Skip to comments.Can Thompson's late effort pay off?
Posted on 12/24/2007 12:08:24 AM PST by County Agent Hank KimballEdited on 12/24/2007 12:43:32 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
Even his harshest critics would likely concede that Fred Thompson had a good campaign swing through Iowa this week.
But as he headed home to Virginia on Saturday for a three-day Christmas break before returning to Iowa for the second half of his Iowa bus tour, the question that this last-minute effort began with still stands.
(Excerpt) Read more at desmoinesregister.com ...
I see a strong 2nd place finish, propelling him to a victory in South Carolina. From there, I see a knock-down, drag-out come Super Tuesday.
McCain and Huckster are RINO's. Guiliani won't get the social conservative vote. Romney is an illusion. Only Fred is a consistent conservative. NOT a PERFECT conservative...but he's 90% there.
He needs our support!
Fred has a tricked out bus.
Romney has a jet.
Paul has a blimp.
That’s so perfect, somehow.
I more than likely will NOT vote for Huckabee, but I am getting sick and tired of people spewing out terms, like “protestant socialist”, Baptist preacher, ect. like it was vomit in their mouth.
I think you misunderstood the comment. The original context was a poster who said (I'm paraphrasing, but this is close): "We don't need two socialist parties; one secular and one protestant"
There's no criticism of protestantism intended (I'm protestant). The point is just that we shouldn't let our sympathy and respect for his religious convictions blind us to the fact that, aside from abortion and guns, he's just as far left as Hillary and Obama.
Indeed but many here have taken the opportunity to allow their own personal bias(s) against Southern Protestants to take on new life in their disdain for Huckster
hell, there are folks who just dismiss the whole state of Arkansas...
it’s the old it’s ok to bash Southern Christians thing here....
and the ignorance...many non Southerners here think Evangelicals are by default right wing and the same as Fundies and Charismatics....so ill informed
I think Cleveland will win the Superbowl.
Why, do you like Socialists? There are other sites where you might feel more welcom.
I personally don't have any bias against Southern Protestants, but I can readily admit that the floating cross ad really, really creeped me out. Can you imagine if Romney had tried to pull that off?
I supported Fred until the attacks came on Huck. If you compare the two’s proposed platforms they are very similar. There records are different, but apples and oranges..you can’t compare a Senator to a Governor. You will find lots of self-proclaimed Christians here, but true devotion scares them. The difference between southern Fred and southern Huck is that everyone understands that fred is acting, Huck is the real deal.
The appellation "pro-life liberal" is probably more accurate.
The fact that he is a Baptist preacher does not outweigh the evil Socialist tendencies he has shown. Go back over just what he has said in his campaign in the last year and you will see a record of changed positions, wrong positions, and outright misleading. Ethics charges, his family problems, even his choice to speak at such an anti-Catholic church the Sunday before Christmas leave me wondering why he even attracts votes.
Thompson, for example, is equally pro-life. If you don’t believe me, look at Huckabee’s stance on abortion at the beginning of the campaign... he wanted the issue sent to the states. Only when Thompson gave that as his answer did Governor Huckabee change his position. Thompson doesn’t have near the baggage. Even Governor Romney takes better stands on most things now than Governor Huckabee.
If Fred were acting, he'd tickle your ears and tell you what you want to hear not what he believes. I actually find it quite telling that the only actor in the race is the only one who's not acting!
Boy, I don’t I could disagree with you much more in that one short paragraph of yours.
Their stated platforms since the beginning of the presidential race are not that close to each other, and Fred’s is so much better defined than Huck’s that the latter may as well not exist.
Their records are vastly more different and clearly point to Fred being almost completely conservative and Huck being frighteningly liberal.
I’m one of those evangelicals that Huck is trying to talk to, and he could not be much farther off the mark with me than he is. I would not want him for a pastor or a president.
Also IMHO, Fred is doing a lot less acting in front of the camera than the other candidates have been, and a whole lot less lying.
Put me down in Fred’s column.
Are you there on the ground there in Iowa ?
Huck isn’t beyond criticism, but calling him Huckleberry, Gomer Pyle, Huckster etc. is childish and indicative of a prejudice against southern culture.
Fred and Huck’s STATED positions are almost identical. Criticisms of Huck are based on his past and not on his platform. Please go to his site and then criticize his positions.
I am not saying that Fred is acting conservative, just that he is acting like a Southern Christian and people are more comfortable with faux Christians than real ones. Fred is a Hollywood facsimile.
You are mking this up slander entirely out of your own prejudices. It really reflects rather badly on your own credibility.
A Protestant Baptist socialist running for president should put a taste of vomit in your mouth. Huckabee has never met a tax he didn't like, supports socialized medicine (see SCHIP), supports shutting down military prison camps that house and detain terrorists, thinks man has caused the earth to warm.......and will tell you that you are un-christian if you don't agree with him.
I've got some prime swampland real estate in Arizona to sell you...or perhaps you would be interested in buying a historic bridge in Brooklyn?
Near Yuma, I hear? ;)
Hillary wants to run against Huckabee because his fear factor will rally the secular progressives like nothing else.
He is a theological social gospel liberal seeking the kingdom of this world. Both his misapplication of the Bible and his political socialism reflect this. He is not “evangelical” or he would still be preaching not campaigning.
“I supported Fred until the attacks came on Huck. If you compare the twos proposed platforms they are very similar.”
Um, you’ve -got- to be kidding. They’re not even -remotely- similar. They’re not even on the same planet, except on abortion, and even there, why doesn’t Huck taking tens of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from the biggest stem cell researching company in the world bother you? It sure bothers me.
When did his positions change and why?
Fred's positions have remained constant throughout his political career. He doesn't have to twist word meaings or try to redefine conservatism to fit his platform.
