Fred's Message to Iowa Voters

Youtube(vid clip) ^ | December 30th | FT

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Seems to be that Fred and Duncan are both the real conservative choices in this election cycle.

[Tigen]

Freds record concerning YOUR GUN RIGHTS are only so so!

http://gunowners.org/pres08/thompson2.htm

[shiva]

GO FRED!

[reasonisfaith]

Yesterday, Iowa campaign office states: standing room only every stop of Thompson’s bus tour; significant increase in number of media people attending the events—the guy didn’t want to put a number on it but when I pressed further his rough approximation indicated that increase in media people is likely to be at least doubled from start of tour.

When asked about how things are going, office staff comment:

“Fred’s more than a 30 second sound bite.”

“When you get people in a room with Fred, he’s a closer.”

“Call response is getting better.”

“The needle is moving.”

[reasonisfaith]

December 31, Iowa campaign office reporting: “People are just pouring out to come see him.” “We had an entire restaurant in the little town of Tama packed full last night, and this has been happening across the state.” Staff member also says there’s been an increase in both the number of media and general public attending Fred’s events.

Fred has made sixty stops so far in fifteen days.

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

Yep. I don’t expect a perfect candidate, but pretty good.

Even Reagan wasn’t perfect, I’ve noticed how so many have lionized him since after his second term, and especially after he passed.

There’s an quote out there that I can’t remember exactly, that goes something to the effect of ‘if you agree with 80% of what I believe, I’m your man. But if you agree with 100% of what I believe, seek help’.

Duncan would’ve been my first choice, he’s the most conservative from what I can see, but Fred is still very conservative, would make me very satisfied, and I think if Fred chose Duncan as a vice, we could possibly see a Duncan presidency in the future.(I wouldn’t mind a Tancredo vice either, he’s *not* a one trick pony despite what the liberal media wish some to believe)

[G.Mason]

Oh please!

Go out and buy a few guns.

Happy New Year.

[John Valentine]

Go Fred!

[Tigen]

I like fred too

[LadyNavyVet]

They sure mixed some apple and oranges to come up with only a “mostly consistent” rating for Thompson. They included Campaign Finance Reform and his vote for David Satcher as Surgeon General as anti-gun votes. That’s a stretch by any measure. I have issues with CFR, but it is clearly not a gun control bill. And anyone Bill Clinton selected as Surgeon General was going to be a liberal kook (Joycelyn Elders, anyone?) and David Satcher was no exception, but choosing the Surgeon General is the President’s prerogative.

On major gun legislation, Fred has proven himself to be ardently pro-Second Amendment. From ontheissues.org:

“NYC doesn’t have same values as America on gun control. (Nov 2007)
Allow colleges to make their own rules about guns on campus. (Nov 2007)
Strongly supports the Second Amendment. (Sep 2007)
Allowing concealed carry could have limited VA Tech massacre. (Apr 2007)
Having handguns in your home is a Constitutional right. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted YES on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES on maintaining current law: guns sold without trigger locks. (Jul 1998)”

The only other Republican running who could possibly be more pro-Second Amendment is Duncan Hunter.

[Dreagon]

Fred may be the only hope this party has. When you recognize Huckabee as a figure that has been rallied around by social conservatives who feel they have been taken for granted by the Republican party, then it becomes very obvious there is no hope they would ever compromise their principles enough to settle for a Guiliani or a Romney. If the GOP can’t offer them somebody like Thompson (or Hunter if he had a chance), then they may as well get ready for a Hillary presidency.

It is vital that Thompson does well.

[Republican Wildcat]

Unfortunately it appears according to the polls one of the more liberal candidates is going to prevail.

[Mygirlsmom]

I remember stopping in to see my parents at about 5 p.m. on election day 2004.

They were listening to a very somber Brit Hume, and informed me that the election was as good as won by John Kerry. It was that day that I learned to refuse to listen to polls and wait until the process was completed.

My hope is that on Jan 4. Fred gets a "Gomer Pyle" headline--"Surprise, Surprise Surprise!"

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Dewy Beats Truman !!

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

I’ve noticed that. Which is sad.

Conservatives can’t win elections if they keep nominating guys who do noting but try to out-lib the libs.

If we want a landslide, we’ll nominate the most conservative guys we possibly can. Right now, the only two really decent conservatives we’ve got are hunter and thompson.

It drives me up the wall that people simply cannot learn from history. Reagan showed us the way. He showed us. True conservatism = landslides. Are DH and FT as conservative as RR? Maybe, maybe not. I don’t know. Don’t care. These are our choices, and DH and FT are the two better candidates.

[glmjr]

Saving the Republican Party

Our party can not survive unless we adhere to our basic conservative principles and nominate a person whose values lie in those principles and one that all Republicans will support.   If we fail, history will record the death of the Republican party as occurring during the caucus primaries of 2008.  This is not speculation on my part, but the opinion of many other experts in political science.  Many republicans and independents would either vote for a democrat or abstain, rather than vote for anything less than a person with "true conservative" values.

