Thompson knows how to get there
By pilgrim Posted in 2008 — Comments (35) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
If you want to understand today, you have to search yesterday.
--Pearl Buck
Reading the latest blogs, polls, and news articles about Fred Thompson got me thinking about The Good Earth author's quote. I let Google be my friend again, and I searched for information about the 1994 Senate campaign of Fred Thompson. I came across an article by Bill Lacy that describes the political savvy of Fred in that campaign. Bill Lacy advised Fred not to do the pick-up truck, and he believes it is the worst advice he ever gave in 20 years of advising Republican presidential and congressional campaigns. The talk about the campaign in 1994 sounds so familiar to some of the talk I hear about the present campaign. If you don't want to read the entire piece, then just check out this snippet to see how familiar the rhetoric then is to the rhetoric now.
In spring of 1994, Fred badly trailed a popular Democratic congressman in the open Tennessee Senate seat vacated by Vice President Gore. Our fundraising lagged behind, and I had just fired our second campaign manager. We beefed up our communications effort and got to the key task of reassuring major donors and prospects. But there was another problem. Fred had a powerful message, and his performance was solid but unexceptional. Not what we expected, given his communications skills.Fred simply wasn’t comfortable on the campaign trail, and it showed. His demeanor was blunting the power of his message of congressional reform. He recognized the problem and proposed a solution: He would shuck the power suits and the sanitized campaign van and travel the state in a pick-up truck, without altering his message.
That part I put in boldface sounds so familiar to what I am hearing about Fred today.
Bill Lacy writes in this article 6 definitive points about Fred Thompson.
1. Fred ran in 1994 to make a difference, a cliché but also a truth. He gave up a lucrative and comfortable life in law and character roles in Hollywood to join the Washington rat race. It was a big sacrifice. He’s not running because he needs to be president; it’s a cause to him. That’s powerful motivation.
2. He’s an intellectual conservative who will please the party faithful but whose folksy style and maverick impulses (like supporting the McCain-Feingold so-called campaign finance reform) soften his image, an invaluable general election quality.
3. His experience during the Watergate hearings and the Tennessee pardons and parole scandal later in the ’70s established him as a committed reformer.
4. He’ll run an unconventional campaign: Experts and journalists who jump to negative conclusions about his campaign’s tactics while ignoring his campaign’s substance do so at their peril. Just ask Tennessee U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper, his ’94 opponent.
5. While he has only won two elections, he came back from being written off in his first race. He will not blow people away every day but will wear well over time. He learned in the courtroom and in movies that his performance at critical junctures is far more important that a heavy schedule. Some say this shows Fred lacks energy. I used to hear the same thing about Ronald Reagan.
6. In the darkest hours of his political career, when the wheels were about to come off his first campaign, he figured out how to scoop them up, put them on a red truck and drive off into the sunset. It was classic Hollywood — a happy ending.
I also came across a 1994 NYT article written well before the time that this newspapers writers and management had succumbed to BDS. The very first sentence of this article grabbed my attention.
Sometimes it is the little things that lead to big changes.
This article describes the general bloodbath the Dems in Tennessee suffered in the '94 election, and attributes it partly to a lack of common touch gestures to regular folks in Tennessee from Democratic candidates. One guy relates how he tried to speak to Dem. Sen. Sasser at a campaign reception, and Sasser just abruptly turned his back on him. A truckstop waitress Jan Crockett had this to say
Mr. Thompson's victory in the other Senate race this year was almost as sweeping as Mr. Sasser's victories had been in the past. And again it often seemed to be the little things that mattered and that highlighted the differences between the candidates. Consider 42-year-old Jan Crockett, a waitress at the Country Pride Restaurant and Truck Stop on the interstate at the edge of Nashville, who swears by handshakes -- strong ones -- which she said her father had taught her meant that a person was honest."Now Fred Thompson had a strong handshake,"
said Ms. Crockett, pausing in the midst of her banter with truckers. "It's the little things that people do that really matter. And you know, I never met Jim Cooper to shake his hand."
I agree with Steve Foley's blog and instead of fretting and fussing over the latest polls I go along with the wise words of Pearl S. Buck.
your comment leads me to believe that you just looked at the photo and didn't read anything. If you had read and comprehended, the point I am making is a candidate can remain consistent with his message and his principles and win without pandering. Mike, Mitt, and Rudy are running with message and declarations of principles that are at odds with their history.
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
Attacking other candidates on their history is a losing argument for Thompson.
He has no significant history. What he has is a bunch of Yeas and Nays. He proved himself, at best, to be a passive conservative. Show up, vote the party line by default, go home. That can make for a solid (if unexceptional) conservative senator, but makes for a weak conservative president.
Sure, he actually tried to get involved and lead a couple of times, rather than merely follow greater men. One of those times was McCain-Feingold. Oops! One of his rare forays into trying to do something is at odds with his current message.
