Are people more concerned that Fred Thompson didn't invest more effort in Iowa and New Hampshire? I'm just not clear on it.
I have to say I support Fred Thompson's positions well and above what I've seen Tom Huckabee promote from a historical perspective. The only problem I have with Fred Thompson's past is his support of McCain's CFR. He's since explained that position. Tom Huckabee has promoted nanny-statism by promoting smoking bans and has a problem with his record on taxes. I just don't see where Huckabee comes off as a better alternative to Thompson.
At least I don't get it beyond seeing that the liberal media gives Huckabee plenty of free press. Thompson's pretty much been blacked out.
lots of freepers have many reasons against Huck. My primary reason for his rejection is his support for illegals. He even wants to give them subsidized tuition. That’s called selling out this country.
My issue with Thompson is this: He is more “show” than “go.” I like his style and his “presence” which I think comes more from him having played certain roles than anything he has actually done politically. I also think his past as a lobbyist, in which he seems to work for the highest bidder not necessarily out of principle. I believe that this can and will be used against him in an election to undermine his message as being insincere.
Give me Fred to Huck, anyday.