Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Many Compare Fred Thompson to Reagan
Scripps Howard News Service ^ | Monday, August 20, 2007 | By MICHAEL COLLINS

Posted on 08/20/2007 2:37:30 PM PDT by hardback

By MICHAEL COLLINS Scripps Howard News Service Monday, August 20, 2007

He's an actor-turned-politician in the mode of Ronald Reagan, someone who is at ease in front of a camera or a crowd, a man who can charm an audience with a folksy tale or a clever turn of phrase.

But is Fred Thompson truly Reaganesque?

Reagan was, after all, the Great Communicator, a leader so skilled at connecting with his subjects that he has become the standard by which all would-be presidents are judged.

Thompson's admirers, elated over his decision to seek the Republican nomination for president, already are hailing his candidacy as the second coming of Reagan.

The former Tennessee senator, an ex-prosecutor who plays a stern district attorney on the television crime drama "Law & Order," is expected to officially enter the race sometime next month.

Like Reagan, Thompson believes in smaller government and fiscal conservatism.

But let's put aside ideology for a minute and focus on the other trait that he shares with the last actor who was elected president -- that is, an innate ability to communicate, to tell a story in a way that captures the public's attention.

Both men come across as strong, authoritative figures on stage and screen. Their speaking voices are fluent and resonant, though vastly different. Reagan's was smooth, mellow, grandfatherly. Thompson's is deep, gruff, sometimes gravelly. Both men were blessed with the gift of gab and a flair for spinning a good yarn.

But is Thompson Reagan's equal as a communicator?

Thompson does have the Reagan touch, said John Geer, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.

"Thompson is at ease with the camera," Geer said. "Certainly, Reagan was at ease with the camera. Second, at least from what I can see so far, Thompson, when he decides to be critical of somebody or question them, he does it in a way that has less of an edge to it than a lot of current politicians, and I think that is also Reaganesque."

In some ways, though, Thompson seems less like "the Gipper" and more like Sheriff Andy Taylor of the old "Andy Griffith Show," Geer said.

"He has this kind of disarming quality about him, where he tries to use folksy kinds of metaphors just like Taylor did," Geer said. "But at the same time, Taylor was the most wily (man) in that entire city. Thompson is very smart as well, so he has this old country-boy kind of routine that I think serves him pretty well."

Clark Judge, who worked as a speechwriter for Reagan in the White House, also sees a little of Reagan in Thompson.

"Thompson has a very solid, reassuring presence at a podium and before a camera," Judge said. "He comes across as someone you trust a lot. ... Look at him on some of his TV speeches, responses to State of the Union, that sort of thing. He's very much someone who's talking to you."

One of Reagan's greatest attributes, at least as an orator, was his ability to take written text and give it additional meaning, Judge said.

"For me, it was very, very different listening to Reagan before I started working for him and then listening to him when he was delivering text that I had actually written," Judge said. "He would find meaning in the text and bring it out through his delivery."

Judge said he doesn't know whether Thompson has that talent because he's never written for him. But, "Thompson is a very effective communicator, which is one reason he has moved up so fast (in the polls)," Judge said.

Others are less impressed by Thompson's oratory skills.

"He's no Reagan," said John Kares Smith, a professor of communications at the State University of New York, an expert in presidential and political communication and a devotee of Thompson's television show.

"Ronald Reagan had an ability and a real underestimated skill of being able to touch very deep-held American myths and beliefs," Smith said. "When he would talk about the city on the hill, he really could resonate with our Puritan past. Fred Thompson, I don't think he has any of those skills at all."

Thompson "just doesn't connect the way Reagan did," Smith said. "Reagan had maybe three ideas, and everybody knew what they were. He knew people. He had a wonderful sense of humor. Fred Thompson is not known for his humor."

Reagan was also the eternal optimist and, like Franklin D. Roosevelt, used his speeches to raise people's spirits, said David Johnson, a political consultant in Atlanta who worked on Bob Dole's presidential campaign in 1988.

"That was Reagan's whole persona," Johnson said. "That's what his greatness was, very much like Jack Kennedy. Thompson, on the other hand, is more a 'just-the-facts' type of person. He doesn't lift to the oratorical lengths that Reagan or Roosevelt did or even Bill Clinton did."