Take a closer look at the candidates

         Rudy Giuliani is intelligent and has proven himself to be capable as mayor of New York City, however Rudy is a liberal in every sense of the word.  He is pro-abortion, pro-gay, and pro-gun control.  I just can't vote for someone who "cross dresses" and marches in gay pride parades.  He is liberal, no other way to put it.  He would not represent the values of the Republican party and would not garner the support of all Republicans by any stretch of the imagination. Death of the Republican Party as we know it would occur if he was the nominee.

           Mitt Romney is sharp, intelligent and on the face seems to be a good candidate to save the party.  If you look closer you will find that in the past few years he has supported sanctuary cities for illegal aliens, supported pro-choice on the abortion issue, supported gay marriages and was elected governor of the most liberal state in the union.  Mitt's Mormon religion is not a factor and should not be a factor in America.  Mitt may have made a real change as he has stated and may have come to embrace a conservative views on the issues, but he'll have to prove it to me AND that may take years.  Mitt might be make a good president for the republican party one day, but not in 2008.  Mitt should wait a few years and give us the proof we need that in fact he is a "real conservative" as he says he is. The Republican Party would not be united behind Mitt in 2008, due to  his religion.  This is a shame , but a fact.  We would loose to the Democrats in 2008 if Mitt was nominated.

            Mike Huckabee is a good speaker, probably a nice guy and I'm sure an excellent preacher.  Mike is conservative on only two issues, abortion and marriage. He is a populist liberal on all other important issues.  His popularity  base is evangelicals who can't seem to separate religion from electing the leader of the free world.  .  He was even endorsed by the Democratic governor of Ohio, who said that he reflected Democratic liberal views as well as the other Democratic candidates.  He has even went so far as to criticize  President Bush, calling his foreign policy "bunker mentality".  Huckabee is a Democrat running as a republican, no other way to put it.  He would divide the republican party and cause a division from which we could not recover.  He is more dangerous to the republican party than having a democrat elected.  Probably the most dangerous thing about Huckabee is his naivetie on how to deal  foreign policy and the threats facing our nation today.  To put it bluntly, he is ignorant on foreign affairs and the part the United States plays as being the premier world superpower and bastion of freedom.  Death of the Republican Party as we know it would occur if he was the nominee.

        John McCain is a true American hero and I honor and respect him for all he has given in the service of his country during the Viet Nam war.  John is a conservative on most issues, but John tends to flip -flop on the issues.  Last year he and the despicable Edward Kennedy were two of the main players in the Amnesty Bill that Pres. Bush was pushing down the throats of the American people.  Thank God the people spoke up and the bill was defeated.  If McCain was the nominated and elected I have no doubts that he would revive that very bill and the next time it may pass.  I don't trust him to stop illegal immigration and therefore he gets "thumbs down" from me.  He also tends to be a little "hot headed" at times.  I'm not sure we need an emotional "hot head" with his finger on the button, if you know what I mean.  The Republican party would not unite behind McCain due to a lack of trust.  We would  loose to the Democrats in 2008 .

         Ron Paul...can you say "nut case"....Ron has a libiterian view of what the world and the US should be like.  He is so far off having "true conservative" values, he is not worth discussion.  The fringe radicals seem to like his message , much the way people who bought in to Ross Perot did some years ago.  Ron's idea of US foreign policy is for the US to withdraw from everywhere and become an isolationist country and "everybody would leave us alone"  Total BS.  Ron could not unite the party, in fact he would cause a split.  Death of the Republican Party as we know it would occur if he was the nominee.

           Duncan Hunter..... A "true conservative" in every sense of the word.  Duncan is strong on all conservative issues, especially illegal immigration.  Duncan could unite the party behind him.  Our party would have someone that all republicans could support.  The liberal media has failed to get behind Duncan, which is what should be expected.  They would prefer a republican candidate , like Huckabee, which would divide our party and be easier for the democrats to defeat next November.  Duncan gets a   "thumbs up" from me.

       Fred Thompson.  Fred is the only candidate that is conservative on all issues.  He is a Federalist, meaning that he is a supporter of states rights and less government.  Fred is the candidate that there are absolutely no negatives.  He has never flipped his position on any issue.  Fred is the one candidate that would appeal to every Republican.  Ron Paul supporters might be the exception, but most of them are libertarian and nothing short of a revolutionary would please them anyway.  Fred is for lower taxes, stronger military, anti abortion, anti gay-marriage, stopping illegal immigration and less government involvement in our lives, all main stay issues of the Republican Party.  Fred is the only candidate in the list that could unite the party and defeat the democrats in 2008.

 

Just the Facts... check them out for yourself.  America awaits your decision.

[Khepri]

Unfortunately it appears according to the polls one of the more liberal candidates is going to prevail.

Yeah, we shouldn't even bother with primaries....or an election for that matter...you know, cause of the polls...they are always so accurate why bother? /sarcasm