Posted on 09/07/2007 9:39:12 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
The conventional wisdom about Fred Thompson is that he might have waited too long to get into the presidential race, even though by the standard of past election cycles he’s right on schedule. The best question for the Thompson campaign doesn’t have to do with timing, but with rationale; it isn’t about “When?” but “Why?”
The Republican presidential field doesn’t obviously lack for a former senator with an unremarkable public record and a career as a character actor. Excitement built around him earlier this year as the default candidate, the “someone else” when underwhelmed Republican primary voters were looking for one. Now that he’s moved from “someone else” to “another candidate in a field of nine,” the default position no longer will suffice.
Thompson isn’t “lazy” — the rap against him — by any reasonable measure. He didn’t become a Watergate investigator, prosecutor, actor, and senator by sleeping late and watching daytime TV. But his Senate career tells against him. Not because he didn’t have the energy to make much of it, but because he apparently didn’t have the desire.
His time there is a notable contrast with that of Bill Frist. Both Thompson and Frist were political novices who won Senate seats in 1994 from Tennessee. Frist determined to do everything he could in the Senate. He headed the Republican Senate campaign and eventually rose to majority leader. Thompson coasted. He was chairman of a committee investigating Clinton fundraising abuses, but got stymied by his unimpressive Democratic counterpart, John Glenn. In 2002, Thompson gave up his seat, not with a bang, but a whimper.
His delay in announcing his presidential bid needn’t seriously hurt him if he is a candidate on par with or better than his top rivals. In the national glare, both Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have proven themselves good fundraisers, adept debaters, and indefatigable campaigners with appealing outsider reformist messages. It’s not clear yet that Thompson is any of these things.
Thompson has two main draws. One is stylistic, even though he has a kind of anti-style — a low-key, no-nonsense bearing that gives him a sense of quiet authority. The downside is that this can seem to be a lack of passion. His appearance on The Tonight Show With Jay Leno announcing his candidacy was so somnolent that you could be forgiven for wondering if he wasn’t already bored with running for president.
His other appeal is ideological. Thompson has a more consistent conservative record than Romney or Giuliani. But, a product of the moderate-conservative Tennessee GOP, he was never a firebrand either. In the gotcha environment of the primary race, Thompson will have to defend past heterodoxies on abortion, immigration, campaign-finance reform and tort reform. The deeper problem, though, is that what ails the Republican Party isn’t a lack of down-the-line conservatism.
Republicans need more fresh thinking, and Thompson’s devotion to federalism emphatically doesn’t count. In terms of domestic policy, the best news in the Republican race so far is that Romney and Giuliani have offered forward-looking health-care proposals. Thompson will have to excel in the ideas race rather than rest on a conservative voting record.
The one advantage Republicans might have in a tough election year in 2008 is that they likely will be running against a Democratic senator or former senator with no executive experience. That creates an opening for Romney or Giuliani — both successful executives who made their political reputations outside the beltway — to argue they are better suited to fix Washington. Thompson, in contrast, has a similar profile as the Democrats — a former senator with no experience running things, whose kitchen table is in the haute Washington, D.C., suburb of McLean, Va.
All that said, it’s the most wide open Republican primary race in 50 years. Before even announcing, Thompson was in second place in national polls. It is understandable that when considering a run he looked at those polls and concluded, “Why not?” Now, he has to answer the tougher question: “Why?”
Because he’s the right man for the right time.............
From a Republican perspective, that is why we need Fred.
Rich Lowrey believes in big-government, compassionate conservatism. Do the exact opposite of whatever he says.
Is Rich Lowry already endorsing another GOP Presidential candidate? This is what I read in this article.
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.
Because he is a member of the CFR and will continue W’s integration of the US and Mexico?
As I posted last night on another “Fred Thread”:
I don’t see his negatives ever getting near the Hillary range (40% to 50% of the public having a negative opinion of her). I think that Fred, for the most part, will go over well with independents, and even a good number of registered Democrats. There’s an image of President Bush out there with many Americans (deserved or not) of incompetence. Fred gives the impression of a sober, stable, mature adult who will keep a handle on things. 2008 will be a particularly good time for the Republican party to have a candidate who seems to have those qualities.
These are not so much reasons “why Fred should run”, and are really more like reasons “why Republicans should nominate Fred”, but they do answer the basic question “why Fred?”.
That fact that they even have federal health-care plans is what's deficient.
Well lets see...there is Rudy McRomney, Ron Paul and a few other good reasons to vote for Fred.
Because I am NOT voting for another RINO, not now, not ever.
We need less federalism and national health care...
um...
I am speechless...
Is my dyslexia getting worse or something?
Or was this just published in some freaky reverse universe and crossed some rip in space time...
Mike
I am really just starting to ignore those...
What a load of drek.
From Thompson’s Senate website:
“Senator Thompson believes that, first and foremost, the United States must protect our homeland and American interests overseas. This means that we must have a strong military capable of deterring potential adversaries, maintaining stability around the globe, and winning our nation’s wars whenever and wherever necessary. We also must have a robust intelligence system capable of detecting potential threats before an attack is launched. Our intelligence services are our country’s front line of defense and they must have the resources they require.
(Senator Thompson does not believe) that the United States should cede any of our sovereign rights as a nation to multilateral institutions. At no time should international institutions be given the authority to tax American citizens, control U.S. soldiers outside our chain of command, prosecute Americans soldiers and citizens, or make laws governing the American people.
Senator Thompson believes our adherence to these principles and priorities will ensure that the United States remains free, strong, and prosperous — a beacon of hope and model for all, and the undisputed leader of the free world.”
Apparently, tin-foil does a good job at "thread alerts".
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.