As evidence, Johnson cited a speech that Thompson gave to a group of Republicans last May. Some complained that the address, Thompson's first as a prospective presidential candidate, was disappointing.

But whether Thompson can live up to the Reagan legend may be beside the point. He doesn't have to be a Reagan clone to win the GOP nomination, Judge said.

"The real issue," Judge said, "is how he compares to the rest of the field."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Alabama; US: California; US: Tennessee; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: 2008; conservatism; conservatives; democrats; election; election2008; electionpresident; elections; fredheads; fredthompson; gop; reaganesque; republicans; ronaldreagan; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: reefdiver

“Nice guy, good on Tv, but I fear He’s Bob Dole”

... or George Bush (Sr. or Jr.), or Gerald Ford, or any other moderate, Rockefeller, or compassionate-conservative “Republican”. That is a very reasonable concern.

How many of the afore-mentioned, were also CFR members.


61 posted on 08/21/2007 7:40:54 AM PDT by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SHEENA26
You must be blind and deaf. You have my sympathy.

Not the "James Bond" Sean Connery, but a 65 year old Sean Connery (Bald and all!). And no, I'm not comparing dialects either.

I wonder how Fred looks in a kilt! LOL :0)

62 posted on 08/21/2007 7:53:51 AM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Withhold Taxes - Starve a Liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: TAdams8591
Fred is his own man with his own personality that has mass appeal. He is nothing like Reagan in the areas I mentioned, which doesn’t mean he isn’t talented.

*************

Damning with faint praise, TA?

63 posted on 08/21/2007 8:04:31 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: hardback

Why I feel that Fred Thompson is the only one in the bunch that can revive that old-time religion of genuine Reagan-like conservatism. Its his remarkable ability to communicate, honestly and openly and with such flair.

A major irritation of the Republican base has been Bush’s trouble articulating. Given a prepared speech he can deliver it with the best of them, but slap a microphone in front of him like at a press conference and we Republicans cringe. His sloppy speaking style only serves to bolster the perception of his incompetence. That is why the most important but least discussed asset we are looking for in a candidate is the ability to communicate, and Fred Thompson seems to be what we the Republicans are yearning for.

We need to not just get a victory in 2008, but we need to look beyond Bush and focus on the long term vision of the Conservative movement. Each of the candidates running have good attributes, and maybe just maybe a few of them have what it takes to beat Hillary, but where will they take the party?
Is this just about beating Hillary? Yea, we get some sweet revenge, but we could also get four years of more of the same politics as usual in D.C. . Or is this about a rediscovery of our values and our common sense as a Nation, and the resurgence of national pride? We need the President to be the “Nations President” once again.

It’s been written not long after the mess in Florida with the hanging chads, that to half the Nation, President Bush was their President, but to the other half he was not President at all. We can as Americans no longer afford to have that sort of a divide between our people.

Ronald Reagan said he left the entertainment world for politics because he wanted to protect something precious. Well the office of President is something precious and the respect for it should be preserved. The President once again needs to be “Our President”, weather you voted for him or not. Out of all the potential presidential candidates, Fred Thompson is the one that can unite us and move us forward to better things.

In President Reagan’s Farewell Address he said, “I wasn’t a great communicator, but I communicated great things.” Fred Thompson is a communicator of great things and I am honored to be behind him.


64 posted on 08/21/2007 8:08:11 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

All one need look at is the “progress” made in the country in the last five or six decades, most notably. Take a look at the social fabric, the complete indoctrinational, non-intellectual morass that our education system has become, the way in which our military (the individual soldiers have never been more competent or professional, just leadership both military and civilian, seems to be a disgrace)) wins wars, the courts, the media, the list is endless.

When we have not had a comlete dolt (Carter) or a degenerate adolescent (guess who) in office, we have had an acceptable Republican. What have conservatives gained? Even during the terms of Reagan, we took some pretty big hits, S. D. O’Connor, the amnesty that has led to our current immigration problem, and cut-and-run when the hundreds of Marines were killed in Lebanon, are examples. I consider both of the Bushes to be able to stand on their own “de”merits.

