Posted on 10/27/2007 5:08:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
So I come across this piece over at Real Clear Politics, which tries to sort out this whole "Thompson doesn't dazzle and therefore must go NOW" business, and I get to the money quote:
"If you have the intelligence to see which rules are real and which are fake, the respectfulness to follow the real rules, and the guts to break the fake rules - you can get ahead in this world. In fact, people will love you for breaking the fake rules."
I must admit up front that this follows a Bob Dylan reference about breaking fake rules in the 60's on the construction of songs, and I would add talking Bob Dylan and Fred Thompson in the same column just "feels" wrong, but the analogy sticks well just the same.
A lot of people seem worried that whatever political wisdom I do have might be fraying at the ends because I am perfectly content with Thompson's commitment to doing just whatever the heck he wants to as he goes about running for President. Even as they suggest they actually "like" Thompson, they abandon him for, what seems to me at least, trivial reasons. I fully accept that different people need different types of inspiration, but really now...with all this fuss about needing a change in Washington do we REALLY insist on there being no change in how one actually winds up there?
I have a great deal of respect for the analysts and the pundits. In fact, I even appreciate the critics (though follies such as trophy wives and marriage attempts seem a bit unrelated to the matter of policy and principle) because they force us to look at all angles and aspects of he (or she) who would be President. Having said that, however, do these guys really think they speak for all of us...or that only THEY understand this game? Further, since when did they get to call all the shots?
In quoting from an earlier Dick Morris rant (who by the way has LONG sought to whack Fred at every turn), RCP lists a couple things about the Thompson campaign that these so-called "experts" consider symptoms of the campaign's terminal illness:
He skipped and is skipping the first two debates of his presidential candidacy and said he was looking forward to attending the Oct. 14 New Hampshire debate -- the one that was cancelled weeks ago;
He is taking this week off from presidential campaigning;
He does not know enough about the details of the Terry Schiavo case to comment.;
He is also unfamiliar with the proposal to lower soaring insurance premiums Floridians must pay for home storm coverage since the hurricanes
Now, each of these have been addressed, and there are many others. The bigger question us dolts out here who actually "work" for a living might ask is this: Who cares? How many of us who will donate to a campaign or support any of these candidates knows any more than Thompson (or anyone else for that matter) about Florida insurance premiums [unless, of course we actually LIVE in Florida]? Same with the Schiavo case - do a "Jay Walking" episode and see how many people even know who she was. Yeah yeah..."but haystack, he's running for President! He MUST have answers to EVERY issue on any given day in any of a number of possible environments and scenarios!"
Ok. Look. Presidents must be sharp. They must be informed. They must be articulate, and they must have a grasp on the issues that affect America. Agreed. They must also be the leader of a team, and as such must have the right people around them to make sure they (and he) knows all angles of an issue before any action is taken. That means getting to the people, and determining the best approach to the problem at hand. They certainly don't need the media to take on these responsibilities; America's best interests are NOT directly equivalent to those of the media.
Again, from RCP:
"The media is the arbiter of the perpetual campaign. This is for good reason. Candidates like to keep the cost of the perpetual campaign low. The media offers advertisement to them - through news coverage, talk shows, debates, and so forth - that costs candidates no money. But, as nothing in life is free, the candidates pay a price. Everything they say and do is analyzed and categorized by the talking heads. So, the heads set the rules of the perpetual campaign. They tell us who does well and who does poorly, and why.
According to the heads, Thompson has done poorly because he is not doing what he is supposed to be doing. He is breaking too many of the rules."
Arbiters of the perpetual campaign indeed.
It is suggested there are two types of campaigns. "On the one hand, there is the perpetual campaign - which is reducible to each party's attempts to win the daily news cycle. On the other hand, there is what I have been calling the real campaign. This is the quest for votes during the few weeks before Election Day."
It seems to me Thompson never had a chance at winning the perpetual campaign - he wasn't in it from the beginning, and as any outsider will tell you (in any bloodsport), last guy in bleeds first. Fine. If you believe the numbers, Fred's got good reason to believe he'll be in the game when the real campaign is in full throttle...the "real" campaign - you know - when real people cast real votes? Yeah, that one:
"Fred Thompson hasn't dazzled many political professionals with his early stump appearances, yet when it comes to building a base of small campaign donors he's showing the potential to keep pace with better-funded rivals.
Thompson, 65, a former Tennessee senator who's running for the Republican nomination as a Ronald Reagan-style populist, tapped 74,217 individuals for an average gift of $125 between July 1 and Sept. 30, the first fundraising quarter of his presidential bid.
That's more than double the contributors Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani signed up during their first reporting periods. If Thompson keeps adding donors at this clip, he may be competitive in early primaries even though he trails Giuliani and Romney in cash raised."
The smart guys may not be dazzled, but more than a few of the rest of us are doing just fine thank you very much.
If not, he should drop out—IMMEADIATELY!!
Why???
Wel, that is certainly my thoughts!
More importantly, I wonder if he knows my birthday?
He skipped and is skipping the first two debates of his presidential candidacy and said he was looking forward to attending the Oct. 14 New Hampshire debate -- the one that was cancelled weeks ago;
Good. Debates are like basketball playoffs. No one cares until the championship!
He is taking this week off from presidential campaigning;
OH NO! THERES ONLY 12 MONTHS LEFT UNTIL THE ELECTION!!!!
He does not know enough about the details of the Terry Schiavo case to comment.;
Last I heard, she was still dead
He is also unfamiliar with the proposal to lower soaring insurance premiums Floridians must pay for home storm coverage since the hurricanes.
Gosh they must pay more because they live in a area that can wipe out homes??? Soon San Diegos will start whining as well! Hey come to Texas and experience what high insurance rates are like!
Remember something...
The Media isn’t looking for a Presidential candidate, they want a ROCK STAR...
The Entertainment news covers the Clinton’s on THE SAMES SHOWS that they breathlessly cover Britney on.
Whe Fred says he honestly doesn’t know the answer, he’s senile. Hillary, only 4 years younger, dodges a question COMPLETELY, goes into something completely different, and the reporters eyes flutter in admiration...
In the end, for Republicans, it all comes down to IOWA.
Thin the chaff from the field, and we can start getting down to ISSUES, instead of sound-bite politics. Fred knows this, too...
I like the article, do not disagree with the premise. However, I hope for a President that can handily discuss 99% of current events/topics. Newt Gingrich comes to mind. Too bad he is not in the race.
Sure there will be some submarine shots from the media, we have come to expect this. Just not sure (yet) Thompson can verbally address most issues? Maybe he can. Thats it, I am just not sure yet, as well as many voters may not be sure yet. So here’s hoping he steps up. Clinton could handle just about any topic thrown his way, in my opinion, this is necessary for a President. I can think of many reasons he (clitton) should not have been the President. But he did have knowledge of the issues, well mostly. This is just a basic presupposition for the Presidency, communicating, understanding & being aware of current/popular issues.
Well, he didn't send me a card, so there's no way I could ever vote for him!
Happy Birthday !
Fred should ,if you are a UM grad as he is.
Clinton could BS his way through an answer. He showed no real depth of understanding the issue.
I don’t know what to make of it either. If I were to guess.... I’d guess that McPain ends up with the nomination. I think Fred will make somebody a great VP. He’s made for that job. It’s a job a lazy person can do...... :)
Bill Clinton certainly holds the BS’er of all BSer titles.
Love it.
I’m afraid that you might be right about McCain. If that is the case, it will be Dole all over again.
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.