...just that he is acting like a Southern Christian and people are more comfortable with faux Christians than real ones. Fred is a Hollywood facsimile.
That's an interesting thing to say considering one of the slams against Thompson is that he doesn't go to church often enough. If Fred were putting on a faux Christian costume, it would have been easy for his to start carrying a Bible and showing up at church every Sunday. He didn't do that because that's not how he lived his life prior to starting the campaign. If he'd suddenly altered his routine to include church on Sunday, you'd have better luck making the case.
There's a huge problem here. Fred has been a consistant conservative. That can hardly be said for Huckabee. There is nothing conservative about jacking up taxes, supporting socialized medicine (see SCHIP), joining the Global Warming© alarmists, calling for the shutdown of military detainment centers for terrorists, and rattling off propoganda that could seriously pass off as a discounted MoveOn.org ad in the NYTimes.
I had a conversation with my very lib bro-in-law. He laughed about Hillary being a total joke but strongly supported McCain "as a true moderate who did whatever it took to get the job done."
I thought it was an interesting statement. I honestly believe our primary process has been heavily corrupted by liberals who have either lied to pollers on their political affiliations or actually registered to vote as republicans in the primaries.
It's really the only explanation I can give for filthy RINOs getting such polling results. I don't know any republicans who are actually voting for them, so far their support seems to come from the left.
In that case wild horses couldn't drag me to vote for him.
LET'S GET 'EM - LOL!
Most of my family is from Arkansas. The single consistent thing they continue to repeat is don't vote for anyone from Arkansas. My mom used to work in the state house when she was a PYT in the 50's. She said it was like a constant track event where you had to continually run away from all the lechers. She left after an exceptionally short time of this, disgusted.
Malvern, Little Rock, Hot Springs, Ouachita...I'm from Memphis myself, though. Good folks all over up there.
Nice to know that we Southern Christians are not real Christin material.
You might want to get down on your knees and ask God just how (FAUX) we Southerners are in how we treat our commitment to God and country.
If you have any smarts you would ask half of FR to forgive you for such an inane offending statement.
Fred's positions have remained constant throughout his political career. He doesn't have to twist word meaings or try to redefine conservatism to fit his platform.And his positions are consistent with a conservative view of the US constitution that is shared by only one other candidate: Duncan Hunter.
All the others, including Huckabee, fail to demonstrate even the slightest understanding of the relationship between a conservative view of the US constitution and the entire concept of American Liberty.
Exactly what 'attacks' has Fred made on Huck. The only things I've seen coming from Fred about his opponents is making sure the voting public knows exactly what the other candidates have done, or have stood for in the past. Using your opponents words to make your point is not an attack, it's simply informative.
I think you have the wrong person who's acting like a Southern Christian. Fred has stated strongly that though he is a Christian, and a believer, he's not bringing that up in the race, because that's a private matter, and he won't pander to the voters in that way. To me, that's a breath of fresh air!
As far as the variations on Huckabee's name, there are folks here who've done that, but it wasn't Fred.
What Huckabee STATES and what he has DONE are sometimes different things. Since we have certainty about his actions, I think that’s what most folks would assume he would DO again, no matter what he says to try to get elected.
I’m for Hunter or Thompson. But if Thompson loses this thing, it can be blamed on his failure to simply endorse the Human Life Amendment and the Federal Marriage Amendment. All he had to do was say, “yes, I support those amendments”. They aren’t a matter for the president to have to deal with, so why not just endorse them and move on? Instead, by opposing them he made a lot of people wonder about his commitment to pro-life and pro-family causes and that allowed Huckabee to exploit those concerns.
I understand the states’ rights argument on those issues, but there’s no constituency for it. People either think human life and traditional marriage are worthy of constitutional protection, or they support Roe vs. Wade and would like to see a similar ruling forcing same-sex “marriage” on the whole country. Nobody wants to see a situation where same-sex “marriage” is legal in Illinois but illegal in Indiana. That would lead to government and businesses in Indiana constantly being dragged into court over some issue arising in the neighboring state. Or where there are twenty abortion mills in Camden, NJ to “service” women from Pennsylvania, where abortion has been banned.
States’ rights will simply never work on those two issues. It would have been fine for Fred to say, “We don’t have the votes right now to pass those amendments, and they’re really outside the scope of the executive branch, but I want to foster a positive culture which will start us down a path which will eventually lead us to a society where life and family are once again sacred”. But he didn’t and he may lose the nomination because of it.
Nope! Just another hick from Hope.
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
When I was very young, and involved as a volunteer for the bad guys (forgive me), one of the things I did was organize voters in certain precincts in an open primary state to vote Republican and vote for the worst of the electable candidates on the slate, not so much to ensure that the dummy would win the primary, but to try to knock off the best candidate. We called the practice “plinking,” but I am not sure if that terminology is still current.
Rudy, Mitt, Fred, McCain, even Duncan Hunter have been mocked or ridiculed in one way or another on FR, they all have supporters and detractors. If you actually supported Fred, how does Huck now getting his from freepers change your vote? Can Huck not handle the scrutiny? Look back on the personal attacks on the rest of the candidates.
Rudy= gay loving adulterer.
Mitt= phony slick lying flip flopping Mormon.
McCain=traitor to his party, back stabbing, illegal loving Rino.
Fred= lazy old pervert robbing the cradle with his trophy wife.
Huck= self righteous liberal preacher from Hope.
Then he would not be Fred, and he would be lying to make people happy. He would simply be pandering.
I thought we were trying to avoid that, indeed it appears we have more than enough of that from some others in the race on both sides.
If there was truly a question of Fred's dedication to life, he would not have received the endorsements from the Right to Life groups.
I got one for ya.How about romney trying to pass himself off as a conservative and doing it with a straight face. Talk about creeping somebody out.