Conservatism and with it, commonsense (which is what conservatism basically is), is taking a severe beating. A “good-enough”, compromise (check definition) candidate is not going to stop the erosion and eventual destruction of the American culture.

We have to stop the d@#* bleeding now.

Fred’s drifting in and out of acting does not bother me nearly as bad as history as a lobbyist (it is not pretty) and a CFR member.

Romney is almost slicker than Willy. And while he may be a gifted businessman, how difficult is it to get a start, when your dad is a past-Governor/Presidential candidate and your mom a Senator. It is quite amazing, the relationship between politicians and big-money.

Even with that, these two are preferrable to Rudy and McCain and infinitely better thanany of Dem candidates.


65 posted on 08/21/2007 8:15:15 AM PDT by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Sturm Ruger

The word lobbyist seems to be missing from your list. Also a lot of that list involves being appointed to insider jobs by, of course, insiders. CFR membership is not looked upon as a plus, by very many conservatives.


66 posted on 08/21/2007 8:19:39 AM PDT by David Isaac (Duncan Hunter '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: hardback

IMHO, Hunter could be better than Reagan.


67 posted on 08/21/2007 8:27:25 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trisham

I call them as I see them. And that’s how I see it. : )


68 posted on 08/21/2007 2:19:31 PM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
>Many Compare Fred Thompson to Reagan
>>Based on what exactly?

They're both equally
old, dead and irrelevant
to younger voters!
69 posted on 08/21/2007 2:26:08 PM PDT by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Catholic Iowan

Unless I’m losing my mind, I distinctly heard Fred Thompson say he would never apologize for America. Indeed, he went on to mention the many, many Americans who died to free other countries. I also like Duncan Hunter, but if he walked in my door right now I wouldn’t know who he was.


70 posted on 08/21/2007 3:17:28 PM PDT by maxwellp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TAdams8591

Fair enough. :)


71 posted on 08/21/2007 3:52:20 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: meandog
"..As for his "high draft number" I remain dubious about his willingness and his conscience about Vietnam and he remains a draft evader in my book, just like Clinton!"

Where's the proof? That's about as fair as your other assessments of Mitt. Clinton had a low draft number and used ROTC to stay out of the military, deferring his military service and later drawing a higher draft nemuber. Mitt drew a high draft number and was never drafted, end of story.

Mitt is for the AWB ban as were both Bushes, and many other Republicans. He is hardly any more anti-gun than most of his fellow Republican politicians. You may not agree with them or him, but stop painting him as if his stance on the gun issues is uncommon for Republicans. It isn't. It won't surprise me at all if we learn Thompson is also for the AWB ban.

Perhaps you better prefer the anti-gun positions of the Democrats which is what you shall have if you continue to spew distortions about viable Republican presidential candidates like Mitt.

72 posted on 08/22/2007 7:29:47 AM PDT by TAdams8591 ( Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney for president in 2008! : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: maxwellp
I haven’t made up my mind who I will vote for in the Republican primary.
As a conservative, Hunter seems closest to my philosophy. I think he would make an ideal president. On the other hand, even though it’s early yet, I don’t think he’s going anywhere.
Fred Thompson is making all the right noises, has an engaging personality and a professional TV presence. It looks like he has a serious chance at the nomination (if he runs) and a good chance to win the general election if nominated. On the other hand, he is a member of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission (whatever that really means), and voted for McCain-Feingold.
So, do I vote my conscience and vote for Hunter ... then see my state delegation go to the convention and vote in one of the RINOs; or do I vote for Thompson and keep my fingers crossed that he isn’t really another internationalist bent on giving away our national sovereignty? His explanation that the Council on Foreign Relations is just another debating society like the American Enterprise Institute didn’t really reassure me all that much.

Guiliani is a Democrat in Republican drag. Mitt Romney? Nobody knows. He can’t be that fellow that ran for Governor of Massachusetts, can he?
73 posted on 08/22/2007 6:44:50 PM PDT by Hiddigeigei (Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson