions which in ways obvious and subtle that tell us we need a woman, a non-white-male, for president for "CHANGE!"...well, it doesn't look good.
Just funnin' y'all...
Chinagate: The Movie
I’ve explained this several times before.
Picking a running mate from the presidential field is extremely rare, and when it happens, it’s a strong runner-up, not the last place candidate.
VP picks are chosen to “balance” a ticket in one way or another, either ideologically or regionally or demographically.
Duncan Hunter doesn’t bring anything to a Thompson ticket electorally at all.
The only presidential candidate that makes sense from an electoral standpoint is Rudy Giuliani. And it is unlikely that Thompson will end up picking him.
Thompson will probably want someone who hasn’t been picked apart by the media quite as much as Rudy by the time the nominee is chosen.
There are a lot of people out there who could change the dynamics of the race in a lot of ways.
George HW Bush was a smart choice for Reagan, because the GOP was bitterly divided at the time between the western conservatives and the eastern Rockefeller wing. That is much less true today, but it is Rudy, not Duncan who would bridge such a gap.
Kerry picking Edwards didn’t make any sense. A popular Democrat from Ohio or Florida — perhaps Bill Nelson — would have been a lot smarter. The only logic behind Kerry picking Edwards seems to be that political pundits thought they made a cute couple. Edwards brought no one to the Democrat ticket, and appealed only to the hardcore Democrat base — ironically enough because they had convinced themselves that Edwards would appeal to southerners and women. But what do urban homosexuals know about appealing to either?
Expect Fred’s choice of running mate to be based on political analysis of which battleground state could be flipped to the GOP by choosing the right popular politician from the state. Here’s a hint: it will not be California and Duncan Hunter.
Chinagate: The Movie
Clinton for POTUS:You've read the book, now see the movie. </sarcasm>
Do people really vote with their brains? I attempt to, and think a lot of us here do so as well.
However, the media makes this a kind of popularity contest that has little to do with policy, leadership ability, management style or intellect. It’s about who can sling the most mud and make it stick. It’s entertainment, not seriousness. I doubt people are really thinking about what they’re going to get with their vote, otherwise we wouldn’t have had to suffer though the last Clinton administration.
I guess we can throw tort reform, a marriage amendment, the border fence, and employer-based enforcement of illegal immigration out the window...
Great. *rolls eyes*
Latest poll results show him tied with "None of the Above".
A liberal friend says he’s voting for Thompson because he can’t stand hillary. This is anecdotal, so make of it what you wish.
The newspaper deadline is simply a version of "The show must go on." And the editor's rules, "If it bleeds, it leads," and "Man Bites Dog, not 'Dog Bites Man'" are also entertainment rules having no justification in respect to public policy issues. In fact the best way I've found to summarize what journalism is is by reference to what it is not. And what it is not, is an encyclopedia or a bible. Nor even a nonfiction book.
And that is the way to characterize the perspective of journalism - in comparison to the things that journalism systematically avoids, journalism is superficial. And to claim superior objectivity when you are actually systematically and for self-interested reasons purposefully superficial is also to be arrogant.
Half the truth is often a great lie. - Benjamin FranklinConsequently, even proof that journalism was always accurate (snort!) would not constitute proof of objectivity.The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . .Why Broadcast Journalism is
It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity,
and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith
Unnecessary and Illegitimate
For example: no one seems to recall our reasons for toppling the Iraq regime any longer. Most people, depending on their political ideology, believe that the reason for invading Iraq was because we wanted to promote democracy or they'll believe that we wanted to exercize imperialism and protect oil interests. Neither is true. The progression to the recent Iraq war was: Iraq invasion of Kuwait in Aug. 1990 => cease fire agreements/UN resolutions => violations of agreements => 1998 weapons inspectors punted => threat of war then faux cooperation => 2002-2003 further games played with weapon inspector leading to resolution 1441.
Another long forgotten factoid regarding a devastating 2001 event that people don't seem to recall that caused America to look really bad...perhaps even emboldened terrorists to try what they did in September of the same year because of our percieved weakness. Do you, yourself, recall the 2001 event that I'm refering to [hint: happened within first third of that year]?
"Now that's what I'm talking about!!"
You’re showing your true colors here.
Lukewarm “conservative” and MSM plant Thompson along with liberal Giuliani. The dream RINO ticket!
Wow! you’re a nut.
Here I try to give some sober and realistic political analysis and you can’t deal with it because you would rather live in a fantasy world.
Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo aren’t even in this race. Face the facts.
I didn’t say that Giuliani is my preference for the VP pick.
I merely said he is the only candidate in the GOP field who would make any sense from an electoral point of view, and even then, the odds are very much against it, historically speaking.
But you just see “Giuliani” and start foaming at the mouth.
You didn’t even read my entire post, did you?
How about this:
ONLY HUNTER/TANCREDO CAN STOP HITLERY FROM DESTROYING AMERICA!!!! ALL OTHERS WILL LOSE BECAUSE THEY ARE RINOS!!!!
Is that more to your liking?
Do you feel all warm and fuzzy now?
I will throw out one caveat, however. Since we're assuming Thompson wins the nomination here... if his long-term health becomes too much of an issue, the choice of VP will quite likely be focused more on who will be a "capable backup" as opposed to geographical or demographical issues.
Quite likely is that whomever is selected will hit on multiple areas -- at least two of geographic, demographic, and/or "capable backup".
There is no reason why Thompson’s health would be an issue, though I’m sure the left will try to make it one.
“But suddenly, a new contender has emerged.”
LOL- 3 Time looser trying for #4
As one of the original Reagan Democrats (read my FR profile) I can see that happening.
Fred Thompson has issued this stern statement regarding Iranian Leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his upcoming visit to the United Nations, and what we must do regarding the threat Iran poses:
Dallas, TX - Senator Fred Thompson issued the following statement today from Dallas, Texas regarding Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s upcoming visit to the United States and further called upon the UN Security Council to impose economic sanctions on the terrorist state:
“Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, president of the world’s premier terrorist state, is speaking before the United Nations next week. He has also asked to visit Ground Zero. If I were President of the United States none of this would have been an issue—I wouldn’t have let him into the country in the first place.
“It’s time for the world to finally send a stern message to Iran. Ahmadinejad has called for the destruction of Israel, is supporting terrorist groups throughout the Middle East, and is responsible for supplying weapons to extremists who are killing US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. And with Iran’s ongoing pursuit of nuclear weapons and development of long-range missiles, that country is a threat not only to the region and our allies, but to the entire free world. It’s time for the United Nations to take more serious action against this terror regime.
“The Security Council needs to begin placing comprehensive, multilateral sanctions on Iran’s economy, to include banning foreign investment, stopping export credits to companies doing business there, and prohibiting any business dealings with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. Iranian banks should be denied access to international banking and financial institutions, and World Bank loans should be suspended. All arms sales to Iran need to be halted. And travel by Iranian officials should be stopped and their assets frozen. Cutting off Iranian access to refined gas imports will certainly get Tehran’s attention and cause them to reconsider their priorities. If the UN can’t reach agreement on these measures due to continued Russian, Chinese or others’ intransigence, then we need to work directly with our allies and go around the UN roadblock.
“The international community has been negotiating with Iran for more than four years to no avail in seeking to halt the mullahs’ nuclear program. I believe strongly in diplomacy, but it has its limits, especially when the other side is made up of extremists. If we don’t get serious and act now—before they build atomic weapons—the stakes will be even higher, and our hand much weaker. The United States and its allies cannot afford to let that happen. As president, I certainly will not.”
What about John Cornyn as VP.
Smart guy, very conservative.
Of course, he doesn’t get us anywhere being from Texas.
Duncan Hunter is our first choice for President and he is whom we will vote for in the primary.
We do like Thompson who would be our second choice.
We would not vote for Romney period and yes part of it is his religion, plus we think he is a RINO.
That was a good post on reasons for choosing a VP.
To add to that, if I may. A couple of people were pulled because of corruption investigations.
Truman was a senator investigating spending during wartime on armaments. Businesses overbilling the government. Truman didn’t want to be president, Roosevelt was very sick, but Truman was perceived as honest. Minimal in management experience.
Nixon was a congressman with a corruption/communism? investigation. I don’t know how legit this was, it was before my time. Did Eisenhower want him?
Truman was drafted by the guys in the smoky back room, Nixon I don’t know about.
Just mention this as historically a reason why some were chosen.
It is very interesting that so many people who support a number of different candidates are talking so soon about a VP. Fred was also asked about it in an interview in Texas this week. His answer was it should be someone who could step in and take over if there was a need IIRC.
Yeah, good history there.
Sort of reminiscent of why Joe Lieberman was chosen, don’t you think?
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
When you want to go OVER the edge!!!!!
Glad you had the /sarc, I was worried for a second. Too much exposure to the Paulinati, second hand smoke and all...
I think Sen. Thompson rated the numbers quoted here on 9/18ish. Their daily tracking poll has shows a slight drop for Sen. Thompson and a slight gain for Giuliani. Not sure why. Maybe the Moveon situation?
Guessing....China holding our jet?
money can’t buy you love...
“And with Thompson running against Hillary, he could run her right off any debate stage by simply mentioning Huang, Trie, Chung, Raidy - and now Hsu:
Chinagate: The Movie
Whoever is the nominee should be reminded by FReepers to do this, just in case the nominee doesn’t realize how important it is to the general public.
And I’m afraid Mitt Romney wants a parternship with Red China, as if the $275 BILLION EACH YEAR trade imbalance isn’t bad enough, I don’t know what else he wants. Romney said that a couple of times on Laura Ingraham’s show.
While I like Thompson more than Rudy McRomney, Thompson
voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China, which is one of the reasons why I’m supporting Duncan Hunter, who voted NO on permanent normal trade relations with China.
Yes, but not just holding our spy plane with sophisticated encryption/decryption equipment...downing the spy plane to begin with while it was in international waters. Hardly anyone remembers this nor do they remember other important details.
I like the story, but it is a little dated.