You can't even find history to compare what he said in his pre-campaign campaign with what he says now. Whenever he was asked about his positions, he would say that he didn't know - he hadn't figured them out yet! His campaign was so disorganized, his handlers needed more time to decide what his positions would be.
Actually, there is an exception to his silence during his pre-campaign. He did say that he would support the FairTax. That didn't last long.
Most of his "history" has to come from what he says in the course of his actual campaign. Of course, his campaign delayed as long as possible in issuing positions, presumably so he could enter into the right side of any issue at the opportune moment. Even this strategy has failed him before.
There was, for instance, the Meet the Press debacle. He declared that an HLA would be against his principles. The next day, after he realized it had got him in trouble, he implied that he would support an HLA, but it just wasn't practical. If only it were practical! He fooled a lot of Thompson supporters, who repeatedly insisted in the aftermath that Thompson supported the HLA in principle, but just found it impractical.
Short version: Thompson has little history you can sink your teeth into. What little substantial history he does have does not support your claim.
What Fred needs to do to win this nomination is become the last adult left in the room after all the Candibots finish bloviating. The majority of the party has no fixed choice in mind and heart. They want the most credible leader out there, not a flavor of the month.
I think McCain has that mantle right now, but if Fred could take it over, he'd pull a shocker in NH and Iowa and then cruise after that.
"If this ain't a mess, it'll do until one shows up." -Sheriff Bell, No Country For Old Men
"I think McCain has that mantle right now, but if Fred could take it over, he'd pull a shocker in NH and Iowa and then cruise after that."
I think Fred and John are fighting for the same mantle and McCain has it right now. They may knock each other out fighting for the same votes in a divided primary.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Now Fred Thompson had a strong handshake
So basically what you're saying is that for every voter whose decision is primarily (and negatively) influenced by Thompson's eye baggage, there will be another voter whose decision is primarily (and positively) influenced by his handshake?
I guess this highlights a promising new campaign strategy: put a bag over his head and set him up as a meet'n'greet at the Wal-Marts in Iowa.
I am home sick with a terrible headcold, and this post just sent me into a fit of coughing. OOOh, look at the pretty lights...
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
I think that Fred is better on talk shows than he is in debates. Debates just aren't Fred's shtick, since he is so low-key (Obama suffer from the same problem). When I recently saw Fred on Meet the Press, though, I thought he came across quite well. I guess his warm, low-key personality can show through better in that type of venue. However, I do think that he looked a lot more comfortable and had more good one-liners in the recent Youtube debate than he did in previous debates. Maybe he's coming into his own. Then again, this could all just be my perception.
By the way, I hope you feel better, Lord Vegas.
ooooh, aren't you sooooo special!
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
If she was scathed by my post, it was purely un-intentional and I hereby offer her my consolation.
But this sort of makes my point. People are going to cast their vote based on any number of rational and irrational factors.
If you're going to make the case that a strong handshake (and the perception of honesty that it evidently evokes) is a valid factor to base a vote on, then you really have no reason to complain about someone else who bases their vote on, for example, baggy eyelids (and the perception of lethargy they might evoke).
The point of my blog is that the positive common touch small things that candidates do or don't do in a campaign can make a big difference in the end. I also have the point that in '94 he realized that his demeanor was blunting getting the message out and so instead of changing his message he changed the vehicle to deliver it.
You seem to trying to make a point that for every small thing done in a positive way that attracts votes there is a small thing done in a negative way to detract votes. In a way back in '94 Fred saw that negativity also. The conventional way of campaigning that he loathed was costing him. So he got unconventional.
The opposition tried real hard to use criticism of Fred's style to defeat him and it did not work. From an article in the NYT
His opponent, former Representative Jim Cooper, portrayed him as a ''a Gucci-wearing, Lincoln-driving, Perrier-drinking, Grey-Poupon-spreading millionaire Washington special-interest lobbyist.'' But it did not stick. Mr. Thompson won with 60 percent of the vote, and was re-elected last year with 61 percent.
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
Fair enough, I wasn't objecting to your position so much as I was intrigued by your final paragraphs and the emphasis on handshakes, which I felt was an interesting contrast to other common "stylistic" protests about Thompson (lack of energy, appearance). They feel his "style" detracts, you gave an example where it promotes. I tend to see both as somewhat irrational reasons to vote for or against someone, while recognizing that a great many people will indeed be influenced by such things...
For more information on Fred Thompson go to www.fred08.com
He is really the only true Conservative running.
Edward E. Richardson
DAV/SSG-Retired
aka: SSGRichDAV
DFT FredHead
What is wrong with this Election 2008 is that we have a lot of people who will not stop and think about the future!!! These people want glitz and glamour and don't care one bit about what these politicians say! This is not the time for pandering!!
FOR FRED, FOR THE FUTURE!
We have a society full of drive-thru lifestylers. Unfortunately, this seems to be mutually exclusive to deep thinking.
*****
The greatest single cause of Atheism today is Christians who profess Jesus with their lips & then go out and deny him by their lifestyle. That's what an unbelieving world simply finds...unbelievable -DC Talk
Not for nothing, but I'm pretty sure we all know that Fred knows how to get to the Capitol Building in DC.
If you wanted to make your point though, maybe some Photoshop work (out with the Capitol, in with the White House) is in order?
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
< /snark >
My bad.
-------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.
It is only with the able assists of Neil Stevens and Steven Foley that images and tables can even appear in my posts. ;>)
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
Fred didn't get in the pickup a month before the election.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
My post has nothing to do with Lamar Alexander. The points are that Fred has won when every pollster said his lackluster campaign style put him 20 points below his rival. Fred has won by a greater margin of victory in his home state than Reagan could muster in 1984. Don't bet the farm against Fred based on polling data. For whatever reasons Fred has not been somebody pollsters have forecasted well.
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.
horse race. Fred is a statesman and will win on substance. When he ran for the Senate in '94 he won on substance and he will do it again. The current beauty pageant will clear the stage of the court jester cum compassionate conservative, and the tough on crime but soft on immigration mayor.
Fred is the only one with the integrity and ideas to get the country back on the track to greatness.
No matter how much you nitpick and slice and dice it, we must nominate a true conservative, and Fred is the only choice.
Proudly supporting FDT in 08,
www.fred08.com
Redneck Hippie
for FDT to even begin to live up to the enormous hype that preceded his present lukewarm campaign.
The man may very well be the best the GOP has to offer, but if he doesn't show a willingness to fight for the presidency he's toast.
Indeed. Fred isn't living up to the hype. At least not in the way some would have liked him to. The hype was, that he would be another Reagan. Fred never bought into the hype. I read somewhere that at this point in the election, Reagan was sleeping in cheap hotels and eating lousy sandwiches and his campaign was broke. So what?
Funny, Wolf Blitzer addressed this question just yesterday with Fred on CNN. The media needs to get its head out of its posterior. But I know that ain't gonna happen.
www.fred08.com
Redneck Hippie
Fred is tired. he looks it, he acts it, and he epitomizes it.
Fred unfortunately bought into his being the new Reagan, that conservatives would fall over themselves to support him, and his Law & Order fame would assure him immediate name recognition.
Now that it hasn't happened and he actually has to fight for the nomination he doesn't have the fire in his belly to do so. I think he wants out and will use his falling in the polls as an exit strategy.
I never did think he had any concrete credentials that supported his claim to being a dyed in the wool conservative. There are few legitimate conservatives in the Republican Party today. That is a significant reason for their rejection by many regular Americans.
Fred was cast in the role of the Conservative Messiah. Sadly he didn't have the goods.
What a bunch of crap trying to be passed off for reasoning. You know, you could probably get a job working in network news.
Do you have anything...well...substantive... to say about the man or are you just another drive-by hack?
"There are two things which cannot be attacked in front: ignorance and narrow-mindedness. They can only be shaken by the simple development of the contrary qualities. They will not bear discussion."
Lord Acton
Lets remember one important fact. For most of the last 6 months, Mitt Romney was the leader in most of the Iowa polls. But now Romney has lost the lead to Mike Huckabee. Although its still far too early to suggest a winner in Iowa, if Romney loses Iowa, it destroys his momentum moving into New Hampshire. If Romney loses Iowa and New Hampshire, he is finished.
Now back to Huckabee.
Does anyone really think that Huckabee will be the republican nominee ? Even if he wins Iowa ? Once Huckabee's record gets picked apart after Iowa, he will fade...and fade fast.
That leaves us where we started..Thompson, McCain, and Giuliani fighting it out for the nomination. Whichever of those three wins South Carolina and Florida will have the big mo leading into the February 5th super primary. At this point, I have no idea who will be the nominee. To ignore Fred Thompson or John McCain is not a wise thing to do.
I'm not an agent, I just write books
What he needs is for no clear cut candidate to come out of the early primaries, so his support in the southern states doesn't crater to the perceived 'winning' candidate. It may require some goofy things happening, Like Huckabee winning Iowa, Romney winning NH, Voldemort winning Nevada, Guiliania and McCain and Thompson all finishing neck and neck in South Carolina and Michigan.
At that point there's no clear cut leader, and even the MSM probably won't proclaim someone as having a lock on the nomination.
Then Thompson can pull off some wins in the southern states on Feb 5th and make a good fight for it.
---
"The bass, the rock, the mic, the treble, I like my coffee black, just like my Metal." - MSI
Fred Thompson is 65, looks 85 and acts 95.
Reagan in his 80's was more vibrant than Thompson is now.
Do all you Thompson booster fail to see this ?
Fred comes across as a recovering stroke victim.
Thus is hardly a candidate that will appeal to the younger voters who will supposedly be so important in the 08 election.
Try again, troll.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
his is done. This is not Tennesse